Roberta J Leong, LAc <[log in to unmask]>:
(Thanks to my acquaintance Steve Boylan for this text)
Note: In replying to the USDA make sure that you respond section by section.
Quantity is more important than quality.
This text matches just what you were saying, Roberta
New Proposed Standards for Organic Foods Compromise The Integrity of Organic
They permit some antibiotic and hormone use, prohibit the use of
eco-labels (saying e.g., foods are raised without antibiotics or
hormones) and are undecided on whether organic foods can be irradiated,
can be subject to genetically engineered organisms (GEOs) and
reprocessed sewage sludge.
You can (try) to stop this. USDA has a comment period until April 30.
Please urge them to:
1. Withdraw the current proposed rule for National Organic Standards and
resubmit a rule based on the recommendation of the National Organic
Standards Board (NOSB). Tell them that the proposed rule is inconsistent
with established organic principles.
Even if the proposed rule is implemented, please comment on the
following inconsistencies:
2. Section 205.15 allows organic livestock production with restricted
space for movement and restricted access to the outdoors. This is
inconsistent with private organic certification programs. Also, organic
shoppers who buy meat expect it to be free range.
3. Section 205.14 allows the use of antibiotics for the first 21 days of
life for mammals and 7 days for poultry. This is inconsistent with NOSB
standards and consumer expectations. People buy organic in part to avoid
consuming antibiotics in their diets.
4. Remove language in section 205.103 that would prohibit eco-labels
that provide product differentiation above and beyond the proposed rule.
Organic food shoppers have a right to know if a food producer does not
use ionizing radiation or hormones, even if government standards allow
them.
5. The proposed rule (Section 205.17, page 65884) asks for public
comment on whether ionizing radiation is compatible with organic
farming. Please say it is not. The NOSB and existing organic
certifications (like California's and Oregon's, which will be banned
after
these rules go into effect) prohibit subjecting foods to ionizing
radiation. Radiation introduces new chemicals in foods called radiolytic
products, some of which are known carcinogens or mutagens. People choose
organic foods to avoid consuming such products.
6. Section 205.8 (page 65875) asks for public comment on whether
genetically engineered organisms may be used in organic food production.
Please say they are not. GEO's pose risks to health and the environment,
including allergenicity, accelerated pest resistance to both natural and
synthetic pesticides, and herbicide resistance among weeds and wild
relatives of crop plants. Danish scientists have found, for example,
that genetically-engineered canola can pass on its herbicide resistance
to weedy relatives, causing new superweeds. The European Union prohibits
GEOs in organic foods, and will probably prohibit their importation from
the U.S.
7. Section 205.22 (page 65892) asks whether biosolids (municipal sludge)
should be permitted or prohibited in organic production. Please say they
should not. The NOSB recommended biosolids be classified as synthetic
and inappropriate. 60,000 toxic chemical compounds can be found in
sewage sludge, including such heavy metals as lead and cadmium.
You can use this flyer as a tool for writing your comment letter. Your
letters may be mailed, faxed or e-mailed to the NOP, and must contain
the docket number (TMD-94-00-2) as well as topic and section numbers.
Also, be sure to use the same terminology used in the proposed rules
(for example, use the term "ionizing radiation," not simply
"irradiation). To submit comments:
By mail: Eileen S. Stommes, Deputy Administrator, USDA-AMS-TM-NOP, Room
4007 - So., Ag. Stop 0275, Box 96456, Washington, DC 20090-6456.
By fax: 202/690-4632.
The easiest way: Go to the NOP website's "Register to Comment" section.
http://www.ams.usda.gov/nop/. You just go to the section and comment.
For more information, see the Mothers and Others Website at
http://www.mothers.org/mothers/mo_nop.html.
|
