Organic food for thought

[Paul Cherubini]

http://www.gaiaresearch.co.za/organics.html Excerpts follow:

Organically grown plants may each produce a minimum of 50 such natural pesticides. Prof Bruce Ames is quoted as saying that the average person consumes 1500mg of pesticides a day, of which 1499.91mg are endogenous toxins, the remaining 0.09mg being synthetic pesticides applied to the produce by the farmer.

“Anticarcinogenic phytochemicals in the diet protect humans equally well against synthetic and natural carcinogens. Multiple hazard chemical synergisms occur from both natural and synthetic sources. These anticarcinogens do not distinguish whether carcinogens are synthetic or natural in origin.”

Crop protection chemicals reduce plant stress, yet there is no pesticide risk management program that evaluates the risk versus benefit equation to balance the risk from crop protection chemicals (which are extensively tested and heavily regulated) against the benefit of decreased risk from natural plant and fungal toxicants (which are only sporadically tested and regulated).

“The human diet has changed drastically in the last few thousand years, and most humans are eating many recently introduced plants that their ancestors did not. Natural selection works far too slowly for humans to have evolved specific resistance to the food toxins in these newly introduced plants.”

“It is possible that every plant in the supermarket contains natural carcinogens (legumes, cereals, fungi, herbs, spices and beverages included with the fruits and vegetables) at levels commonly measured in the (highest) parts per thousand ranges, ie. thousands of times higher than from man-made pesticides.

[blazing star]

My topical review of your post reveals this:

Bruce Ames, one of the "esteemed" scientists that your article profiles is linked to a fronting group of Philip Morris that was established as a smear group against environmental concerns. It is not surprising he thinks conventional, synthetic poisons are of benefit to us. Those of us with a central nervous system know better than to embrace synthetic pesticides.

[Paul Cherubini]

Bruce Ames is Professor of the Graduate School Division of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology at the University of California at Berkeley http://mcb.berkeley.edu/index.php?optio ... name=amesb

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bruce_Ames
His research focuses on cancer and aging and he has authored over 500 scientific publications. He is among the few hundred most-cited scientists in all fields. Ames' current research includes identifying agents that delay the mitochondrial decay of aging, understanding the role of mitochondrial decay in aging, particularly in the brain, optimizing micronutrient intakes in the population to prevent disease, malnutrition, and obesity. He is also interested in mutagens as they relate to cancer prevention and aging.
He is a recipient of the Bolton S. Corson Medal in 1980, Tyler Prize for Environmental Achievement in 1985, the Japan Prize in 1997, the National Medal of Science in 1998 and the Thomas Hunt Morgan Medal in 2004, among many others.

[blazing star]

His credentials are easy to find. It was also easy to find that he served on a board funded by Philip Morris to discredit environmental movement. He may be a brilliant, pioneering scientist but that doesn't mean he can't be bought (which evidently, since Philip Morris funded him to discredit the environmental movement, he is). Just like you sell conventional pesticides so you come on chat boards to discredit organic pesticides. Any time their is such monetary influence, one has to be weary about the messenger's message.