>I would respectfully disagree.  While there is a lot of certification wrt
>process, there is nothing really to prevent cross-contamination which,
>iirc, is indeed a problem for many organic farmers.  Not their fault, not
>much, if anything they can do about it, but those 100s of chemicals have so
>permeated most of the inhabited areas, at least in the US, that it's neigh
>on impossible to avoid getting some of them.

yes and no  when the soil food web is rich and active the chemicals don't
get so problematic  than in a field that lost its biological life. they will
be broke down more quickly and thoroughly. You can find references of
studies done by some university promoting the no till techniques in the
context of chemical farming.( so can't be accused of organic propaganda)
>
>That is not to say that organic produce and meat isn't better, often,  just
>not always and not necessarily as significantly better as I, for one, would
>like.

as long that organic farmers welfare depend on the health of their soil
 and not on the amount of chemicals they can buy) the quality of the
produces will be most of the time superior but exceptions can occur in
relation with specific local conditions and level of availability of
minerals in the soils.

I am myself criticizing the too timid  organic certification programs  but
have to recognised that lot of work have been done  toward quality to make a
difference with conventional farming ( that is just an industry).
The radical move that  i will hope for organic standards will be to ban
tilling or promote original diets for animals ( grass for herbivorous
etc...).

>
>Also, from what I understand, when it comes to organic meat, by legal
>definition, that doesn't necessarily mean "always been free of antibiotics,
>etc." but more along the lines of "been free for x number of days/weeks
>before slaughter".  Am I misremembering this?

 Almost exact but the difference is that use of drugs are permitted  only in
the last resort when alternative solutions have failed ( <the wefare of the
animal being of primary importance ) and an increase amount  of withholding
time at  least the double that specified by the product, is required >
 < In certain cases such as antibiotic use in meat animals , their use
results in the permanent loss of organic status>
<routine prophylactic use of drugs is not alowed>

<....> are extracted from the organic livestock handbook of the organic
canadian growers

>
>Then there's the legal and realistic definitions of "free range" and
>whether this is truly reflected in the animal's diet.

Free range animals can be fed with pelleted craps .but can theorically have
access to a live dessert.( if any are there in the space allowed to them )

jean-claude