Home / Organic Activists / Headlines
July 20, 2009
Organic, Natural; Tomato, Tomahto?
Earlier this month, we remarked that it’s difficult to see how labeling everything on our menus and in our grocery aisles will make anyone safer or healthier. But as recent Chicago Tribune article highlighted, the food labeling craze is having one noticeable effect on consumers: bewilderment.
From “no high fructose corn syrup” to “rBST-free,” food marketers have created all kinds of labels to distinguish their product from the next. But such labels are rarely an indication that one product is more superior from a health perspective. As we’re telling Tribune readers today in a letter to the Editor, the apparent confusion over “organic” vs. “natural” labels is a perfect example.
Parsing the subtle differences between foods labeled "organic" and "natural" is an interesting exercise, but both categories are identical where it counts: nutrition…
The fact that organic food companies and their non-profit defenders are attacking their "natural" competitors so aggressively is a good sign. So is consumers awakening to the fact that organic is "just a fancy way of saying expensive," as quoted in your story. As the market for misleading health gimmicks shrinks, so will Americans' grocery bills.
The truth is spreading that organic foods are no healthier than what our parents fed us. And as more and more scientists are pointing out, paying double for tomatoes isn’t going to stop climate change either.
Could this be the end of organic’s reign over the universe of meaningless food labels? Maybe there is an “apocalyptic situation” for the organic-or-bust movement after all.
email us comments