4 ms·

For spices and tea it really makes sense to buy organic (not that there are no fraudsters but still).

by ofrzeta 4mo ago

Jensson 4mo ago
Just buy from places where these laws are in effect instead of imports from other countries where they legally use these pesticides.
- account42 4mo ago
  You can but that makes grocery shopping more cumbersome so it's valid to ask why you have to put in that effort.
kuerbel 4mo ago
It also makes sense for anything coming out of third world countries, pesticides kill and harm lots of farmers there. https://www.publiceye.ch/en/topics/pesticides/pesticide-giants-make-billions-from-bee-harming-and-carcinogenic-chemicals/the-pesticides-that-poison-farmers https://www.publiceye.ch/en/topics/pesticides/pesticide-gian...
darth_avocado 4mo ago
Organic is just green washing, it doesn’t mean no chemicals. Plenty of organic products contain toxic chemicals and heavy metals. Organic oats have been found to contain glyphosate. Organic spices have been found to contain heavy metals.
- Saline9515 4mo ago
  Organic means that no non-organic pesticides have been used in production. There are still organic ones available, which are less dangerous. Especially to the farmers who are the first ones to get exposed to the poisons we spread on the fields.
  - luqtas 4mo ago
    care to cite any decent research proving you point? there's an extensive body of research on synthetics having no effect on human health, from goverment funded, private and independent research... if you access your country's official institution you'll see there's plenty of synthetics allowed in organic agriculture just because they mimic perfectly "organic" substances interesting point too, is the lack of any extensive meta-analysis/studies on organic pesticide impact on health and plus the fact organic farm is rather poor (produce less than 2% of the global food) and usually if not always lack good machinery to spread pesticides on the recommended quantities science points out (which organic agriculture also has less literature on that too)
    - Saline9515 4mo ago
      Not all synthetics are dangerous, many are. Many are banned, with the list growing each year: https://www.npic.orst.edu/reg/restricted.html https://www.npic.orst.edu/reg/restricted.html Why were they allowed in the first place, if "research" was enough? Science is not definitive, and what we believe to be an approximation of the truth today way be discovered to be totally wrong tomorrow. You are confusing science and religion. Would you defend, for instance, that DDT and other organochlorine poisons are safe? They were the darling of scientists and agrobiz companies for a long time, until we discovered well that they were dangerous. Of course, if we find a strict equivalent to a biopesticide that happens to be synthetical, it would be a good substitute. But most synthetic pesticides are not like this, unfortunately. And what you say about the lack of studies regarding organic farming is a plain lie, it takes 30 seconds on google scholar to find it: - Farmers in organic farms are less exposed to health effects of synthetic pesticides: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0378427414000897 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S03784... - Organic farming improve soils and yields: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1658077X2300070X https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1658077X2... - Review on organic food quality and health effects: https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1186/s12940-017-0315-4%C2%A0.pdf https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1186/s12940-017-031...
      - 4mo ago
- i5heu 4mo ago
  At least in Germany we have “Bio” which is a organic label that is controlled at least somewhat.
  - jenadine 4mo ago
    But it is controlled for the wrong criterias. "Natural" doesn't mean healthy or good for the environment. It is only greenwashing and "appeal to nature" fallacy
    - kakacik 4mo ago
      Strong claims require strong evidence, not just throwing random fashionable words others are using. Your claims are very strong.
      - jenadine 4mo ago
        Do you need evidence that "Natural doesn't mean healthy or good for the environment"? Asbestos, is "natural". So is Arsenic. And CO2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_nature https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_nature Or do you need evidence that the bio labels are not optimizing for health or environment? Check the rules. Most of them are just there to restrict synthetic products, regardless of their impact. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organic_certification#False_assurance_of_quality_and_environmental_benefit https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organic_certification#False_as...
- bluebarbet 4mo ago
  Organic is a label which means something specific. Compliance with the definition is controlled by law, however imperfectly. It is not just greenwashing.
  - bluGill 4mo ago
    You are both correct. Organic means something specific. However what it means is not what most people think it means. People want healthy and good for the earth - that is not what organic gives you. Sometimes it does, but sometimes conventional ag (with all those scary chemicals) is better.
    - bluebarbet 4mo ago
      Yes, I get this argument. But everybody intuitively understands the basic proposition of organic. Namely: "We have not added anything to your food for which you don't have many thousands of years of evolutionary preparation." That is not pseudoscience, it's rational circumspection. Or, as the European Commission calls it, the "precautionary principle". Speaking for myself, I find it convincing.
      - bluGill 4mo ago
        Problem is we have modern science which in same cases has proven that the modern chemicals are less harmful. Remember lead was considered normal for many thousands of years
        bluebarbet 4mo ago
        Modern science can only "prove" that something is not harmful on a timescale of a year or perhaps a decade, not a generation or more. If the precautionary principle had been applied in Roman times, lead would not have been considered safe. Nor asbestos, nor thalidomide, nor microplastics, nor a bunch of synthetic molecules - "proven safe" - that are routinely added to non-organic food in order to improve its yield or its cosmetic aspect or whatever. That was my point.
- woadwarrior01 4mo ago
  Within the EU, it does. There's a whole regulation for it: EU 2018/848.
- tashoecraft 4mo ago
  People are downvoting you, but you’re right: https://news.immunologic.org/p/organic-foods-are-not-healthieror https://news.immunologic.org/p/organic-foods-are-not-healthi... Organic is marketing. Organic produce is more profitable.
- deleted 4mo ago
  [deleted]
- abc123abc123 4mo ago
  True. My tea merchant sells two varieties of the same tea. The organic and the regular. I asked what the difference was, and they said the tea comes from the same village, and that the organic one was lower quality, so they invested in EU stamps to get a higher price, while the higher quality one did not feel the need. No difference essentially, except that the organic was priced higher. So I always make a point to buy the inorganic one (pun intended!).
Theodores 4mo ago
Yes and no! In the UK, tea means tea bags and that normally means tea bags made of a plastic/paper mix. If I remember, the bag material is made and then they heat it up to get the plastic out, revealing the holes, needed for the bag. Of late there has been criticism of microplastics in tea bags, and the posh organic bags have fared quite badly. Fancy sachets are not necessarily it. As for chemicals, not one farmer spends any money than what is the bare minimum, no matter what they do. They might have to put all kinds of toxic chemicals on crops but they are not going to waste money over-doing it, because they are tight with the money, at all times, under all circumstances. So the question has to be asked, is it worth worrying about the worrying levels of chemicals in tea when there are worrying levels of microplastics that the body really cannot get rid of with some liver-fu? But, are there more toxins? The working class British way to have tea is with milk and two sugars. The milk is designed for baby cows, not grown men, they should be 'weaned off' because there are all kinds of things in dairy that might not be toxins, but could be considered to be. For example the cholesterol and saturated fat. Next the sugar, which is fine in moderation, so long as you don't care for your teeth, and, when combined with saturated fat, can contribute to type two diabetes. Clearly opinions vary regarding the health aspects of milk and sugar in tea, my grandmother almost made it to a century, consuming plenty. However, you can reduce the toxic load from drinking tea by getting rid of the microplastics by using plant-based teabags (even LIDL have them), not having milk and sugar in the tea and, only then, getting concerned about buying organic. Organic does not mean no nasty chemicals, it means no synthetic nasty chemicals. However, it is still a good nice-to-have, but, realistically, if you want to cut your exposure to toxins, there are these other huge areas that are under our control, but those things are going to be controversial lifestyle choices. Just not using cars 'could' reduce your toxic load far more than any organic teabag.
- card_zero 4mo ago
  Oh no, I drank 1 ml of saturated fat. Is it even still all bad for you? I thought I heard some detail about that recently ... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saturated_fat https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saturated_fat > A 2024 meta-analysis found that odd-chain and longer-chain saturated fatty acids were negatively associated with the risk of cardiovascular disease, including stroke. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Odd-chain_fatty_acid https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Odd-chain_fatty_acid >OCFAs are found particularly in ruminant fat and milk (e.g. pentadecylic acid). (I don't know if that means most of the saturated fatty acids in milk, it's full of different varieties.)
brikym 4mo ago
People still use tea bags even though they're a top source of microplastics.
- SchemaLoad 4mo ago
  People don't even know. I had long assumed that it was only the obvious nylon pyramid tea bags that were plastic, and only recently discovered it's _all_ tea bags.
  - wahnfrieden 4mo ago
    Source?
  - littlexsparkee 4mo ago
    Not all, if they use stitch method with cotton it's okay - many use PLA though https://www.hampsteadtea.com/blogs/news/is-pla-plastic-free-tea-bags https://www.hampsteadtea.com/blogs/news/is-pla-plastic-free-...
- squidsoup 4mo ago
  People still use tea bags even though what they contain is a byproduct of tea production and barely counts as tea.
  - childintime 4mo ago
    Then where does the real stuff go? The arabs, indians?? Tea bags are the mass market in Europe for example. Hardly anyone uses tea leaves (are they different?). I know an Iranian in the Netherlands who says the tea there is mostly coloring.
    - graemep 4mo ago
      My knowledge of this from a long time ago and narrow, but I can give you a rough picture. Different countries do buy different types and qualities of tea. The US is big market for low quality (dust, stalks) tea for tea bags. Countries that like strong sweet tea with lots of milk buy tea that is low grown (i.e. lower elevations) and processed using the "cut, torn curled" process rather than the older "orthodox" process. High grown (on mountains) tea is better for those who drink it without milk. Leaves do tend to be higher quality and they have grades reflecting the size of the pieces. There is a standard system which is marked on some types of tea. It is usual to pluck two leaves and a bud. Plucking more would add a lot of stalk which lower quality. Plucking or using just a bud produces a very delicate flavour (sivlertips). High grown silvertips is good with Most tea is blended so will contain a mix of different things.
littlexsparkee 4mo ago
I've been buying spices from Diaspora, Burlap & Barrel, Curio - not cheap but I definitely feel some validated after eyeing the report. The potency is top notch too. Tea I buy loose leaf from a trusted purveyor. Among yerba mate brands there are a few organic brands to choose from.

For spices and tea it really makes sense to buy organic (not that there are no fraudsters but still).

by ofrzeta 4mo ago

For spices and tea it really makes sense to buy organic (not that there are no fraudsters but still).

Just buy from places where these laws are in effect instead of imports from other countries where they legally use these pesticides.

account42 4mo ago
You can but that makes grocery shopping more cumbersome so it's valid to ask why you have to put in that effort.

kuerbel 4mo ago

It also makes sense for anything coming out of third world countries, pesticides kill and harm lots of farmers there. https://www.publiceye.ch/en/topics/pesticides/pesticide-giants-make-billions-from-bee-harming-and-carcinogenic-chemicals/the-pesticides-that-poison-farmers https://www.publiceye.ch/en/topics/pesticides/pesticide-gian...

darth_avocado 4mo ago

Organic is just green washing, it doesn’t mean no chemicals. Plenty of organic products contain toxic chemicals and heavy metals. Organic oats have been found to contain glyphosate. Organic spices have been found to contain heavy metals.

Saline9515 4mo ago
Organic means that no non-organic pesticides have been used in production. There are still organic ones available, which are less dangerous. Especially to the farmers who are the first ones to get exposed to the poisons we spread on the fields.
- luqtas 4mo ago
  care to cite any decent research proving you point? there's an extensive body of research on synthetics having no effect on human health, from goverment funded, private and independent research... if you access your country's official institution you'll see there's plenty of synthetics allowed in organic agriculture just because they mimic perfectly "organic" substances interesting point too, is the lack of any extensive meta-analysis/studies on organic pesticide impact on health and plus the fact organic farm is rather poor (produce less than 2% of the global food) and usually if not always lack good machinery to spread pesticides on the recommended quantities science points out (which organic agriculture also has less literature on that too)
  - Saline9515 4mo ago
    Not all synthetics are dangerous, many are. Many are banned, with the list growing each year: https://www.npic.orst.edu/reg/restricted.html https://www.npic.orst.edu/reg/restricted.html Why were they allowed in the first place, if "research" was enough? Science is not definitive, and what we believe to be an approximation of the truth today way be discovered to be totally wrong tomorrow. You are confusing science and religion. Would you defend, for instance, that DDT and other organochlorine poisons are safe? They were the darling of scientists and agrobiz companies for a long time, until we discovered well that they were dangerous. Of course, if we find a strict equivalent to a biopesticide that happens to be synthetical, it would be a good substitute. But most synthetic pesticides are not like this, unfortunately. And what you say about the lack of studies regarding organic farming is a plain lie, it takes 30 seconds on google scholar to find it: - Farmers in organic farms are less exposed to health effects of synthetic pesticides: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0378427414000897 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S03784... - Organic farming improve soils and yields: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1658077X2300070X https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1658077X2... - Review on organic food quality and health effects: https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1186/s12940-017-0315-4%C2%A0.pdf https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1186/s12940-017-031...
    - 4mo ago
i5heu 4mo ago
At least in Germany we have “Bio” which is a organic label that is controlled at least somewhat.
- jenadine 4mo ago
  But it is controlled for the wrong criterias. "Natural" doesn't mean healthy or good for the environment. It is only greenwashing and "appeal to nature" fallacy
  - kakacik 4mo ago
    Strong claims require strong evidence, not just throwing random fashionable words others are using. Your claims are very strong.
    - jenadine 4mo ago
      Do you need evidence that "Natural doesn't mean healthy or good for the environment"? Asbestos, is "natural". So is Arsenic. And CO2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_nature https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_nature Or do you need evidence that the bio labels are not optimizing for health or environment? Check the rules. Most of them are just there to restrict synthetic products, regardless of their impact. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organic_certification#False_assurance_of_quality_and_environmental_benefit https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organic_certification#False_as...
bluebarbet 4mo ago
Organic is a label which means something specific. Compliance with the definition is controlled by law, however imperfectly. It is not just greenwashing.
- bluGill 4mo ago
  You are both correct. Organic means something specific. However what it means is not what most people think it means. People want healthy and good for the earth - that is not what organic gives you. Sometimes it does, but sometimes conventional ag (with all those scary chemicals) is better.
  - bluebarbet 4mo ago
    Yes, I get this argument. But everybody intuitively understands the basic proposition of organic. Namely: "We have not added anything to your food for which you don't have many thousands of years of evolutionary preparation." That is not pseudoscience, it's rational circumspection. Or, as the European Commission calls it, the "precautionary principle". Speaking for myself, I find it convincing.
    - bluGill 4mo ago
      Problem is we have modern science which in same cases has proven that the modern chemicals are less harmful. Remember lead was considered normal for many thousands of years
      - bluebarbet 4mo ago
        Modern science can only "prove" that something is not harmful on a timescale of a year or perhaps a decade, not a generation or more. If the precautionary principle had been applied in Roman times, lead would not have been considered safe. Nor asbestos, nor thalidomide, nor microplastics, nor a bunch of synthetic molecules - "proven safe" - that are routinely added to non-organic food in order to improve its yield or its cosmetic aspect or whatever. That was my point.
woadwarrior01 4mo ago
Within the EU, it does. There's a whole regulation for it: EU 2018/848.
tashoecraft 4mo ago
People are downvoting you, but you’re right: https://news.immunologic.org/p/organic-foods-are-not-healthieror https://news.immunologic.org/p/organic-foods-are-not-healthi... Organic is marketing. Organic produce is more profitable.
deleted 4mo ago
[deleted]
abc123abc123 4mo ago
True. My tea merchant sells two varieties of the same tea. The organic and the regular. I asked what the difference was, and they said the tea comes from the same village, and that the organic one was lower quality, so they invested in EU stamps to get a higher price, while the higher quality one did not feel the need. No difference essentially, except that the organic was priced higher. So I always make a point to buy the inorganic one (pun intended!).

Theodores 4mo ago

Yes and no! In the UK, tea means tea bags and that normally means tea bags made of a plastic/paper mix. If I remember, the bag material is made and then they heat it up to get the plastic out, revealing the holes, needed for the bag. Of late there has been criticism of microplastics in tea bags, and the posh organic bags have fared quite badly. Fancy sachets are not necessarily it. As for chemicals, not one farmer spends any money than what is the bare minimum, no matter what they do. They might have to put all kinds of toxic chemicals on crops but they are not going to waste money over-doing it, because they are tight with the money, at all times, under all circumstances. So the question has to be asked, is it worth worrying about the worrying levels of chemicals in tea when there are worrying levels of microplastics that the body really cannot get rid of with some liver-fu? But, are there more toxins? The working class British way to have tea is with milk and two sugars. The milk is designed for baby cows, not grown men, they should be 'weaned off' because there are all kinds of things in dairy that might not be toxins, but could be considered to be. For example the cholesterol and saturated fat. Next the sugar, which is fine in moderation, so long as you don't care for your teeth, and, when combined with saturated fat, can contribute to type two diabetes. Clearly opinions vary regarding the health aspects of milk and sugar in tea, my grandmother almost made it to a century, consuming plenty. However, you can reduce the toxic load from drinking tea by getting rid of the microplastics by using plant-based teabags (even LIDL have them), not having milk and sugar in the tea and, only then, getting concerned about buying organic. Organic does not mean no nasty chemicals, it means no synthetic nasty chemicals. However, it is still a good nice-to-have, but, realistically, if you want to cut your exposure to toxins, there are these other huge areas that are under our control, but those things are going to be controversial lifestyle choices. Just not using cars 'could' reduce your toxic load far more than any organic teabag.

card_zero 4mo ago
Oh no, I drank 1 ml of saturated fat. Is it even still all bad for you? I thought I heard some detail about that recently ... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saturated_fat https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saturated_fat > A 2024 meta-analysis found that odd-chain and longer-chain saturated fatty acids were negatively associated with the risk of cardiovascular disease, including stroke. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Odd-chain_fatty_acid https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Odd-chain_fatty_acid >OCFAs are found particularly in ruminant fat and milk (e.g. pentadecylic acid). (I don't know if that means most of the saturated fatty acids in milk, it's full of different varieties.)

brikym 4mo ago

People still use tea bags even though they're a top source of microplastics.

SchemaLoad 4mo ago
People don't even know. I had long assumed that it was only the obvious nylon pyramid tea bags that were plastic, and only recently discovered it's _all_ tea bags.
- wahnfrieden 4mo ago
  Source?
- littlexsparkee 4mo ago
  Not all, if they use stitch method with cotton it's okay - many use PLA though https://www.hampsteadtea.com/blogs/news/is-pla-plastic-free-tea-bags https://www.hampsteadtea.com/blogs/news/is-pla-plastic-free-...
squidsoup 4mo ago
People still use tea bags even though what they contain is a byproduct of tea production and barely counts as tea.
- childintime 4mo ago
  Then where does the real stuff go? The arabs, indians?? Tea bags are the mass market in Europe for example. Hardly anyone uses tea leaves (are they different?). I know an Iranian in the Netherlands who says the tea there is mostly coloring.
  - graemep 4mo ago
    My knowledge of this from a long time ago and narrow, but I can give you a rough picture. Different countries do buy different types and qualities of tea. The US is big market for low quality (dust, stalks) tea for tea bags. Countries that like strong sweet tea with lots of milk buy tea that is low grown (i.e. lower elevations) and processed using the "cut, torn curled" process rather than the older "orthodox" process. High grown (on mountains) tea is better for those who drink it without milk. Leaves do tend to be higher quality and they have grades reflecting the size of the pieces. There is a standard system which is marked on some types of tea. It is usual to pluck two leaves and a bud. Plucking more would add a lot of stalk which lower quality. Plucking or using just a bud produces a very delicate flavour (sivlertips). High grown silvertips is good with Most tea is blended so will contain a mix of different things.

littlexsparkee 4mo ago

I've been buying spices from Diaspora, Burlap & Barrel, Curio - not cheap but I definitely feel some validated after eyeing the report. The potency is top notch too. Tea I buy loose leaf from a trusted purveyor. Among yerba mate brands there are a few organic brands to choose from.