We are urgently developing research requirements with other European laboratories to make sure we understand and the disease (Schmallenberg) better.Organic farmers fight back over benefits
THE organic lobby has rallied together this week after the Food Standards Agency said its produce was no more nutritionally beneficial than conventional food.
Farmers across the country have criticised the FSA for damaging their brand based on ‘selective’ evidence and for not considering the effects of pesticides and herbicides on health and the environment.
Others said it was irresponsible not to consider the wider benefits of organic farming.
AJ Folder, an organic farmer from Pembrokeshire in Wales said: “Just suppose organic food is no better for you, at least it is grown, as nature has evolved, in a truly sustainable way and is wonderful to eat.”
Forget the nutrients, agreed Edward Goff, an organic dairy farmer from Oswestry, only organic farming methods can guarantee a sustainable future for food production, he said.
“Organic farming is going to become seriously important as oil supplies diminish and prices escalate,” he said. “That is why many people look to organic food. They want a sustainable system that uses less energy, less chemicals and makes better use of waste products.”
Academics also joined the fight to rebuff the FSA conclusions. Carlo Leifert, a professor of ecological agriculture at Newcastle University conducted an EU-funded study which found nutrient levels were higher in organic foods said he found the FSA conclusions confusing.
While John Hughes, an organic beef farmer from Warwickshire, said negative headlines were unhelpful to a fledgling industry. “Organic farmers could do without a further hit on popularity after sales almost ground to a halt in 2008 as consumers sought cheaper alternatives,” he said.
After a decade of year-on-year growth of over 20 per cent, shoppers increased organic sales by a modest 1.7 per cent last year. The UK market is now worth £2.1 billion.
