These days we hear so much double-talk about “organic” foods, including “free range” chickens, “hormone free” lamb, and “pesticide free” produce crops. What does “organic” really mean and why is it so important—or is it?
Most people are under the assumption that anything “organic” is superior. This is a nice ideal, and certainly organic products may indeed taste better and be healthier for us. However, do we really need organic pet foods? Is there such a thing? Even the government is confused about how to define “organic” and is currently struggling to establish uniform standards to assist consumers in figuring it all out. You might be surprised to learn that many “certified organic” foods still contain “acceptable” levels of pesticides and chemicals. “Naturally raised” livestock may still be fed non-organic feeds, or be given “acceptable” drugs or hormones.
Let’s consider the production of poultry, a popular meat for both humans and pets. “Free range” poultry means the chickens were let out of their cages, however briefly, to roam free. “Naturally fed” may mean simply that the feed for these chickens was scattered on the ground, and they were allowed to scratch and peck the ground to ingest their food “naturally.” But was that food “organic?” Were the grains and other components of the chicken feed grown organically? And if they were, was the actual production of the feed done in compliance with regulations to maintain organic standards? What if the chickens ate some bugs while they were scratching the ground? Were those bugs previously exposed to chemicals or pesticides prior to being eaten by the chicken? Let’s say the farmer has done everything in his or her power to comply with every regulation concerning the production of organic, free-range chickens. Even the best intentioned farmers cannot control environmental pollutants: air pollution, smog, water pollution, acid rain, etc.
Ok, so then what if we feed our pets a meat source that is not commercially produced, like venison? Chances are good that a deer killed by a hunter will not have had any hormone shots. But what and where did that deer eat? Maybe s/he grazed on chemically fertilized fields, or near highways where automobile exhaust tainted the nearby plants. Maybe s/he nibbled on pesticide-sprayed trees, and drank out of polluted streams or ponds.
The USDA and FDA regulations concerning what may and may not be labeled as organic are unclear and somewhat confusing, and that’s just for individual items, like animals raised for slaughter, and individual vegetables, herbs and fruits. Imagine the difficulty in regulating whether a product like pet food, comprised of several ingredients, may be labeled as organic! Common sense would suggest that as long as each and every ingredient used is “certified organic” then any final product containing those ingredients would also fall into the same category. However, there is no rule on this for pet food (yet)! This means that a pet food manufacturer might use one or two organic items out of several in a recipe, and still be able to call the finished product an organic one. The consumer can’t tell, and the manufacturer is not doing anything illegal. And of course the price tag on anything “organic” is much higher than a similar product that does not make the claim.
The majority of us don’t seek out organic foods for ourselves and our families to eat. When it comes to feeding our pets, the emphasis should be on fresh, high-quality ingredients. Organic is nice, but not necessary. Grocery store meats and vegetables that are sold for human consumption are far superior to the ingredients contained in most commercially produced pet foods. Switching your pet to a “natural” diet comprised of fresh, raw, human-grade meats and vegetables will provide a multitude of health benefits, regardless of whether or not the individual ingredients you purchase are “certified organic.”
Resources/Followup on this subject:
Online articles to read:
QAI Challenges USDA’s Organic Decertification Proposal 12/15/98 “If an organic potato farmer in Idaho were caught using unapproved synthetic pesticides or herbicides, for example, the USDA plan would allow that farmer’s potatoes to still be sold as “organic” while due process occurred. The length of time for investigation and due process is unclear.”
USDA Unveils Organic Food Standards 12/15/97 “The Preamble to the Standards contains questions relating to the potential inclusion of genetically modified organisms, food irradiation, the use of antibiotics in livestock and dairy production and the use of sewage sludge.”
USDA Proposes Organic Rules February 1998 “Right now, there are more than 40 state and private organizations that certify products as organic. As of yet, there has been no national standard to determine what constitutes an organic product. The meat and poultry industries are left out of the organic craze altogether, with FDA prohibiting these industries from using the word organic.”
NATIONAL ORGANIC PROGRAM PROPOSED RULE December, 1997
Coleman Position Paper Regarding the National Organic Program; Proposed Rule. Under the proposed NOP as currently written, “organic” foods are not necessarily antibiotic-free or hormone-free, and antibiotic-free or hormone-free foods are not necessarily “organic.”
This article written by J. Boniface, (c) copyright 1999, all rights reserved.