Air-freighted Organic Food?

[shropshire 0]

Should organic food that had been air-freighted (larger carbon foot print) around the world still be labeled as organic?
Or should the Organic .vs. Green issue bee considered seperate?

(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome

[Skyrad 0]

Here is another issue regarding the same question. If Organic food was treated with radiation to keep it fresher for longer it wouldn't be able to be sold as organic (would it?) but one hours flying time exposes organic material (including us) to roughly the same amount of ionising radation as a chest X-ray. So food that is air-freighted for several hours say from one continent to another has been exposed to a significant dose of ionising radiation. Should it still be labled as organic?

When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy.
Lucius Annaeus Seneca

[willard 0]

Quit confusing the tree huggers!

[Nightingale 0]

Quote

Should organic food that had been air-freighted (larger carbon foot print) around the world still be labeled as organic?
Or should the Organic .vs. Green issue bee considered seperate?

Yes, the organic and green issues should be separate. Organic is concerned with what chemicals you're putting in your body. Green is concerned with the impact on the environment as a whole.

[shropshire 0]

Good answer and I agree.
So food labeling should also make the buyer aware of both.
Orgainic is easy, because the s/markets want to charge more for these products.
Labeling for Food Miles is more tricky but is becoming more prevalent here in the U.K.

(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome

[billvon 3,120]

>Or should the Organic .vs. Green issue bee considered seperate?

Yes. Organic and green are two separate issues.

[Kennedy 0]

Quote

>Or should the Organic .vs. Green issue bee considered seperate?

Yes. Organic and green are two separate issues.

Yeah! One has carbon in it and the other absorbs light waves except for a certain bit of the spectrum. Totally different issues, DUH!

witty subliminal message
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*

[Nightingale 0]

Quote

Quote

>Or should the Organic .vs. Green issue bee considered seperate?

Yes. Organic and green are two separate issues.

Yeah! One has carbon in it and the other absorbs light waves except for a certain bit of the spectrum. Totally different issues, DUH!

ROFL!

[vortexring 0]

Has this come about from a recent label reading dilema in Tesco's?

'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

[shropshire 0]

No it was from a current affairs program.

(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome

[philh 0]

"Here is another issue regarding the same question. If Organic food was treated with radiation to keep it fresher for longer it wouldn't be able to be sold as organic (would it?) but one hours flying time exposes organic material (including us) to roughly the same amount of ionising radation as a chest X-ray. So food that is air-freighted for several hours say from one continent to another has been exposed to a significant dose of ionising radiation. Should it still be labled as organic? "

Thats very interesting, do you have a source for this information?

[narcimund 0]

Quote

Thats very interesting, do you have a source for this information?

The OP wants us to think that a "chest xray" is similar to the irradiation process that food goes through. An interesting question would be whether the two amounts of radiation are comparable. I suspect they're not.

First Class Citizen Twice Over

[billvon 3,120]

>So food that is air-freighted for several hours say from one continent
>to another has been exposed to a significant dose of ionising radiation.
>Should it still be labled as organic?

Mountain grown organically coffee is exposed to significantly more UV and ionizing radiation than sea-level coffee. Should _it_ be labeled as organic?

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Should organic food that had been air-freighted (larger carbon foot print) around the world still be labeled as organic?
Or should the Organic .vs. Green issue bee considered seperate?

there are some people in the Bay Area that just released a book on their experience with eating only local foods. In California you wouldn't suffer too badly, though certain fruits would be gone forever.

It is something to think about - I like Gerosteiner water but I can't get past the silliness of buying german mineral water anymore.

Organic in the intended sense is no human driven artificial process, so I wouldn't consider flying (versus irradiation) more than a nitpick. Also, the nature of the radiation isn't the same, is it?

[philh 0]

"Organic in the intended sense is no human driven artificial process,"
Surely all agriculture involves some human driven processes?

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

"Organic in the intended sense is no human driven artificial process,"
Surely all agriculture involves some human driven processes?

artificial is the key, if very fuzzy word. You don't need chemicals in agriculture, though your yields and pest problem may be affected. And after you're harvested the crop, you don't have to dump more chemicals or radiation on it.

Farming in the 19th Century was likely very close to what organic might mean now.

[philh 0]

is water not a checmical?