A word about the 'O' word.

[Mr Potato Head]

I'm afraid so... the verging on (and occasionally veering into) abusive language is unhelpful to the debate and excludes new people (and even some of the experienced forum members). It's precisely because of use of terms like 'Freak' and 'Luddite' that make it off-putting and are unhelpful.

[Cider Boys]

Come on, please can you inform me when a contributor was described as a ‘luddite’.

In fact it was Jenny Green that first quoted the term in response to a contribution I had made. I immediately clarified that I did not think that Jenny was a Luddite.

The only other time I used the term was to Johnboy in support and response to a contribution Johnboy made.

I referred to a Luddite mentality that has existed through history and that truth and science will prevail.

At no time have I personally called anyone a Luddite, but if the cap fits!!!

Respectfully

Barney

[alan refail]

Barney

Nobody has accused you of calling any individual "luddite".

However, since you want to muddy the waters of sensible discussion, here are some direct quotes from your posts:

"The organic followers seem to want us to return to the ignorant days of folklore and intuition. Most rationale people would prefer to live in an enlightened modern age with the help that education and science has given us. The organic movement of today is submerged in myth and a 'rose tinted’ view of how life would be without those nasty chemicals. In short they live in a fantasy world. Alarmingly when their claims have been unsubstantiated they resort to scare tactics to frighten members of the public into believing their falsehoods. Of course there are many benefits in organic methods but to take the polarised view that organic is always ‘better’ holds the modern organic lobby up to well deserved ridicule."

"What surprises me is the deafening silence from the pro- organic worshipers on this forum. Perhaps pragmatism is catching!!!"

"The organic zealots are quick to contradict our misgivings but were peddling myths rather than science and are now being found out. There are many good reasons to grow food in an organic way for example adding manures and compost to soils improves their structures as well as supplying nutrients, but to then take the argument that organic food is better is an inappropriate claim. The SA must take some responsibility for the assumption of many of the general public that unless it is organic it is full of nasty chemicals etc.. It has stood by when many of their members have brazenly published these false mantras."

"What heading is the programme under?
I can not seem to find it - unless the namby pamby arty fa*ty pinkos that run the BBC have removed it!!!"

"Take heart Johnboy, many advances in science have been fiercely resisted by the ‘luddite’ mentality, but in time science will prevail over the deceptive claims and assertions from the shadowy organic entourage."


Alan

[Mr Potato Head]

Er, back to the topic please!

[Cider Boys]

Alan

You don’t realise it but you make my point better than I can.

Barney
alias Muddy Waters

[peter]

Jenny I define myslef as a pragmatist and do not take to the way you are assosciating the word, by implication, with a spray anything mentality.

Retires from fizzing blue touchpaper, to define word.


A pragmatist in this context is one who seeks to garden by the criteria or definitions bookmarked by Alan (single L), but who :
* when the ruddy bindweed re-emerges for the umpteenth time, carefully anoints it with some glyphosate.
* when after picking a pint of caterpillars off the cabbages on Saturday and finding them covered again on Sunday, carefully applies some Derris.
* when certified organic additives are not available, orders normal farm yard manure.
* when suffering physical disabilities and faced with a "virgin" couch/bindweed plot, does not give up the idea of having an allotment, but carefully picks a windless day and treats all those lovely weeds to some glyphosate.
* and most importantly, does not go round saying "I'm an organic gardener", but says instead, "I use an absolute minimum of herbicides or pesticides and when I have to I use the safest ones available.".

Or more generally, "I aspire to organic gardening, but if a particular organic method is failing for me and using something non-organic will save my crop/back/will-to-garden then I will use it, but only as much as is really needed."

Everyone happy with that definition he asks, turning off the e-mail and inserting the ear-plugs.

[Jenny Green]

Jenny I define myslef as a pragmatist and do not take to the way you are assosciating the word, by implication, with a spray anything mentality.

Sorry Peter, where have I defined pragmatists as having a spray anything mentality? Even by implication?
I generally try to avoid pigeon-holing people and making negative sweeping statements about their attitudes and practices as I am so often on the receiving end of such behaviour.

[alan refail]

Er, back to the topic please!

Has thread locking time arrived? It didn't take long for the slanging match to get going again

I noted that there were few contributions to help the formulation of what the KG Forum definition of Organic is. To try and get the topic back to a discussion of what IS "Organic", see below the full text of the link I posted:

Organic growing involves

Treating the soil and growing environment as a resource to be husbanded for future generations, rather than mined for short term gain.

Providing plants with a balanced food supply by feeding the many soil living creatures that live with composts, manures and other organic materials.

Choosing renewable resources, thereby creating a sustainable future.

Reducing pollution of the environment, by recycling garden, household and other wastes, rather than dumping or burning them.

Combating pests and diseases without using pesticides that may prove harmful to human health and that of domestic and wild animals.

Encouraging and protecting wildlife, by creating suitable habitats and by minimizing use of harmful pesticides.

Creating a safe and pleasant environment in which to work and play.

Moving with the times - taking new scientific discoveries and ideas into account, as well as the best traditional knowledge.

Using good horticultural practices.

Recognising the importance of genetic diversity and hence the preservation of threatened plant varieties.

The whole garden - flowers, trees, shrubs and lawns, as well as vegetables, fruit and herbs.

(Courtesy of HDRA/Garden Organic)

Whether you or I are Organic, Pragmatic or Conventional (or any other terms we may choose) is really neither here nor there for the purposes of this thread - that's really our own decision, and a topic to debate separately elsewhere.

Cofion gorau

Alan

[Johnboy]

Oh dear Mr PH,
When the latest thread blew up it was because Allan asked us all to listen to a programme and try sensibly to debate what had been said but the majority of those organic practitioners who replied had time to tell us that they had not listened and did not intend to listen but then contributed all the same.
In particular Richard P who was not going to listen to the programme but has on several occasions sought fit to simply snipe at at anybody with a point of view of that differs from his. The latest snipe comes in this thread:
Quote:
When you actually read the posts from the "chemical champions" "pragmatists" call them what you will they arnt actually doing that much different from what the "organic zeollots" /"freaks" are doing.
_____________________________________________________

This does not help the situation one bit but remember he has not listened to the programme and is simply sitting there in judgement on anybody who has contributed with a point of view that he has never understood or wishes to even attempt to understand.
Peter sums the situation up beautifully. Pragmatic does not mean the wholesale use of chemicals but to use them only as a very last resort.
The demonstration of weed infestation so great that you either use something to help, Glyphosate in this instance, or pack up gardening is a very good example.
Because Allan says that he uses chemicals to aid his growing it is automatically assumed by Richard that Allan is spraying Pesticides is grossly inaccurate.
Simply another snipe.
Alan brings Thalidomide into the equation which has absolutely nothing to do with the subject in hand.
As I see it the organic practitioners are the ones who have refused to debate properly.
It would appear that the OP's are probably as sick of the Soil Association as the rest of us.
It only needed them to say so and we would then have some common ground with which to debate. We may have then have been able to move forward and come to a very amicable solution on our own without you having to step in. As it is with the continual sniping and not adding to the thread both sides become entrenched.
The Soil Association are continually sniping at conventionally grown produce and it seems that it is endemic throughout the organic fraternity so is there little wonder that it occurs on this forum.
As for a new name for "Organics" well call it what you will I fear the sniping will continue.
Conventional Alternative seems as good as it could get!
JB.

[alan refail]

"Another snipe"



But more seriously - I think the Soil Association has been and remains one of the most honest and influential organisations of the 20th, and now 21st century. Its certification may cost money to obtain and maintain, but to me it is an absolute guarantee.

Here are the SA's Ten reasons to eat organic. I can't find anything wrong with them.



1. Top for taste
Many people buy organic food because they believe it tastes better than non-organic. This could be because organic fruit and vegetables tend to grow more slowly and have a lower water content, which may contribute to the fuller flavour some people experience. A poll in 2005 showed that quality and taste of food are important to more people than low prices.

2. It's healthy
On average, organic food contains higher levels of vitamin C and essential minerals such as calcium, magnesium, iron and chromium as well as cancer-fighting antioxidants. Organic milk is naturally higher in Omega 3 fatty acids, Vitamin E, Vitamin A (Beta Carotene) and certain other antioxidants than non-organic milk.

3. No nasty additives
Only 32 of the 290 food additives approved for use across the EU are permitted in organic food. Amongst the additives banned by the Soil Association are hydrogenated fat, aspartame (artificial sweetener) and monosodium glutamate which have been linked to health problems.

4. Avoids pesticides
The best way of reducing your exposure to potentially harmful pesticides is to eat organically grown food, where their use is avoided. Over 440 pesticides can be routinely used in non organic farming and residues are often present in non-organic food. Over 40% of all non-organic fruit, vegetables and bread tested in 2005 contained pesticides according to the Government's Pesticide Residues Committee.The results for particular fruit and vegetables were much worse, e.g. chemicals were found in all oranges tested, 90% of bread, 72% of grapes, 95% pears.

5. GM-free
Genetically modified (GM) crops and ingredients are not allowed under organic standards. Over a million tonnes of GM crops are imported to feed non organic livestock that produce much, if not most, of the non organic pork, bacon, milk cheese and other dairy products in our supermarkets.

6. Reliance on drugs removed
Antibiotic additives routinely added to animal food to speed animal growth are linked with bacterial resistance in humans to the same or closely related antibiotics. Soil Association standards ban the routine use of antibiotics.

7. No hidden costs
Compare this with the £120m that tax payers fork out to pay for chemicals to be removed from drinking water, mainly as a result of the pesticides used in farming.

8. High standards
Organic food comes from trusted sources. All organic farms and food companies are inspected at least once a year. The standards for organic food are laid down in European law.

9. Care for animals
No system of farming has higher levels of animal welfare standards than organic farms working to Soil Association standards. Compassion in World Farming believes that the Soil Association's welfare standards are leaders in the field. (Joyce d'Silva, Director, Compassion in World Farming.)

10. Good for wildlife and the environment
Overall organic farming supports more farmland wildlife than non-organic farming. The UK government has said that it is better for wildlife, causes lower pollution from sprays, produces less carbon dioxide - the main global warming gas - and less dangerous wastes.

Cofion gorau

Alan

[Allan]

I fear that this latest posting by Alan gets us nowhere in finding an alternative to big"O" and therefore is best ignored. It represents all the controversy making Mr PH's move necessary.
If I could add one more remark My position on the whole subject is near enough that of JB with the sole exception that I do not agree with the phrase "in the last resort". I like to consider each subject and substance purely on its merits, regardless of the opinions of any Quango.
It so happens that my ways of cultivation have made the application of any insecticide, organic or otherwise, to any crop unnecessary but I would not condemn their use especially by the commercial grower in order to meet the demands of the market.
Lastly I have yet to meet that bogey, the grower of garden or field crops who eschews the use of any bulky organic matter whatsoever, it seems that such a person does not exist, certainly not on this forum, other than in the propoganda of the organic extremists.
Allan

[richard p]

allan , at the risk of being accused of sniping could you clarify the following

"Lastly I have yet to meet that bogey, the grower of garden or field crops who eschews the use of any bulky organic matter whatsoever, it seems that such a person does not exist, certainly not on this forum, other than in the propoganda of the organic extremists.
Allan"

i have seen no reference anywhere to any organic growers claiming that adding organic matter (FYM ?) to the soil is banned.
i can only think that maybe organic purists will insist that their manure comes from animals that have been fed organically and that this has been missreported by someone with an axe to grind.
regards richard

[alan refail]

Allan wrote:-

"I fear that this latest posting by Alan gets us nowhere in finding an alternative to big"O" and therefore is best ignored. It represents all the controversy making Mr PH's move necessary."

Is this a new tack? If you don't like a posting/viewpoint, suggest it be ignored. There are a number of members whose views I strongly disagree with - I would never have the arrogance to suggest that people ignore them.

When contributing to a thread, Allan, with the greatest respect, I think it would be a good idea to read carefully the starting post. In this case the question was: "How do we define Organic?" , not what other terms would you like to use instead. Whether we like the term or not, it is not going to go away. I suggested yesterday that it was probably time to lock the thread, as the discussion was lapsing into the usual sniping at each other. I think I was right.

Alan

[beefy]

Jenny I define myslef as a pragmatist and do not take to the way you are assosciating the word, by implication, with a spray anything mentality.

Retires from fizzing blue touchpaper, to define word.


A pragmatist in this context is one who seeks to garden by the criteria or definitions bookmarked by Alan (single L), but who :
* when the ruddy bindweed re-emerges for the umpteenth time, carefully anoints it with some glyphosate.
* when after picking a pint of caterpillars off the cabbages on Saturday and finding them covered again on Sunday, carefully applies some Derris.
* when certified organic additives are not available, orders normal farm yard manure.
* when suffering physical disabilities and faced with a "virgin" couch/bindweed plot, does not give up the idea of having an allotment, but carefully picks a windless day and treats all those lovely weeds to some glyphosate.
* and most importantly, does not go round saying "I'm an organic gardener", but says instead, "I use an absolute minimum of herbicides or pesticides and when I have to I use the safest ones available.".

Or more generally, "I aspire to organic gardening, but if a particular organic method is failing for me and using something non-organic will save my crop/back/will-to-garden then I will use it, but only as much as is really needed."

Everyone happy with that definition he asks, turning off the e-mail and inserting the ear-plugs.

Thats good enough for me Peter .
Im a Pragmatist

[alan refail]

It really is time for a reminder about the original post.

Well I think it's time for a little definition about what is 'Organic' in the context of the KG forum. (If I could change the actual word I would, but it's the one that has stuck)

I'm doing this because I want to prepare a baseline for future debate about the subject so that we can move on from the endless slanging matches that I think we're all a little tired of (and move on to new ones. )

Please be clear, I'm not trying to dictate what you think 'Organic' is, or make any value judgements on the way that you may live / garden / shop etc.

Firstly, in an effort to say what Organic is, I'll start by saying what it is not.

'Organic' is not the same as organic chemistry. Organic chemistry is a Victorian concept about the fundamental nature of chemicals, and as we all know harmful substances can be organic and inorganic, so it doesn't really help our debate.

It is not 'Organic' as laid down by the legal definitions for commercial organic farming & the labelling of goods. In fact, as I hope to explain, this is unhelpful to the definition of 'Organic' in that it provides a minimum baseline to adhere to rather than an ideal to strive for.

Which brings me to my definition of what 'Organic' is:

'Organic' is an ideal; a vision of a time / situation where no harmful substances are used to raise perfect produce that is consumed where it is grown.

Not many of us can manage this ideal, but we can aim towards it.

I don't expect the debate to stop (in fact I sincerely hope it does not), but I do hope to stop some of the daft comments, and at least we're examining the same notion. (In fact I hope to stimulate debates around what constitutes a 'harmful substance' and 'perfect produce', what is 'consumed where it is grown' and why any of this might or might not be a good idea!)

-----

For a limited time I'll accept submissions to change the wording for the KG definition of 'Organic', then lock the thread. Then the arguments can really start.