Sunday, March 13, 2011

The Omnivore's Dilemma: Ch. 9

Explain the term "industrial organic," and give an overview highlighting the similarities and differences between conventional farming and large scale organic production discussed in chapter 9. Were you surprised at how "industrial" most of the food available at Whole Foods really is?

12 comments:

  1. Industrial Organic is the term that describes the trend of latching onto the organic and using it was marketing to sell similar products to what you were selling before. The basic premise is that if you include pictures of pristine natural landscapes, and include wordy personal narratives about utopian happy hippie crunchy granola style farm life where all the animals are treated fairly, people are willing to pay more for it. Don’t get me wrong, industrial organic usually started with its heart in the right place (often a product of the organic food counterculture movements of the 1960s and 70s). However, they have often sold out for profit (the best example being that of the small farm whose founder is now a VP at General Mills or whatever), and, as Pollan finds out for himself, besides perhaps more natural inputs, and a lack of hormone doping for animals, big organic looks an awful lot like big agro. You just feel better about it because it costs more and the label is an earthy tone. I was not really surprised at the Whole Foods phenomenon. Advertising is everything in our culture, and guilt is one of their most common tools.

    ReplyDelete
  2. The term "industrial organic" refers to food grown in a large-scale industrial manner that meets government organic standards, but as Michael Pollan emphasizes is not as sustainable or ideal as it appears to be to most consumers. Because of marketing, description, and virtuous sounding phrases on the labels, a regular consumer concerned with their health and the environment (like most Whole Foods shoppers) chooses to buy industrial organic, which is slightly more sustainable than conventionally-grown foods but is not as sustainable as the term "organic" seems to deem it to be. Michael Pollan says that originally "organic stood for everything that industrial was not," and that continues to be the general connotation of the word and is paradoxical considering that the organic food that we buy at supermarkets is industrial as well. USDA regulations for certified organic foods are much less strict than most of us would expect, such as the ruling that dairy cows must have "access to pasture," which is so vague that it has little meaning at all. Most of the methods of farming on industrial organic farms are the same as on conventional farms, except that they don't use artificially-derived pesticides. Nonetheless, their way of farming is far from sustainable. It doesn't surprise me that much that Whole Foods sells mainly industrial organic food, since it is a supermarket chain, but it is still somewhat depressing to know that the convenience of buying food there is in contradiction with true sustainability.

    ReplyDelete
  3. ‘Industrial Organic’ refers to the machine and oil-based agricultural process that does not use pesticides. Unfortunately, the many connotations of the word ‘organic’ cause people to think that organic food is grown in a way that it is (mostly) not. People see organic farms as happy places where animals are treated humanely and plants are not grown in a monoculture. Seeing a new market, big industry has now taken over the ‘organic’ market, practicing the same techniques for-profit corporations always do and reducing the term organic to meaning that pesticides are not applied. Using this definition, the term organic becomes almost meaningless, with items such as “organic high-fructose corn syrup” now being made. ☹
    I am surprised by just how industrial Whole Foods really is, but not too surprised. I didn’t realize just how industrialized their organic fruit is, but I knew that all of the non-perishable food was highly industrialized. The plastic packaging gave it away.

    ReplyDelete
  4. “Industrial organic” refers to food that is produced on a large industrial scale but still meets organic standards. What this means is that these foods can be marked up and are advertised as sustainable and organic even though they aren’t nearly as organic as they claim. Consumers that don’t agree with industrial agricultural ways decided to buy what they imagine (because of clever and “green” advertising) are much better, safer, and “greener” products. These things, while we consider them organic aren’t really much different than the industrial products; they actually are industrial products too. Through many years of sneaky and guilt-tripping advertisements people have come to imagine organic products as the polar opposites of industrial products, when in fact in the supermarket they are basically the same. It was kind of sad to read about how non-sustainable and not really organic stores like Whole Foods really are. Instead of seeing people’s interest in “greener” products and making real changes, corporations took advantage and are tricking people into thinking they are buying products that are better than they actually are.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I have read this already, so I wasn't surprised this time. I was, however, quite disappointed when I read about how floozy that store can be with some of its products (though I would sooner buy food there than at a supermarket that appeared to have no quality control whatsoever, such as Safeway or Lucky's).
    The difference between Industrial Organic Food and Plain Industrial Food is, simply, the fact that Industrial Organic Food is made without pesticides, GMOs, or chemical fertilizers, and, often, some preservatives that are of questionable nature. Industrial Organic food is otherwise produced in roughly the same method as conventional food is: much of its meat and dairy come from feedlots, the vegetables are often grown in monocultures, and produce and other products typically come from large suppliers rather than small farmers. Although eating food from Whole Foods means that several fewer pounds of pesticides have been laid over the earth, it does not necessarily mean that you are supporting small farmers, reducing use of fossil fuels, helping animals, or somehow "being in harmony with nature" by buying. And while Whole Foods, Trader Joes, and other stores of that type market their products as being the things one can buy to do exactly that, the vagueness of the words used to market them (along with, sometimes, the absence of particular words that indicate, for example, just HOW LONG an animal spent out on the pasture) further hides the fact that this system is, essentially, a slightly less chemical-intensive form of corporate food supply.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Industrial organic is a new view on “organic.” This take evolved out of the rise in popularity of organic goods. To mass produce and feed the growing need for organic food, the USDA passed standards that drastically changed what is considered “organic” today. Today what sets organic farming apart from conventional farming is the lack of artificial chemicals. Farmers cannot use chemical herbicides or pesticides to treat their crops. Instead, they can use alternative means, like other plants to control pests or tilling to control weeds. On the food production level, organic foods are similar to conventional foods. Some synthetic additives are permissible in organic foods OFTRA standards. However, there is a smaller selection of additives that can be added to organic foods.
    In food production, the main thing that sets industrial organic produce apart from conventional produce is the usage of organic feeds. Livestock must be fed organically grown foods. These feeds can be processed, but must not be grown with artificial chemicals. Also, organic live stock cannot be fed antibiotics, growth hormones or other animal byproducts. Organic livestock must also have “access to pastures.” This is highlighted as a useless piece of legislation as many organic livestock are grown in similar conditions to conventional animals (granted there tends to be a bit more room). These organically grown animals are raised in sheltered conditions and tend to not be motivated to go outside. Thus, these pastures go widely unused.
    I was most surprised with the definitions of organic. I knew organic crops didn’t use pesticides or herbicides, but I never thought too much about organic meat. I just assumed they didn’t use pesticides on the animals, which didn’t make too much sense. Also, the usage of synthetic additives sounds a bit backwards and out of place for organic produce, but is it “industrial organic” so there is some corporative pull.

    ReplyDelete
  7. “Industrial organic” is used to describe food grown and distributed using mostly conventional, industrial agricultural techniques but that still (barely) meets the Department of Agriculture’s standards for organic food. The problem with organic food is that the government standards for organic are very different from the standards of the original organic movement. However, as long as growers meet these low standards, they can use “organic” as a marketing device to attract more customers. Therefore shoppers are often misled into believing that their food is more organic, natural, sustainable, and ethical than it actually is. The most surprising part of Pollan’s expose of industrial organic was when he described the lives of supposedly free-range animals, namely chickens. First off, the living standard for free-range animals is very vaguely set at “access to pasture,” without a spatial or temporal definition. Second, a lot of organic, “free-range” chickens are killed when they’re young so that they can be sold for at the same label price as other meat but at a higher per-pound price. The average life span of a free-range chicken at Petaluma Poultry is 7 weeks, yet for the first 5 weeks they are remain closed up in sheds to develop eating habits. By the time they reach 5 weeks of age and the shed is opened up, the baby chickens have no desire to go outside. Even if a curious chicken took advantage of the small outdoor space provided to him, he would have only 2 weeks to enjoy it before being slaughtered. In this way the organic food system is worse than the conventional food system--it finds loopholes in the already loose standards for what passes as organic food, and fools consumers into thinking that the food is produced in an environmentally friendly way.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Yes I was so surprised! I read the whole chapter aloud to my mom and she was so sad at the end because she felt so good about all the organic foods she buys all the time and now she is like ive bought Ruby before at Berkeley Bowl! But I tried to convince her that its still good to buy organic its just not as good as what most of us think.. I couldnt believe it but it does make total sense. I feel so oblivious! They are good at tricking the consumers.
    Industrial organic is basically processed organic food produced on a large scale much in the same way most foods are produced, it just has the organic label because for example the chickens are fed using organic certified feed and they have two weeks of limited access to a little patch of outdoor land thus gaining the title, free-range. Conventional farming and industrial organic farming both have huge plots of monocultures. They both often have the same labor rules and conventions. They both are able to use synthetic materials in their foods in processing and for storage and to increase shelf life and modify flavor although the list of 'okayed' synthetic ingredients for organic is shorter. They both transport their food across the country and use huge amounts of fossil fuels to get it there. They both use way more calories to manufacture and transport their food in fossil fuels than the food contains in food calories. They both will do whatever necessary as long as it minimally complies with guidelines to make the most profit possible. They both do not necessarily treat their animals well or account for the feelings and natural inclinations of the animals. Organic has come such a long way from what it first arose as, that the name hardly has any resemblance to its 1960s version yet many consumers still think it does! We need to move past organic and set stricter guidelines that does not allow people to easily circumvent these rules and trick the consumer into thinking the product is fresh, sustainable, and animal friendly.

    ReplyDelete
  9. industrial organics are still organic food products, however they are mass produced and take place in systems that are eerily similar to non organic farms. the reason they are able to hold onto the "organic" label they have is because none of these large cooperations that consider themselves "industrial organics" use pesticides. conventional farming uses alot the same methods, such as allowing animals to roam free when the graze (called "free range" products). both conventional and large scale farming productions use similar methods that on the outside seem very ethical. however, the main differences between these two types can be found within the fine lines that determine whether something is large scale or not. most large scale productions are considered worse for the environment and humans' health primarily because they are so large that they do not care about individual products they put out. despite many of these corporations meeting standards. for me, this has been a bit of a wake up call to just how manipulative these products can be. as Frances said, there are quite a few ways these giant machines can mass produce their product while slyly slipping past the regulations that many consumers assume as the standard for organic products.

    ReplyDelete
  10. The term "industrial organic" is used to refer to foods that have been made in factories and using all industrial methods, but meet the government's standards to label their food "organic" - i.e. without the use of pesticides. So these companies milk the ability to use that label, utilizing very appealing and attractive packaging and wording (bucolic scenes and words like "all-natural" put in every visible place on the package) to pander to the current public's desire to eat "organically". However, "organically" grown foods are not sustainable or even humane methods of growing, as many people would assume. I was incredibly surprised to learn the foods of Whole Foods are actually very industrial; growing up, I had always seen the foods of Whole Foods in my mind as the perfect food, the angel of the food industry whose morally perfect foods were simply a little too expensive for my family to buy. It's pretty insane how much advertising (much of it false) can shape the food products we buy and put into our body.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Other than not using chemical herbicides, hormones, antibiotics and petrochemical fertilizers, Industrial Organic foods are produced in a quite similar manner to that of conventional industrial food. Both systems mass produce plants and animals in large lots and factories. When Pollan visited "organic" farms, he noted that they looked very similar to regular farms. He saw: migrant laborers, huge packing factories, and long stretches of crops. "Organic" companies make wordy labels with fantasy stories about the origins of their product to pull on the heart strings of consumers. People will thus imagine "a return to a utopian past with the positive aspects of modernity intact" (137) and believe that organic foods are better and help the environment. Their beliefs are untrue as many of these companies loosely follow the USDA's very lenient regulations (ie. the USDA rules that factory raised animals must have access to the outdoors. An organic company that raised chickens claimed that letting their animals go outside too early in their lives would leave them vulnerable to disease. The organic chickens would receive the privilege to roam out into a small alleyway soon before their death and also were given two weeks extra to live than regular industrially raised chickens). Also, when we think of organic foods, we think no preservatives and no chemicals added. Apparently some organic products like microwave meals have 31 ingredients inside, such as "natural grill flavor", from processing plants from over six states and two countries. I wasn't as surprised about how industrial organic foods are as to how saddened I was by it.
    I have to admit that I do fall for those labels by thinking how great it is that if I buy the product I will be helping a small family owned business and will receive extra healthy nutrients or whatever from it. Living on a lie >:0

    ReplyDelete
  12. And, forgot this one too! Wrote it up, then forgot to post it. Geesh.
    Industrial organic seems to be the term that describes how “organic” has evolved to fit and essentially become the big monster of industrial food. In order to find its market, “organic” had to find a way to be embraced by the supermarket, and its method was to morph and resemble the industry more and more, which seems completely illogical. Of course, the farmers must still make a living and take care of their families, which I think is why they’ve been forced to convert to industry. The term “industrial organic” seems to represent the juxtaposition between the industrialization of food creation and marketing and the pastoral ideals that the industry itself prided itself on and was built upon. Also, just because government or USDA corruption, it seems the standards for “organic” are just bogus. Its weak and vague interpretations allow TV dinners to be considered organic, and synthetic food additives and preservatives to be included as “organic.” Synthetics are not organic, no way. These standards make me feel bad, but I understand why Kahn states that they have to fight for business because that’s what keeps them economically safe. Without synthetics, they don’t have a business. I also hate that the USDA used the term “access to pasture,” which is so open for interpretation that it is just not fair. They can argue and debate about this phrasing as long as they want, but in the meantime, cows are getting ripped off. Its unenforceable nature seems to undermine the very thing organic farming stood for: more safety, justice and health for the plants, animals, and humans that were involved with this food system. It did surprise me at how “industrial” Whole Foods really is, but at the same time, I realized the lies depicted of the happy cows prancing in sunshine and endless green fields of joy. LIES. It seems to me all of those depictions and phrases like “cage-free” have become busy words that mean nothing. All they do is bring about a false sense of security and good feelings to the naïve consumer. I wish the reality could be revealed. I thought it was interesting just how debatable, fake, and meaningless terms like “ultrapasteurized” are, since that one word could mean an extra processing step that seems great since it extends the products’ freshness on the shelf OR a more negative interpretation since its an extra processing step that takes away from the products’ natural freshness and organic nature. Who knows? Not the naïve consumer, and not me either. Someone needs to clear this stuff up, so people can be more aware and knowledgeable, and thus make better choices.

    ReplyDelete