"The organic system did not use synthetic pesticides or fertilizers and relied on compost, mulch, pheromone-mating disruption (PMD), Bacillus thuringiensis (a bacteria that kills caterpillars) and thinning fruit by hand. By contrast, the conventional system used synthetic fertilizers and pesticides, PMD and chemical fruit thinner; the integrated farming system used compost, synthetic fertilizers, mulch and herbicides."
One of the interesting findings of the study was that apple yields were the same for all three of the systems. That flys in the face of claims by organic agriculture's detractors who say that if farmers were to all turn to organic production the world would face starvation because of lowered crop yields. There would be no shortage of apples if all apple farmers went organic, according to this research.
The finding by the researchers that organic apples taste better was summarized by PANNA as follows:
"A consumer taste test found that organic apples were less tart at harvest than both conventional and integrated apples. They were also found to be sweeter than conventional apples after six months of storage."
Although organic apples taste better, are better for the environment, and are more profitable for farmers they generally cost consumers more at the grocery store. But the true costs of an agricultural system using chemicals that degrade the environment and threaten human health are not factored into the cost of a bag of "conventionally" produced apples. A September 28, 2001 report by PANNA points to one more cost not figured at the grocery store for chemically produced food.
Although 10% of Parkinson's Disease is suspected to be genetic there appears to be a strong environmental connection for this debilitating and all too common disease. Here's PANNA again:
Go To Page: 1 2