"100% Natural" Can Be 0% GreenWhen it comes to food and other consumer products, many people tend to think "100% natural" and "100% organic" mean the same thing. Some believe that "organic" is just a marketing term, while "natural" means that a product has government certification.
The Shelton Group, a market research firm that monitors sustainable and organic industry, found that 31 percent of respondents to its consumer survey thought the phrase "100% natural" was a better indicator of a "green" pedigree than the phrase "100% organic."
That's a bit troubling, speaking as someone who grows and promotes organic food.
Advocates for the organic industry have expressed concern that capitalizing on consumers' misunderstanding of labeling will diminish organic sales at a time when demand is already stalled because of the recession.
For the record, organics are produced without chemical herbicides and pesticides, antibiotics, genetically modified organisms, irradiation, growth hormones or synthetic fertilizers (including the sewage sludge that was mentioned in my previous post). Organic certification is managed by the Department of Agriculture and an array of third-party accreditors.
"Natural," on the other hand, means... whatever the producer or seller wants it to mean.
There is little restriction on the use of the term "natural," except that products labeled "natural" cannot be processed with artificial colors, preservatives or synthetic substances. Note that this is in regard to processing, not raising or growing.
So soybeans sprayed with embryonic cell-destroying RoundUp, or animals fed GMO corn and injected with antibiotics, can be labeled as "100% natural," just as long as Red #40 and sodium benzoate don't get thrown into the mix at the processing facility.
One way to clear up the confusion over labeling would be to use the term "minimally processed" in place of "natural." Doing so would prevent products that contain high fructose corn syrup, hyrdogenated oils, autolyzed proteins and other additives from being considered "100% natural."
The FDA has said that current labeling standards aren't being abused and that there are higher priorities to be dealt with other than food labeling.
add to del.icio.us
add to digg
add to yahoo
related at technorati
share on facebook
Check our most impactful articles and see how popular these opinions are with you.
Will others follow in your footsteps? Share your thoughts and ideas for changing the world.
I agree 100% Damon. I am a big proponent of organic sustainable permaculture and for years have been disappointed in the labeling guidelines allowed by the USDA and FDA. Such marketing terms as "natural" can have many potential meanings, and even a scientific term such as "organic" has had various legal definitions from state to state and federally. This means that when something is labeled "organic" you really don't know whose definition they are using.
The whole world was 100% organic until roughly the time of WWII, when the agricultural chemical industry took off. I can't think of even one reason why we couldn't return to that state. Sure there are more people to feed now. Killing our planet with ag chemicals isn't helping. Genetically modified seeds that won't reproduce or grow aren't helping either.
Stop buying. Start growing your own. The only labels you need are on seed packets.