On Sat, 16 May 2015 08:53:24 -0700, sf > wrote:

>On Sat, 16 May 2015 09:03:00 +1000, Jeßus
> wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 16 May 2015 08:13:13 +1000, Bruce > wrote:
>>
>> >On Fri, 15 May 2015 17:51:18 -0400, jmcquown >
>> >wrote:
>> >
>> >>On 5/15/2015 4:04 AM, Alan Holbrook wrote:
>> >>> Good point. Too many people assume "organic" is equivalent to "natural",
>> >>> and of course, it isn't. Being just a touch cynical, I think "organic" is
>> >>> equivalent to "We can charge more in our stores because you people are
>> >>> ignorant."
>> >>>
>> >>Agreed. Jack up the prices, the consumer doesn't know any better.
>> >>
>> >>> The only way to know what goes into your produce is to grow your own.
>> >>>
>> >>That's absolutely true. Unless you have your own garden and know what
>> >>you put into the soil, how could you know? Slapping a label on
>> >>supermarket produce doesn't prove anything. At least, not to any
>> >>pennywise shopper.
>> >
>> >Don't you have organisations that check these claims? Or can anyone
>> >say 'organic'? In the latter case, I wouldn't "buy" it either.
>
>I'm fine with organic produce. Organic farms only qualify after a
>certain number of years growing product without whatever it is they
>aren't supposed to use.
>>
>> I wouldn't entirely trust any such organisations anyway.
>> Just look at 'RSPCA approved' eggs in Aus.
>
>We have labeling problems here too.
>http://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/...acked-up-to-be

They get rather prosaic with their descriptions of 'farm fresh' and
'cage free'... I singled out the RSPCA as it seems to me their
'standards' are for sale, IMO. Chicken meat production is as bad, if
not worse, especially in the U.S. It's barbaric how most chicken/eggs
are raised. Ask yourself why most supermarket chicken is so cheap.
It's TOO damned cheap, you can't ethically produce chicken meat that
cheaply.