Copper sulphate is a listed "organic" fungicide despite not having any carbon atoms.
I've seen "Organic" salt.
that doesn't have Carbon, Hydrogen or Oxygen
There is no such thing as organic salt........
Wouldn't the salts derived from organic acids like citric acid technically be organic salts?
Like sodium citrates for example?
Heresy!
I mean, I wouldn't want to eat inorganic food. What would that even be, pure salt?
Many different salts, not just NaCl. As well as many metals and some acids. But they all are micronutrients, you won't get any calories out of them.
So it's a diet then.
won't get any calories out of them
Me, an intellectual: eats a chunk of uranium
I ate lead paint chips when I was a kid.
Delicious. But deadly.
McDonald’s?
Chick FIL A
I thought that was made from ground-up plundered religious artifacts or something
Spam
You can actually eat spammers, and I think doing so counts as community service
Hey now, spam is made of pork!
What cuts of pork we're talking about, well, that's a different question.
It's "mystery" "meat".
Also "organic"
"organ"ic
ITT: Non-Americans and people being facetious
Even the most transgenic plant, grown in the techiest greenhouse ever cared for with the nastiest fertilizers and pesticides is organic in the most widespread and commonly used meaning of the word.
The air quotes are well deserved.
Wait, what's the most widespread and commonly used meaning of the word?
Organic is a term certified by the USDA.
To use "organic" on packaging, a product must contain at least 95% organically produced ingredients.
Love a definition that uses its own word
It is a bit annoying, though "organically produced" is defined exhaustively on the website.
We can debate what it means effectively, but the term organic in the US means something. It's a regulated term and you can't just slap different stickers on something and call it organic. So much just straight up misinformation in this thread from people too jaded, or too lazy, to look it up.
Now I'm not saying that the regulated term "organic" doesn't have some other weird side effects, or that people haven't attempted to hoodwink the process, but the term itself carries the weight of regulation in the US. So it's not some silly, "Hurrr derrr Organic means Organic" thing like people are making it out to be.
I think what we know is that it's a scam and we don't care.
How is it a scam? There is a whole host of rules and regulations around using the term.
Means "contains carbon" in any context other than food
When not talking about US food it just means living matter. Basically anything you eat is organic by the traditional definition. The USDA organic definition is honestly a joke though. Most pesticide other than the new age shit is made out of plant directives. Doesn't make it safe to consume. The range of shit they can use and do, while still calling things organic is pretty laughable. You just have to avoid a few products that are widely used today. Nitrogen fertilizer and shit like roundup.
Meaning one could hypothetically spray a tomato with dioxins up to 5% of its body weight and it would still qualify as organic.
And slip some cash over to the FDA when one of their interns asks too many questions.
My definition of organic =contains carbon so = all food uless you are eating sand for some reason. Just another meaningless tag on US foods imo.
My own definition is: 30% upcharge for the same damned thing in a differently labeled package
You're paying for the label
( looking at you too, "non-GMO" 👀 )
No, no, my food's not genetically modified. It's just been developed via artificial selection for thousands of years.
To be fair, genetic modification and selective breeding are not the same thing. It is funny how one is totally normal and the other is considered negative when they're quite similar
I think some reservations can come out of the idea that the natural environment isn't producing these genetic changes. Just to play devil's advocate.
Edit: does nobody fucking know what devil's advocate means? This isn't my opinion christ. Also there's a bit more depth to the argument though that you guys seem to be really obtuse about.
The natural world tries to kill you all the time. Why are you trusting that!?! Seriously though, both of these arguements are somewhat fallacious. Saying that GMOs are safe because, "It happens all the time in nature." Is the same fallacy that it isn't safe because, "It isn't natural to accelerate the process with genetic modification." Both are just mental shortcuts for people so they don't have to think about the insanely complex topic of GMOs, the effects, and what the right path forward is for all of us.
I think this is somewhat strawmanning what the point of the argument in this specific case is. They're not appealing to nature being good, that's not the argument.
The point is that if you are genetically selecting for specific genes through modification then you are circumventing the typical process for genetic change. There are lots of unintended effects of genetic changes and there are lots of corrective mechanisms built into DNA when genetically modified through selective processes rather than direct gene splicing. Science is always slow to catch up with analysis of an entourage effect where many other small factors may influence results long term.
I'm not anti GMO and this isn't my opinion as I think GMO products have amazing potential. I'm just sick of people on my side totally misrepresenting this argument as "hurr durr nature good." It's such a smooth brained take.
( looking at you too, “non-GMO” 👀 )
I'll let someone correct me if I'm wrong but I believe carrots were never orange, as in every orange or yellow carrot you buy is GMO
Virtually everything we eat now is GMO after countless generations of selective breeding and all that. Ever read about the wild versions of common foods? Bananas, watermelons, corn, all that stuff in their completely natural wild form is unrecognizable from the monstrosities on sale in every grocery store.
Nearly every food you could theoretically consume is a GMO. The label is intentionally misleading.
Not quite the same. I couldn't get my normal soy milk recently and opted for a more expensive organic type from the same company. It tasted baaaaad. Like idk what the material difference is, but it sucked. The smell was really strong. I think I actually tossed a bunch of it out it was that difficult to drink. Now I just get light if the regular stuff is gone.
X USDA Organic
✓ IUPAC Organic
Do you consider a tomato a fruit as well? Organic has different meanings depending on the context, just like the culinary vs botanical version of fruits and vegetables.
You probably eat more sand then you realize. It was the filler in Taco Bell meat before they got called out for not having enough beef to call it beef.
So they sourced cheaper beef, of course, and the taste went to shit.
Also, I appreciate the label, even though it is a misnomer. I prefer not eating glyphosate.
Source?
The source is mass (internet) hysteria from 5 or 6 years ago. The above poster's claim is false and just silly given the slightest amount of scrutiny.
Okay, I may have been wrong about TB. They did change their meat formulation about ten years ago (I remember the texture changed drastically, possibly as a PR move by TB when Alabama sued them in 2011).
Silica is a common food additive regardless. You can verify this yourself easily on Wikipedia.
While silcon dioxide is used as a food additive, and is found naturally in a lot of food, it's regarded as safe and even has been shown to have health benefits.
That's wildly different then the claim that Taco Bell was sued, and had to change formula, because they had so much "sand in their meat."
I didn't say it was unsafe. Just that we do eat sand.
And yes, I was wrong about TB. Their meat did change drastically in 2012 and I repeated a rumor as to why.
My point was just that the poster I was replying to does eat sand and that the organic label, while a misnomer, is far from meaningless.
No, but saying "TB was putting sand in their meat" is wildly misleading, when talking about silica as food additive.
Wikipedia silica and you'll see it's a common food additive.
Here's a paper on glyphosate in food. I read this yesterday to be sure I wasn't talking out of my ass. It's a bit dense but if you pick it apart basically cereal grains are the worst offenders.
I for one am happy to know that the food I purchase is strictly carbon-based and doesn't contain fillers made up from ground-up Horta carcasses or whatever.
I'm sorry to tell you this but plants contain anorganic elements. It's less than 1% tho.
That's unacceptable.
That's why I avoid them
No kill I!
Some of you need to find a local farmer and it shows.
I'm in nebraska. I can find all the corn you ever could want... Not much else. Got a bitchin' farmers market though.
I get that, I’m in WI.
I thought being organic meant no pesticides
It means "organic" pesticides, which are older and more dangerous to the environment.
How are older organic pesticides more dangerous to the environment??
Neem oil for example is completely safe afaik.
The newer pesticides are designed to work as effectively as possible. Due to their effectiveness, a limited amount is required to be applied to the soil. The FDA approved organic pesticides aren't as effective. This requires additional applications and more being applied each time (vs the newer non-approved pesticides). More pesticides being applied means more runoff and possibility of contamination to streams and ground water. The soil can also be over saturated and be damaged by the increased concentration.
Copper sulphate is a listed "organic" fungicide despite not having any carbon atoms.
I've seen "Organic" salt.
that doesn't have Carbon, Hydrogen or Oxygen
There is no such thing as organic salt........
Wouldn't the salts derived from organic acids like citric acid technically be organic salts? Like sodium citrates for example?
Heresy!
I mean, I wouldn't want to eat inorganic food. What would that even be, pure salt?
Many different salts, not just NaCl. As well as many metals and some acids. But they all are micronutrients, you won't get any calories out of them.
So it's a diet then.
Me, an intellectual: eats a chunk of uranium
I ate lead paint chips when I was a kid.
Delicious. But deadly.
McDonald’s?
Chick FIL A
I thought that was made from ground-up plundered religious artifacts or something
Spam
You can actually eat spammers, and I think doing so counts as community service
Hey now, spam is made of pork! What cuts of pork we're talking about, well, that's a different question.
It's "mystery" "meat".
Also "organic"
"organ"ic
ITT: Non-Americans and people being facetious
Even the most transgenic plant, grown in the techiest greenhouse ever cared for with the nastiest fertilizers and pesticides is organic in the most widespread and commonly used meaning of the word.
The air quotes are well deserved.
Wait, what's the most widespread and commonly used meaning of the word?
Organic is a term certified by the USDA.
Love a definition that uses its own word
It is a bit annoying, though "organically produced" is defined exhaustively on the website.
We can debate what it means effectively, but the term organic in the US means something. It's a regulated term and you can't just slap different stickers on something and call it organic. So much just straight up misinformation in this thread from people too jaded, or too lazy, to look it up.
https://www.usda.gov/topics/organic
https://www.ams.usda.gov/rules-regulations/organic
Now I'm not saying that the regulated term "organic" doesn't have some other weird side effects, or that people haven't attempted to hoodwink the process, but the term itself carries the weight of regulation in the US. So it's not some silly, "Hurrr derrr Organic means Organic" thing like people are making it out to be.
I think what we know is that it's a scam and we don't care.
How is it a scam? There is a whole host of rules and regulations around using the term.
https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-7/subtitle-B/chapter-I/subchapter-M/part-205/subpart-B/section-205.105
Means "contains carbon" in any context other than food
When not talking about US food it just means living matter. Basically anything you eat is organic by the traditional definition. The USDA organic definition is honestly a joke though. Most pesticide other than the new age shit is made out of plant directives. Doesn't make it safe to consume. The range of shit they can use and do, while still calling things organic is pretty laughable. You just have to avoid a few products that are widely used today. Nitrogen fertilizer and shit like roundup.
Meaning one could hypothetically spray a tomato with dioxins up to 5% of its body weight and it would still qualify as organic.
And slip some cash over to the FDA when one of their interns asks too many questions.
My definition of organic =contains carbon so = all food uless you are eating sand for some reason. Just another meaningless tag on US foods imo.
My own definition is: 30% upcharge for the same damned thing in a differently labeled package
You're paying for the label
( looking at you too, "non-GMO" 👀 )
No, no, my food's not genetically modified. It's just been developed via artificial selection for thousands of years.
To be fair, genetic modification and selective breeding are not the same thing. It is funny how one is totally normal and the other is considered negative when they're quite similar
I think some reservations can come out of the idea that the natural environment isn't producing these genetic changes. Just to play devil's advocate.
Edit: does nobody fucking know what devil's advocate means? This isn't my opinion christ. Also there's a bit more depth to the argument though that you guys seem to be really obtuse about.
The natural world tries to kill you all the time. Why are you trusting that!?! Seriously though, both of these arguements are somewhat fallacious. Saying that GMOs are safe because, "It happens all the time in nature." Is the same fallacy that it isn't safe because, "It isn't natural to accelerate the process with genetic modification." Both are just mental shortcuts for people so they don't have to think about the insanely complex topic of GMOs, the effects, and what the right path forward is for all of us.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_nature
I think this is somewhat strawmanning what the point of the argument in this specific case is. They're not appealing to nature being good, that's not the argument.
The point is that if you are genetically selecting for specific genes through modification then you are circumventing the typical process for genetic change. There are lots of unintended effects of genetic changes and there are lots of corrective mechanisms built into DNA when genetically modified through selective processes rather than direct gene splicing. Science is always slow to catch up with analysis of an entourage effect where many other small factors may influence results long term.
I'm not anti GMO and this isn't my opinion as I think GMO products have amazing potential. I'm just sick of people on my side totally misrepresenting this argument as "hurr durr nature good." It's such a smooth brained take.
I'll let someone correct me if I'm wrong but I believe carrots were never orange, as in every orange or yellow carrot you buy is GMO
Virtually everything we eat now is GMO after countless generations of selective breeding and all that. Ever read about the wild versions of common foods? Bananas, watermelons, corn, all that stuff in their completely natural wild form is unrecognizable from the monstrosities on sale in every grocery store.
Nearly every food you could theoretically consume is a GMO. The label is intentionally misleading.
Not quite the same. I couldn't get my normal soy milk recently and opted for a more expensive organic type from the same company. It tasted baaaaad. Like idk what the material difference is, but it sucked. The smell was really strong. I think I actually tossed a bunch of it out it was that difficult to drink. Now I just get light if the regular stuff is gone.
X USDA Organic
✓ IUPAC Organic
Do you consider a tomato a fruit as well? Organic has different meanings depending on the context, just like the culinary vs botanical version of fruits and vegetables.
You probably eat more sand then you realize. It was the filler in Taco Bell meat before they got called out for not having enough beef to call it beef.
So they sourced cheaper beef, of course, and the taste went to shit.
Also, I appreciate the label, even though it is a misnomer. I prefer not eating glyphosate.
Source?
The source is mass (internet) hysteria from 5 or 6 years ago. The above poster's claim is false and just silly given the slightest amount of scrutiny.
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/taco-bell-grade-d-meat/
https://www.mashed.com/110654/truth-taco-bells-seasoned-beef/
Okay, I may have been wrong about TB. They did change their meat formulation about ten years ago (I remember the texture changed drastically, possibly as a PR move by TB when Alabama sued them in 2011).
Silica is a common food additive regardless. You can verify this yourself easily on Wikipedia.
While silcon dioxide is used as a food additive, and is found naturally in a lot of food, it's regarded as safe and even has been shown to have health benefits.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silicon_dioxide
That's wildly different then the claim that Taco Bell was sued, and had to change formula, because they had so much "sand in their meat."
I didn't say it was unsafe. Just that we do eat sand.
And yes, I was wrong about TB. Their meat did change drastically in 2012 and I repeated a rumor as to why.
My point was just that the poster I was replying to does eat sand and that the organic label, while a misnomer, is far from meaningless.
No, but saying "TB was putting sand in their meat" is wildly misleading, when talking about silica as food additive.
Wikipedia silica and you'll see it's a common food additive.
Here's a paper on glyphosate in food. I read this yesterday to be sure I wasn't talking out of my ass. It's a bit dense but if you pick it apart basically cereal grains are the worst offenders.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8622992/
Well it’s not made of organs…
Organish
I for one am happy to know that the food I purchase is strictly carbon-based and doesn't contain fillers made up from ground-up Horta carcasses or whatever.
I'm sorry to tell you this but plants contain anorganic elements. It's less than 1% tho.
That's unacceptable.
That's why I avoid them
No kill I!
Some of you need to find a local farmer and it shows.
I'm in nebraska. I can find all the corn you ever could want... Not much else. Got a bitchin' farmers market though.
I get that, I’m in WI.
I thought being organic meant no pesticides
It means "organic" pesticides, which are older and more dangerous to the environment.
How are older organic pesticides more dangerous to the environment??
Neem oil for example is completely safe afaik.
The newer pesticides are designed to work as effectively as possible. Due to their effectiveness, a limited amount is required to be applied to the soil. The FDA approved organic pesticides aren't as effective. This requires additional applications and more being applied each time (vs the newer non-approved pesticides). More pesticides being applied means more runoff and possibility of contamination to streams and ground water. The soil can also be over saturated and be damaged by the increased concentration.
Hey now! Don't go rubbing organic salt in their wounds!
what kinda salt is organic ?
Yes
I guess all the annoying shit from reddit is coming over here.