While the term “organic” alone may not have a definition as far as the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) is concerned, “USDA organic” does carry a heavy definition. As reported by this blog, being certified organic is a process with many steps and, oftentimes, many companies are only able to reach “made with organic products” status or can only claim a certain percentage to be organic.
But, a recent research paper published by scientists at Stanford University claimed that most organic products offer little to no nutritional benefit compared to those from conventional farms. Although this paper may have sparked controversy in the organic labeling industry, it is only part of a growing number of changes.
Regardless, a recent Huffington Post article argued against the Stanford research paper.
According to the article, USDA organic products help minimize pollution and reduce harm to farm workers and the public’s health as it curbs the risks that are created by using antibiotic-resistant bacteria. In addition, supporting certified organic products limits the amount of pesticides that one ingests.
Prop. 37’s effect on organic farming
But, as Prop. 37 gains momentum in California, so does the opposition it faces from big-agriculture. Companies such as Dean Foods, Kellogg and General Mills are all posting up major dollars to fight the proposition, according to an editorial in the Boulder Weekly. All of these companies own popular organic brands, though, which are usually in support of the bill as it plays toward their marketing and image.
Clearly, the sphere of organic labeling – even food labeling in general – is up in the air until after November 6. Until then, companies may benefit from investing in a Primera LX900 color label printer to prepare for whatever custom label changes they may need to make.