Organic News As Originally Published at ilovetiny.com

*Tiny's at Tacoma Farmers Markets

*Fruit Snacks Score High During WASL

*Tiny's At Ballard Market

*Jay & John Evergreen Monthly Article

*Pesticide level drops in children fed organic foods

*Vitamin supplements take a shellacking

*Organic Food Fight

Farmers markets grow tall in sunshine

EIJIRO KAWADA; The News Tribune
Published: October 28th, 2006 01:00 AM

Puyallup’s sales are expected to grow by more than 30 percent from last year’s $750,000. The figure was $664,600 in 2004.

The peak number of vendors also increased from about 100 last year to 135 this year.

The weather – including a summer-long streak of dry, sunny weekends – was a factor, said market manager Janie Morris. “The equation was perfect, every which way we looked,” she said Thursday.

Farmers markets report similar successes this year all over the South Sound.

Though not all have final sales figures, market organizers from Federal Way to Tacoma to Olympia all said they’ve seen steady growth in recent years, and 2006 was no exception.

Tacoma’s Proctor Farmers Market also holds the season’s last market today. Manager Bruce Larson estimates total sales of about $250,000, up from last year’s $200,000.

“We create a nice community event,” he said. “And produce speaks for itself – as fresh as it gets, grown locally.”

Farmers shared in the banner year.

“The best season ever,” said John McPherson of Tiny’s Organic, who has 44 acres in Wenatchee. “I think the big thing is the customer awareness. They want to get local, fresh produce, and they want to meet the producers.”

McPherson said his family farm probably saw an increase of about 15 percent in sales this year.

Jean Curbow, who grows tomatoes, peppers and other produce on 5 acres on Highway 162 near Orting, said she knew early on it was going to be a strong season.

“The warm weather – it was bound to be a good year,” she said. “The weather matters. It always does.”

The Olympia Farmers Market – the area’s oldest and largest, boasting more than $4 million in sales annually – also saw an increase in gross revenues, although the growth rate was not out of the ordinary compared to years past, said assistant manager Ashley Powell.

She attributed the steady growth to the rising popularity of organic produce and people’s desire to buy local.

Smaller and newer markets are adjusting to that trend, as well.

T.H.E. Farmers Market in University Place, which also saw about a 25 percent rise in sales, had the same number of vendors this year – 10 of them. But two produce stands replaced arts-and-crafts vendors, said Jan Piercy, market manager.

She said the market averaged 1,000 to 1,200 people a day, about a 20 percent increase from last year.

The Puyallup market, which has been running at Pioneer Park for more than 25 years, was open Saturdays and Sundays this year. Two years ago, organizers tried holding Thursday evening markets tied to a concert series, but that didn’t prove successful.

Morris said the Puyallup Market puts the focus on organic produce. Vendors come from all over the state, including Spokane, Centralia and Aberdeen.

“Eating locally and organic is becoming very strong here,” Morris said. “Also, this was a bumper crop year of everything. Flowers were brighter and fruits were fresher.”

Eijiro Kawada: 253-597-8633

eijiro.kawada@thenewstribune.com

The Puyallup and Proctor farmers markets will close for the season after today.

Puyallup: 10 a.m. to 2 p.m. at downtown Pioneer Park on South Meridian Street

Proctor: 9 a.m. to 2 p.m. on North 27th Street at Proctor in Tacoma

Living Well: Fruit snacks score high during WASL

By BOB CONDOR
SPECIAL TO THE P-I May 2, 2006

As principal of White Center Heights intermediate school, Greta Salmi is adept at gauging the energy level of the student body. She has noticed something different during the past two weeks of mandatory WASL testing.

"School is letting out right now," Salmi said from her office last Thursday. "The whole tone during the WASLs this year seems more focused. There's not the anxiousness I have seen in past years."

One reason, not the only reason, is the healthy fruit snacks students are receiving as a midtest break, says Salmi. Organic apples, oranges and pears have been supplied each of the past three Mondays by the Food Sense program operated by Washington State University-King County Extension.

White Center Heights is one of seven schools and about 2,000 students benefiting from fresh fruit drop-offs during WASL testing weeks, including stops today as kids head into the final test rounds through Thursday.

"I'm not going to say that an apple at 10 o'clock is the whole reason why our students seem more focused, but everything fits together," Salmi said. "I have to say usually by Thursday afternoon (after three straight days of testing for math, writing and reading) the kids have lost it. But not this year."

The WSU-King County program operates on federal grant money from the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Its mandate is to work with schools in which more than 50 percent of the students participate in a free or reduced-cost lunch program.

Beth Blessing, a Food Sense educator, said the core of her team's work is the classroom lessons provided to primary and intermediate school students. There is a 10-lesson set (an hour apiece) that is incorporated into yearly curriculums. Students hear the reasons why we need more produce and fiber in our diets, but also enjoy hands-on preparations and food samples.

One more highlight: Each of the seven schools in the pilot program has a garden planted and maintained by the Food Sense educators and the students. They harvest vegetables and use them to make salads and other freshly prepared dishes.

Salmi said the school also hosts family nights that include conversations between the WSU-King County nutritionists and parents.

Blessing admits to looking for any way to influence healthier eating in schools, including ongoing discussions with the cafeteria services.

The WASL program grew out of that opportunistic approach. During a staff meeting two years ago, the talk turned to the observed snacks during WASL weeks.

"We noticed a lot of schools were buying snacks but those items were high-sugar and processed (such as muffins, energy bars and toaster tarts)," Blessing said. "We started brainstorming about maybe getting some organizations to donate fresh organic fruit. We are always trying to promote the organic produce message to students and parents."

The idea was, ahem, a natural for several reasons. One, because most kids love fruit. What's more, the students at the seven selected schools "rarely get fresh fruit and vegetables," Blessing said.

Another good reason: Blessing's husband works for Full Circle Farms, one of the region's leading providers of fresh organic produce. She told the staff she "had a pretty good connection."

What's more, Blessing knew a friend at Pioneer Organics, which agreed to supply fruits. Tiny's Organic pitched in, too. Each piece of fruit is sliced in half by teachers ("they are happy to do it") because most kids can only handle about half an orange or apple during a test break. If you are wondering, the oranges were mostly Valencia (easy to peel, even as a half) from California and the apples were Braeburns and Cameos from Washington.

At the White Center Heights school, third-, fourth- and fifth-graders test for 90 minutes, then break for the fresh fruit before returning to a final hour of testing. The students clearly look forward to the snack and feel honored that their nutrition educator, Jackie Cramer, has "done this for us," said principal Salmi.

"What I have noticed is we are influencing the school's snack purchases on days when there isn't enough of the donated fruit," Blessing said. "That's a positive right there."

Blessing would love to involve more farmers and producers to cover the healthy WASL snack needs, including finding a local provider of string cheese or some other form of single-serving cheese to match with the fruit.

"We also talk to the students about eating before school to help them focus and learn. A number of kids come to school tired. Even though many of them are enrolled in free breakfast programs they come to school tired in part because they are hungry."

Research backs up the Food Sense efforts. In standardized studies, students who eat breakfast score higher on cognitive tests and skills than children who go without a morning meal. Note to adults: The same findings apply to us.

Good news for local teachers and administrators: The Food Sense CHANGE (the full name with the acronym Cultivating Health and Nutrition Through Gardening Education) is within a month of publishing its two sets of 10-lesson plans online at www.metrokc.gov/wsu-ce/food$ense/CHANGE. It is free for teachers or volunteers who feel moved to teach kids about healthy eating. "We just keep working toward getting more local farmers connected with schools," Blessing said. "It will keep happening."

Thursday, January 19, 2006

By LISA STIFFLER
SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER REPORTER

It's chilly this time of year at the Ballard Farmers Market, and there are only a couple of dozen stands set up, but it was worth the trip Sunday for Jill Bramlett, who was on a quest for affordable, fresh, organic foods.

After buying a sack of apples from Tiny's Organic Fruit and Produce, the Ballard resident said she tries to get all organic dairy items and leafy green veggies. When it comes to other produce, "it depends on how expensive it is," Bramlett said.

		Karen Ducey / P-I
	Kristin Barquist runs the stand for Tiny's Organic Fruit and Produce at the Ballard Farmers Market while, top, leeks and red and yellow onions from Anselmo's Farms are on display.

Demand for organic items has grown faster than a zucchini in summer -- swelling 20 percent annually nationwide in recent years. But when does it make sense to plunk down the extra cash for organic milk, spinach and hamburger, and when are conventionally produced items OK? What are the health and environmental effects, and what does the organic label really mean?

People are turning to organic items for a variety of reasons -- often with health topping the list.

"A lot of people with children -- they're the ones that are more concerned with it," said Kristin Barquist, between customers at the Tiny's stand. Some of the shoppers buy the organic produce and turn it into baby food.

For parents concerned about the effect of the pesticides used in conventional food production, buying organic makes sense, University of Washington research shows.

Children eating non-organic foods were switched for five days to an organic diet and pesticide levels were measured in their urine before and after the change. The study -- published this past fall -- found that some pesticides disappeared from the children's urine after going organic.

"We don't say that moving to more organic food will necessarily change your risk (of health problems)," said Richard Fenske, a professor with the UW's School of Public Health and one of the researchers on the study. "But it will change your children's pesticide exposure."

Fenske previously published results showing that children consuming produce and juice grown using conventional farming practices had urine levels of some pesticide types that were five to seven times higher than for children with a 75 percent organic diet.

Studies are being done on the neurological and developmental effects of the chemicals in animals, and a massive human U.S. study has been proposed that could measure potential subtle effects, he said.

Those supporting pesticide use say that the levels of the chemicals in non-organic foods are well-controlled by the government and so minuscule that they are not a threat to human health.

"The benefits of eating fresh fruits and vegetables far outweigh any concerns about pesticides," said Heather Hansen, executive director of Washington Friends of Farms and Forests, a non-profit group representing agricultural interests.

Organic: What it is and when to buy it

Before an item is slapped with an organic label, it must pass a certification process by the U.S. or state departments of agriculture.

Certified foods cannot be genetically modified or irradiated. Produce cannot be farmed with most synthetic pesticides or fertilizers. Organic dairy, poultry, meat and eggs are produced without growth hormones and antibiotics. The animals must have some kind of outdoor access, but that standard is poorly defined.

Although organic foods are sometimes the same price as non-organic items, they're often 25 percent, 50 percent or even twice as expensive as conventionally produced foods.

Shoppers who are selective about which items to splurge on for the organic label might choose those with the highest residual pesticide levels: apples, bell peppers, celery, cherries, imported grapes, nectarines, peaches, pears, potatoes, raspberries, spinach, strawberries, according to February's issue of Consumer Reports.

Other produce -- asparagus, avocados, bananas, broccoli, cauliflower, corn, kiwi, mangoes, onions, papayas, pineapples and sweet peas -- are rarely tainted with pesticides even when not dubbed organic, advises Consumer Reports.

But for many people, the decision to pony up the extra dough for organic goes beyond human health worries.

"Some of the overriding reasons for purchasing organic have to do with the environmental aspects, because that removes tons of many forms of pesticides," said Goldie Caughlan, nutrition education manager for Puget Consumers Co-op Natural Markets.

With pesticides and fertilizers curtailed, organic farmers typically take greater measures to maintain the health of the soil in sustainable, natural ways, such as rotating crops.

But for smaller farmers, the hurdles of the certification process can be too costly -- even if they're already following the rules.

"More important than anything is (that) people start thinking about where food comes from, what exactly went into it," said Judy Kirkhuff, market master at the Ballard Farmers Market.

An outgrowth of the surge in interest in organic goods is a push toward the support of locally produced foods. A benefit of buying from local farmers is less fuel burned getting the goods to shoppers. It's considered more sustainable economically, socially and environmentally.

And places such as farmers markets give consumers a chance to talk with farmers -- helping them learn about food production, identifying farmers selling organic items but without the certification and giving people a better understanding of why organic costs more.

George Vojkovich was manning his family's stall in Ballard on a recent Sunday. Surrounding him were more than a half-dozen coolers packed with organic sausages, eggs, chicken and beef from his Skagit River Ranch.

"It's a labor-intensive business," Vojkovich said. His cows are grass-fed, so they need more land than grain-fed cows penned in a lot. The chickens eat organic grains and run free. "There's not a lot of profit in it," he said, even though his prices are about double the grocery store.

But Vojkovich believes in the health and ecological benefits of what he's doing -- and says his growing number of customers do, too. "They want to know the people who grow their food," he said. "You know your auto mechanic; you ought to know your farmer."

		Jay and John McPherson Photos by Ritzy Ryciak   November 2005 | Cover Story Sexy and Sustainable Local organic farmers are getting personal with consumers to upturn the profit model By RITZY RYCIAK If you eat lettuce and live in Seattle, you may have noticed that the face of farming has changed. Farmers markets have popped up in practically every neighborhood. CSA (community supported agriculture) is the hot acronym. Local is in, pesticides are out, and somewhere along the way sustainability has gotten sexy. It’s not just the peas and carrots that are looking good. On a fall day in Seattle, the afternoon sun warms the red bricks of the Pike Place Market. The morning chill has vacated and Pike Place is pulsing with fruit vendors and produce shoppers. Chinese chestnuts, giant pears and rainbow-colored peppers line the stalls. Jay McPherson, a 25-year-old organic farmer with aquamarine eyes and arm muscles as supple as the peaches he peddles, offers sliced samples of his family’s fruit—pluots, doughnut peaches and the best Gala apples I have ever tasted. Jay is dressed in a white tank top, apron and jeans. Since when did sexy and sustainable keep showing up in the same sentence? And then there’s Jay’s brother, John… The duo is enough to make any female stop and sample. Jay and John are both University of Washington graduates in their twenties who have chosen orchards over corporate America. They aren’t hippies and they won’t tell you that they farm to feel close to the land. But they are passionate about the organic fruit they produce. It is why they do what they do. “When the boys were growing up, if kids were aspiring to do anything it certainly wasn’t to work in the orchards,” says Greg McPherson, John and Jay’s father and a farmer since 1979. Going public “We knew that if the public had a chance to taste our product, that it would just take off,” explains John, who, three years ago helped his family shift from the wholesale model of fruit sales into farmers markets and direct marketing. Operating under the wholesale model, the family was on the brink of bankruptcy and out of ideas. They believed in their product, but amid fruit packing fees and wholesale distributors, they couldn’t turn a profit. Meeting the public was the best decision they ever made. “I have at least 10 people a day who bless me for growing organic fruit and tell me that they want to become an organic farmer,” says Jay, who with John, runs the farmers market and home delivery service of Tiny’s Organic Fruit, their family business. The McPhersons own a 42-acre farm in Wenatchee and grow fruit varieties with names like Arctic Snow nectarines, Indian blood peaches and Dapple Dandy pluots (a hybrid between a plum and an apricot). Sumptuous flavor mixed with aquamarine eyes is apparently a hard combination to resist. “I have a friend in Coupeville [on Whidbey Island] who visits the farmers market there just to see Jay,” affirms one customer in the midst of picking pluots for the week. Whether customers are coming for the notable deltoids or Tiny’s unusual fruit, the McPherson brothers represent an interesting new development in farming. Call it fresh-face farming. Local officials say there is a significant influx of entrepreneurs who are opting to become organic growers. One key reason is market demands, another is the lifestyle it promises. Producing the goods In 2002, a consumer survey conducted by Washington State University’s Center for Sustaining Agriculture and Natural Resources found that 43 percent of consumers purchased directly from farmers once a month or less. But more than 80 percent of those surveyed said they wanted to buy more fruits and vegetables directly from local farmers. At the time of the survey, one of the biggest factors preventing consumers from buying directly from farmers was a shortage of farmers markets in their area or inconvenient market hours of operation. The number of farmers markets has steadily increased. This past summer there were more than 100 farmers markets in Washington, 23 in King County alone. It is unlikely inconvenience will remain an issue. “I think there is a trend that is starting to grow where consumers are picking a farmer or two who supplies them with their food,” says Steve Evans, a farm specialist for King County who works with Washington growers to help them become more profitable. “It benefits the farmer to provide more and more of a complete range of items—you grow as much as you can.” Plus, organic farming offers not only a promise of food safety but also a romantic glimpse into pieces of ourselves that may be missing. When most of us spend more time with our computers than the trees outside, what could be better than growing your own food, working with the land and possibly getting muscles like the McPherson brothers? “There is something about sticking a seed in the ground, nurturing it, watering and picking it,” says Evans. While the average age of the farmer is still older (54 years old), Evans believes the public tends to deal more with the younger farmers now because they are the ones doing the new things. The older farmers are still farming in the old way and selling to wholesalers. “The new farmers are out there and working with the public,” says Evans. It wasn’t too long ago that customers never met their farmers. “As people shop more at farmers markets and meet the growers,” says Evans, “they realize that they are kind of cool people, and jeeze, working outside in a beautiful field and growing your own food beats typing in a cubicle.” Farmers are the new version of cowboys, says Evans: “Ten years ago everyone wanted [to quit the corporate life] to become a cowboy—it was the sexy new thing—now it is farming.” Organic boom According to the Department of Agriculture, organic farming is one of the fastest growing segments of U.S. agriculture. Certified organic cropland has nearly doubled from 1.3 million acres in 1997 to 2.34 million acres in 2001.What’s more, organic food sales grow at a clip of 20 percent per year. Mary Embleton, executive director of Cascade Harvest, a Washington-based organization committed to farmland preservation, also heads up Farmlink, a program that connects people who want to get started in agriculture with farmers and landowners who are committed to establishing the next generation of producers. There are currently 180 individuals actively looking for farmland who are enrolled in Farmlink. Embleton flips through her list of applicants and reads off their current occupations: airline employee, Microsoft, Boeing, molecular biology and software engineering. “Farming is a simplification in one way even though the job may not be simple,” she says. “I know that a lot of people have said they are looking to reconnect and add something to their community and they feel like they can do that through local agriculture.” In October, Andrew Stout, owner of Full Circle Farm—alongside CEO’s, lawyers and techie-gurus—received the Puget Sound Business Journal’s 40 Under 40 as one of this region’s rising business stars. “In 6th grade, the worst insult that you could give someone was to call them a farmer,” says Stout. “Now it is one of the best pick-up lines out there.” Many young farmers possess the confidence to break out of the mold, create their own reality and do it in a way that benefits the community around them instead of depleting it, says Stout. Now that’s sexy. “We are not the hippie generation anymore,” says Stout. “Everyone is wired.” One farmer, Sarah Caasidy, is in it for the learning experience—and the dirt. “I like working with plants and learning from them,” says Caasidy, a 38-year-old who runs Oxbow farm in Carnation with her husband Luke Woodward. “It is a classroom out here.” According to the 2002 Census of Agriculture, there has been a 13.4 percent increase in the number of farms operated by women since 1997, including an 8 percent jump in Western Washington. “I do think that people still consider farmers to be kind of dirty and smelly,” says Caasidy. “And I am not saying that I am not. But dirt is sexy.” Caasidy recently delivered a CSA box to a bakery in Seattle. A man on the street stopped and stared at her. He stared for so long that Sarah become uncomfortable. She asked if she could help him—broke the spell—and the man simply looked at her and said “you just look so healthy.” Caasidy notes a glow that she observes from all of the “crazy farmers” who get together at the Washington Tilth gatherings she attends. She believes that when you surround yourself with nature, plants and animals rather than concrete and offices, you start to look different. “There is a sparkle in people’s eyes,” she notes. “It is because we love what we do.”

Pesticide level drops in children fed organic foods

By Marla Cone, Los Angeles Times
Sunday - September 4, 2005

Switching to organic foods provides children “dramatic and immediate” protection from widely used pesticides that are used on a variety of crops, according to a new study by a team of federally funded scientists.

Concentrations of two organophosphate pesticides —malathion and chlorpyrifos — declined substantially in the bodies of elementary-school age children during a five-day period when organic foods were substituted for conventional foods.

The two chemicals are the most commonly used insecticides in U.S. agriculture. More than 2 million pounds were applied to California crops in 2003, according to records of the state Department of Pesticide Regulation.

The health effects of exposure to minute amounts of pesticides found in food are largely unknown, especially for children. Some research, however, suggests that the residue may harm the developing nervous system.

For 15 days, a team of environmental health scientists from the University of Washington, Emory University and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention tested the urine of 23 elementary-school age children in the Seattle area.

During the first three days and last seven days, the children ate their normal foods. But during the middle five days, organic items were substituted for most of their diet, including fruits, vegetables, juices and wheat and corn-based processed items such as cereal and pasta.

Average levels of both pesticides in the children “decreased to the non-detect levels immediately after the introduction of organic diets and remained non-detectable until the conventional diets were reintroduced,” the researchers reported Thursday in the online version of the scientific journal Environmental Health Perspectives.

When they ate organic foods, the children on average had zero malathion detected in their urine, with a high of 7 parts per billion in one child. But when the children returned to eating conventional foods, one child had as much as 263 ppb and the average increased to 1.6 ppb.

For chlorpyrifos, the children had less than one part per billion when they ate organic foods, but the average increased five-fold as soon as they returned to their previous diet.

The findings suggest that children are exposed to organophosphate chemicals mainly through food, not through spraying in homes or other sources. In 2001, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency banned most residential uses of chlorpyrifos but has left most agricultural uses unrestricted.

Three other organophosphate pesticides that are not widely used on farms and are more highly restricted by the EPA were undetectable in most of the children, according to the study, directed by Emory University’s Dr. Chensheng Lu.

“In conclusion,” the researchers wrote, “we were able to demonstrate that an organic diet provides a dramatic and immediate protective effect against exposure to organophosphorus pesticides that are commonly used in agricultural production.”

Thursday, August 18, 2005

Vitamin supplements take a shellacking
Recent studies find that heavy doses don't help to ward off some diseases

By STEPHEN SMITH
THE BOSTON GLOBE

On the surface, it makes all the sense in the world: Since fruits, vegetables and fish contain loads of healthy nutrients, why not isolate those vitamins, put them in pills, and gobble them up? And wouldn't more be better?

Then we could just skip the strawberries, spinach and salmon, and let fistfuls of vitamin tablets provide a fortified shield of protection against cancer, heart disease and other ailments, right?

"It's a very plausible hypothesis," said Dr. JoAnn Manson, chief of preventive medicine at Brigham and Women's Hospital. "However, when submitted to rigorous testing, it has not held up. ... It's an oversimplified view."

Three times in recent weeks, scientists writing in medical journals have attacked the notion that heavy-duty helpings of vitamins can thwart life-threatening illnesses. In some cases, they argued, excessive supplementation may even be harmful.

The way to live a long, healthy life, the researchers insisted, is not to pop lots of pills but to eat a balanced, healthy diet.

For reasons that scientists have yet to figure out, the body processes vitamins differently when they arrive in food than in pill form -- probably because foods interact with each other in a way that may help nutrient absorption. So far, nutrition specialists said, scientists working in labs can't beat what nature does.

"What you can buy in a bottle doesn't come close to providing you with the wealth of benefits that come automatically when those nutrients are present in the form of food," said Linda Van Horn, a research nutritionist at Northwestern University in Chicago.

Nutrition advice, though, is never quite as simple as "take your vitamins" or even "don't take your vitamins." Further complicating matters, the answer isn't the same for everybody.

Much of the recent criticism of vitamins has revolved around megadoses, which can be 10, 20, even 30 times stronger than the amount recommended for the daily diet.

But even multivitamins, which typically contain the recommended daily intake of a host of nutrients, are not universally accepted by nutritionists.

Alice Lichtenstein, a professor at Tufts University's Friedman School of Nutrition, said there's no evidence that multivitamins are hazardous -- but she said there's also no compelling proof that they do much. Other experts believe multivitamins can help restore nutritional equilibrium to a defective diet.

"If you look at what people eat, and there have been many national surveys to look at levels of nutrients and foods, there is a lot of deficiency," said Dr. Meir Stampfer, a professor of epidemiology and nutrition at the Harvard School of Public Health.

"We're not talking about people with scurvy or rickets, but there are nutrients that large, substantial portions of the population are not getting," he said, including, vitamins B12 and D. And for some people whose extreme poverty keeps them from eating right, supplements can be life-savers.

Last year, vitamin sales in the United States totaled $6.9 billion, according to estimates from the Nutrition Business Journal, a market research and publishing firm. That's roughly the size of the bottled water industry.

But the promise of high-dose vitamin pills has been increasingly contradicted by gold-standard scientific research, Lichtenstein wrote in The Journal of the American Medical Association late last month, with a Tufts colleague.

For example, consider beta carotene. It was trumpeted as the ultimate cancer fighter. But researchers in one study showed that high doses of the nutrient, which the body converts to vitamin A, actually increased the chance that a smoker would develop lung cancer.

Then there's folate. Physicians still encourage women trying to get pregnant to take supplements that include folate, because of scientific studies showing it prevents birth defects. But recent findings have tempered hopes that folate would also help battle heart disease. One study suggested that heart patients who took large amounts of folate after an operation to unclog their arteries were more likely to get clogs again.

Two other medical reports released last month examined vitamins D and E. The vitamin D study, published in The Archives of Internal Medicine, found that it did not slow bone loss in older African-American women, as had been predicted.

And the vitamin E report, appearing in The Journal of the American Medical Association, concluded that for most women, large doses of vitamin E do nothing to prevent heart problems.

Still, even the president of the American Heart Association acknowledges just how seductive the healing promise of vitamins can be. Dr. Robert Eckel, of the University of Colorado, said he took vitamin E for a couple of years, based on those early reports hailing its disease-fighting properties. But when the more elaborate research results emerged: "I finally looked at the evidence and said, gee, this isn't worth taking."

Of course, plenty of people remain devoted to vitamins. "Many people," Eckel said, "continue to take supplements despite advice that they may not be helpful to them. There's a lot of strong-headedness among people."

The studies debunking the disease-preventing powers of vitamins have come under steady attack, both from the supplement industry and from vitamins aficionados. The Dietary Supplement Education Alliance, an industry-backed advocacy coalition, regularly assails studies critical of vitamins, arguing that the science is faulty and that it is tantamount to fear-mongering.

For comment, the alliance provided Maret Traber, a professor in the Department of Nutrition and Exercise Sciences at Oregon State University, as a specialist on the usefulness of vitamins. Traber agreed that a healthy diet combined with an active lifestyle is the best path to fitness.

"We know nutrition and exercise are critical for good health, but we're ignoring it," said Traber, who said she does not take research money from the supplement industry, although industry dollars helped pay for one piece of scientific equipment she uses. "It's always easier to sit in front of the couch and eat Doritos than it is to go for a jog. Everybody is lazy."

ORGANIC FOOD FIGHT
Outcry over rule changes that allow more pesticides, hormones

Carol Ness, Chronicle Staff Writer

Saturday, May 22, 2004

Printable Version Email This Article

A showdown is taking shape over the nation's organic food standards, triggered by a spate of recent rule changes that some producers and activists say are setting a pattern that could eventually render the organic label meaningless.

The changes in the National Organic Program standards, made in April, expand the use of antibiotics and hormones in organic dairy cows, allow more pesticides in the organic arsenal and for the first time let organic livestock eat potentially contaminated fishmeal.

Program administrators also reversed themselves and said seafood, pet food and body care products can use "organic" on their labels without meeting any standards at all.

And in what the $11 billion organic food industry, consumer and farm groups call a dangerous precedent, program administrators made last month's changes in three "guidances" and one "directive" without seeking public comment or consulting with their own advisers on the National Organics Standards Board.

"This is hugely terrible for the organic industry," said Nancy Hirshberg, a vice president at Stonyfield Farm, a New Hampshire organic dairy whose yogurts are sold in the Bay Area. "It's a real weakening of the standards. And it could have the effect of weakening consumer confidence in the organic label. "

A coalition of organic interests, including the powerful Consumers Union, says the interpretations represent major changes that could threaten the integrity of the program, which set a high standard for what products qualify as organic. And they say administrators risk undermining trust in the program by leaving the public, including its own advisory board, out of the decision- making.

Sounding a national alarm, the coalition is pressuring the U.S. Department of Agriculture to retract the changes and keep the public involved.

In both the House and Senate, letters calling on Agriculture Secretary Ann Veneman to withdraw the documents are gathering bipartisan support. And businesses that will lose money because of the changes are said to be considering lawsuits.

"We are drawing a line in the organic soil," said Bob Scowcroft of the Organic Farming Research Foundation in Santa Cruz, who helped write the organic standards.

Barbara Robinson, the USDA deputy administrator in charge of the organic program, defended the moves as merely interpretations of the standards, not new regulations. Among the 90-plus USDA-accredited organic certifiers, some were interpreting the standards one way, some another, she said. For example, some were allowing dairy farmers to use antibiotics in certain circumstances, and some weren't.

"We want it to be consistent," she said in an interview. In an earlier statement, she put it this way: "The statements simply say what is enforceable under the existing regulation and statute and what is not. There is nothing new, just an attempt to be clear about what is covered."

The board wasn't involved because the guidances didn't set new standards, she said. Decisions needed to be made, and Robinson said she has only six staff members and $1.5 million, out of the USDA's $70 billion budget, to run the entire organic program.

If people don't agree with the staff, she added, "the fix is to petition the department to change the regulation. That can be done."

The National Organic Standards Board was told of the changes just the day before they were announced and responded with a letter expressing its strong concerns.

"The board was totally caught by surprise,'' said vice chair James Riddle, who has written to demand that the directives be withdrawn. "They certainly weaken the regulations."

The new pesticide rule allows the use of some pesticides that contain unidentified inert ingredients if a "reasonable effort" has been made to identify them. Before, the ingredients had to be approved before use.

The livestock rule allows organic beef cattle and poultry sold for their meat to eat non-organic fishmeal, even if it contains a synthetic preservative or toxins. The standards require organic feed, but fishmeal is allowed as a feed supplement.

A major change was defining of the scope of organic standards to say seafood, pet food and personal care products simply aren't covered. Previously, the program said they were, though standards for them had not yet been written. Businesses have been built around the promise that if they followed organic principles, they eventually could be certified.

For example, an organic shrimp farmer from Florida invested $1.5 million in raising organic fish to feed the shrimp, based on the previous policy, Riddle said. The new rule pulled the rug out from under him, and now anyone can call fish organic as long as they don't use the USDA's organic seal.

"It was a complete reversal," Riddle said.

At Stonyfield Farm organic dairy, Hirshberg said she has seen many guidances and clarifications from the program since the organic standards went into effect 11/2 years ago, but the latest series were "a turnaround. In the past they weren't true departures."

When it came to using antibiotics in an organic dairy, she said, "everyone understood that once you treat with antibiotics, a cow can't be brought back into the (milking) herd" under the 2001 standards. But some certifiers had allowed antibiotics under certain circumstances.

Under the new standard, cows and calves can be treated with antibiotics, or growth hormones or any other drug, as long as a year goes by before their milk is sold as organic.

The organic standards are based on the principle that cows should be raised in healthy, disease-preventive ways so drugs aren't needed, Hirshberg said. The new rule makes it easier for large dairy farms that have both organic and non-organic herds to move cows back and forth between the two.

"That's not what organic is about," she said.

Beyond that, many organic milk labels say "no antibiotics, no hormones," and consumers expect that to mean the milk comes from cows raised without such drugs, said Liana Hoodes of the National Coalition for Sustainable Agriculture, about three-dozen groups that monitor the organic standards.

Both the program administrators and the organic coalition fighting the changes agree that the rules need to be clear as more businesses jump into the organic market. Organics are the fastest-growing segment of the food industry, rising at more than 20 percent a year.

In Santa Cruz, Nell Newman, president and co-founder of Newman's Own Organics, said, "I think we have to fight to maintain the standards with their true and original intent. Unfortunately it's a waste of time and energy to have to fight with our overseeing agency, the USDA."

On Capitol Hill, Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., who wrote the 1990 organic food act, is gathering bipartisan support for a letter demanding retraction of the changes.

"Unilateral fiats like these may violate the letter of the law, and they certainly violate the spirit," Leahy said.

A draft of a similar letter to Agriculture Secretary Veneman circulating in the House expresses "strong concern" that the "far-reaching" changes will "undermine the integrity of the organic label."

Consumers Union and the Organic Consumers Association have revved up e- mail and letter-writing campaigns. And the Organic Trade Association, which represents 1,400 organic producers, are muscling up their lobbying in Washington.

Santa Cruz's Scowcroft, among others, said it's conceivable some of the new rules -- especially the one affecting body care products -- would have been reached even if the program had consulted its board and the public to resolve ambiguities in the rules.

But its failure to do so means "that the validity of these practices is questionable," Scowcroft said. "The precedent has to stop."
Points of contention

Pesticides: Now, some pesticides can be used even if they contain unknown inert ingredients if a "reasonable effort" has been made to identify them. Before, the ingredients had to be approved before use.

Livestock feed: Now, organic cattle and poultry sold for their meat can eat non-organic fishmeal, even if it contains a synthetic preservative or toxins. Before, only organic feed was allowed. The fishmeal is allowed in any quantity as a "feed supplement."

Antibiotics in dairy cows: Now, calves and cows can be treated with antibiotics or any other necessary drug, if other means of helping them have failed, but a year must pass before their milk is sold as organic. Before, most dairies interpreted the rule to mean that a cow treated with antibiotics had to be removed from the herd forever (they were sold to conventional dairies), but some certifiers allowed drug use with a 12-month hold on the milk.

Scope of organic standards: Now, any seafood, pet food and body care products can be called organic without meeting any standards other than their own. That's why the USDA hasn't objected to things like "organic" salmon in fish markets. Before, the three groups were included under the organic law although specific standards hadn't been written to cover them; some won organic certification by following the rules for livestock and crops.