Viewpoint: Examining the science denial behind IFOAM—Organics International

Henry Miller, Drew Kershen | Genetic Literacy Project | April 25, 2018

The true-believers in organic agriculture, such as the International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movements (IFOAM—Organics International), are as deluded as those who deny the value of vaccines and, like them, have the potential to inflict tremendous harm.

IFOAM came into existence in 1972 under the leadership of Roland Chevriot (Nature and Progress, France), Eve Balfour (Soil Association, UK), Kjell Arman (Biodynamic Association, Sweden) and Jerome Goldstein (Rodale Institute, US).  Today, IFOAM boasts 800 affiliates in 120 countries and is the leading and most influential international organic organization. It meets every three years in General Assembly, most recently last November in New Delhi.

At that event, IFOAM issued a position paper titled, “Compatibility of Breeding Techniques in Organic Systems,” which began with ten “Summary Recommendations and Advocacy Messages” that set forth fundamental tenets of organic practices towards agriculture, breeding techniques, and laws and regulations. The paper ends with a list of sixty-one breeding techniques (from agro-infiltration through zinc finger nucleases), and indicates whether each is acceptable in organic agriculture...........To Read More....

My Take - There's a phrase in this article I think is fundamental to dealing with the green/left which is: "Yet the dangers of Lysenkoism of subsuming biology to ideology continues [sic] to lurk.”  This is true across the board, whether it's biology or science as a whole, the green/left will always work to undermine legitimate science in favor of ideological "science".  Whether it's global warming, genetically modified foods, vaccinations or pesticides, the pattern is consistent. 

When I started this many years ago I found it important to read as many authors as possible from both sides. 

First, my goal was to find out who was worth reading.  Everyone leaves out information in articles simply because there's not enough room in an article to address every aspect of an issue.  And then there are those who leave important information out because they don't like the information and don't want society to know about anything that disagrees with their view. 

Secondly, articles can't provide all you need to know, but they're important in helping to decide what books to read.  Articles point the direction, books fill in the data. 

Third, eventually you begin to realize some writers are ideologues and no matter the real science, they will constantly spew out garbage and aren't worth the time and effort it takes to go through their gobblygook. 

After all that you begin to spend time reading authors that will provide honest answers on all subjects.  From that point on everything becomes much easier. 

Truth is the sublime convergence of history and reality.  Everything we're told has a historical foundation and context.  Everything we're told should bear some resemblance to what we see going on in reality.  If what's presented to us fails in either of those categories - it's wrong!  All that's left to do is develop the intellectual response to explain why it's wrong.  The really hard work has already been done.....deciding what's right and what's wrong.