I mistakenly used to believe that when I read the label, "organic food" that I was getting healthier and safer food. However, as I began to research the industry, I was shocked to find that is often not the case. When one adds the expensive cost of organic foods along with the very questionable value, it is no wonder that some researchers, like Henry Miller, has stated that he expects an ongoing shrinkage of the market share for organic food as it just to expensive in terms of a cost-benefit analysis. My participation in this article, is minimal, I would rather let the unbiased research (ie those who have nothing to gain from the sale of natural, organic foods) speak to the issue. 

In this first article, an excerpt that is documented, there has been historic fraud in the organic and natural food industry:

Consumers rely on labels, advertising and marketing information to help them choose products they believe to be safe, healthful and produced using practices that are aligned with their values. Many food companies exploit this fact. They knowingly mislead consumers by claiming their products are “natural” when in fact those products contain pesticides, genetically modified organisms (GMOs), antibiotics, growth hormones and artificial ingredients.

The most prevalent examples of false labeling and advertising are use of terms like “Natural,” “All Natural” and “100% Natural.” 

Cornerstone Natural, a consultant to the natural products industry, predicts “explosive growth” in U.S. sales of “natural” products, reaching $252 billion by 2019. Driving this growth is consumer demand for healthier food produced using sustainable and humane farming practices.

Consumer demand for healthier, non-GMO, pesticide-free food is also driving growth in the organic market. Sales of certified organic food and products reached $50 billion in 2017, amounting to more than 5 percent of all grocery store sales, including approximately 10 percent of all produce sales. That's strong growth. But as long as consumers equate “natural” with certified organic, and as long as companies exploit that perception, the organic market will remain at a disadvantage.

A 2014 Consumer Reports poll found that 66 percent of consumers believe a product labeled “natural” has no artificial ingredients, pesticides or genetically modified organisms, and 86 percent believe that it should mean those things. In 2016, Consumer Reports released a new survey showing that 73 percent of consumers seek out foods labeled “natural.” Many consumers equate the word “natural” with “organic” and some even believe that “100% Natural” is better than certified organic. 

Natural vs. organic

There is a big difference between a certified “organic” product and a “natural” product. Food products can be labeled “organic” only if they are independently certified as meeting U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) National Organic Program standards. However, with the exception of meat and poultry, there is no legal definition of “natural” as it applies to food. The term is unregulated. 

The USDA defines “natural” only in the context of labels on meat and poultry. And that definition is very narrow. Under USDA regulations, meat and poultry can be labeled “natural” if it is free of artificial flavor or flavoring, coloring ingredient, or chemical preservative or any other artificial or synthetic ingredient, and if the product and its ingredients are not more than “minimally processed.” The USDA definition of “natural” for meat and poultry does not address the presence of antibiotics, growth hormones or other drugs and/or pesticides, nor does it address issues of animal welfare.

Despite pressure by the courts to do so, the U.S. Food & Drug Administration (FDA) has so far declined to legally define the term “natural” for foods other than meat and poultry. As a result, knowing that consumers seek out the word “natural” when buying foods because they believe "natural" means the product is free of GMOs, pesticides and artificial ingredients, food companies routinely label products “natural,” “all-natural” and “100% natural” in order to increase sales. In 205, the FDA said it would finally address requests for a definition of "natural." And in a February 2018 article in the New York Tiems, an FDA official suggested the agency would weigh in on the issue "soon." But the term remains, at least legally, undefined.

Taking it to the courts

OCA’s Myth of Natural Campaign educates consumers about the misleading use of the term “natural” and the difference between “natural” and “certified organic” products.

Through our Myth of Natural Campaign, we directly confront food companies—sometimes using consumer protection laws like those in Washington, D.C. and California as the basis for lawsuits—for labeling or marketing products as “natural” when independent lab testing shows the products to be contaminated with pesticides, antibiotics and other drugs, and “unnatural” ingredients. 

Examples include: Nature Valley Granola Bars, which tested positive for glyphosate, the active ingredient in Monsanto’s Roundup® weed killer; Post Shredded Wheat, which tested positive for glyphosate (the suit has been settled); and  Sioux Honey, which tested positive for glyphosate.

Thank goodness for companies like this that protect us from the false of claims of companies, particularily companies purporting to sell "all natural" storeable food, that these companies are beginning to be held accountable for their false claims with their intent to fool the public. The Myth of Natural Campaign is very agressive and every consumer is safer because of their good work. 

For more on this historic article, click here. 

So if one is lucky enough to obtain real natural and/or organic food, is it worth the cost and is it really an safer? There is serious research that calls these claims into question. 

More research on the topic of organic food revealed the following general characteristics that applied to some organic foods. 

More Concerns Regarding Organic Food

Organic food advocates consistently point out that organic foods has far less that residue that regular food. However, this statement is misleading as Henry I. Miller in Forbes points out that “...But that’s a poor rationale: Non-organic fruits and vegetables had more pesticide residue, to be sure, but more than 99 percent of the time the levels were below the permissible, very conservative safety limits set by regulators—limits that are established by the Environmental Protection Agency and enforced by the Food and Drug Administration...just because a farm is organic doesn’t mean the food it produces will be free of potentially toxic elements. While organic standards may preclude the use of synthetic inputs, organic farms often utilize so-called “natural” pesticides and what Miller calls “pathogen-laden animal excreta as fertilizer” that can also end up making consumers sick and have been linked to cancers and other serious illnesses...”

And there is more research that casts serious doubt on the efficacy of organic food as well as the cost effectiveness. When one weighs the totality of organic food, some experts have labled the industry as "affluent narcissism". There are even more serious concerns about organics foods contained in the following paragraphs.  

Documented List of Cons of Organic Food

• Easily Goes Bad. Compared to non-organic food, organic produce has the possibility of going off a lot quicker. ...
• More Expensive" ...'the cost of producing such products is the main reason why organic food is not the favorite choice of many consumers.
• Minimal Chemicals Allowed. ..."A lot of people believe that the production of organic food will not allow the use of chemical fertilizers or pesticides. However, organic food production still allows a minimal amount of chemicals in order to develop a reasonable amount of produce."
• No Health Benefits. ..."It is often a popular belief that organic food has a lot of health benefits compared to non-organic products. However, there are no consensual reports that link organic food to health benefits. Hence, there is no reason believing that it will provide a healthier alternative to non-organic food."
• No Nutritional Proof. ..."Research made by the British and Swedish food agencies has found that organic food has not been considered safer compared to food produced via conventional means. For this reason, it is safe to say that organic food is just as nutritional as non-organic products."
• Even Low-Level Pesticides Can be Harmful. ...According to the National Academy of Sciences, exposure to low-level pesticides can be harmful to children and fetuses because of their vulnerable immune systems. Likewise, it can be a disadvantage to pregnant women as it will put added strain particularly on their taxed organs.
• Pesticide Contamination. ..."According to the National Academy of Sciences, exposure to low-level pesticides can be harmful to children and fetuses because of their vulnerable immune systems. Likewise, it can be a disadvantage to pregnant women as it will put added strain particularly on their taxed organs."
• High Bacterial Levels..."The levels of bacteria have been found in the production of organic foods. For this reason, the consumption of organic foods has been linked to the risk of ingesting e-coli bacteria into the digestive system of a person. Thus, it will be harmful for children as well as pregnant women as they have vulnerable immune systems."

Conclusion

Buyer beware as in this age of extreme deception, one must verify the safety and efficacy of what they allow to be put into their body. I am saddned and dismayed that much of the research, both mainstream and alternative, casts doubt on the claims made by many who sell organic food. I cannot say for sure that this is a univesal characteristic, but there is enough expressed concern, in the form of research, that it gives me extreme pause before I would consume any more organic food. I am convinced that there is a cult like following with organic foods that may not deserved.

In reality, no food, or medicine is pristine. In my research on organic food, I expected I would find some negatives, but I was shocked at the depth of concerns that I came across. A scientist friend of mine not-so-jokingly stated "that when it comes to organic food, people might just as well off as curl up with a bag of chips and soda and enjoy the movie", and "consuming organic food will not likely increase life-span". Meanwhile, in my quest for better health, I am still in search of optimal food to consume, but I have come to the conclusion that there is no perfect answer and the terrm, affluent narcissism, does seem to apply to some from the organic foods industry as it strongly appear to accurately address the cult-like devotion instead of relying empirical scientific-based proof for their claims as we discovered in this article.