Home : :
WHY ORGANIC?
1. It's healthy
On average, organic food contains higher levels of vitamin C and essential minerals such as calcium, magnesium, iron and chromium as well as cancer-fighting antioxidants.
2. No additives
Organic food doesn't contain food additives that can cause health problems such as heart disease, osteoporosis, migraines and hyperactivity.
3. No pesticides
Over 400 chemical pesticides are routinely used in conventional farming and residues are often present in non-organic food. Various studies done recently have confirmed high levels of pesticide residues in baby food, spinach, dried fruit, bread, apples, celery, and chips.
4. No GM
Genetically modified (GM) crops and ingredients are not allowed under organic standards. Genetic modification (GM) is a new food technology. Although people are already eating it in a few products, it has only undergone one human feeding trial – and that showed negative results. In the study, commissioned by the Food Standards Agency, scientists found that GM DNA is transferring to the human gut bacteria.
5. No Drugs
There is growing concern about the high use of antibiotics on farm animals and the possible effects on human health. SGS standards prohibit the routine use of antibiotics. Organic food is bursting with vitamins and minerals. We believe this is because of the way it is grown – with nature. Natural systems for fertilising the soil and keeping pests under control are used instead of relying on chemicals.
We nourish the soil with all the must-have nutrients, not just those needed to make the plants grow. This gives the plants all the goodness they need so that they can give you all the goodness you need.
No food has higher amounts of beneficial minerals, essential amino acids and vitamins than organic food… so buy it!
6. High Quality
Our Organic food comes from trusted Organic Practices. We are periodically inspected by SGS India Pvt. Ltd..
7. Safer for humans, wildlife & Environment
Not only the Organic produce but also the Organic Production inputs/techniques are highly safer to humans, wildlife & Environment
8. Better taste
Many people prefer organic food because they say it tastes better. A number of top chefs choose organic. Organic food is bursting with flavour. In a recent taste test carried out by the Good Housekeeping Institute, organic foods fared better than non-organic in nine out of 11 categories.
Infrastructure
We have a strong infrastructure base. Our huge and well-equipped infrastructure facility ensures that we are able to provide quality organic food with timely completion of orders. We have the high encouraging environment in our company and this is the driving force behind our regular development. This enthusiastic approach has established our company as dynamic producers of Organic Vegetables, Organic-Cereals, Organic Spices-condiments & Organic Pulses.
Genetically Modified Foods: a primer
CBC News Online | May 11, 2004
The typical Canadian kitchen is likely to contain many ingredients or foods that have been genetically modified. Everything from bread to tomatoes, corn and soya oil has been produced from altered food organisms.
Some estimates peg as many as 30,000 different products on grocery store shelves as "modified." That's largely because many processed foods contain soy. Half of North America's soy crop is genetically engineered.
The term "genetically modified" refers to the alteration of genetic material. Specifically, it means the genes of one organism have been "cut out" and then "pasted" into another organism.
GM plants are often created to resist disease and eliminate the need for pesticides. Desired characteristics, such as a hardier texture, higher nutritional value or faster growth, are chosen to produce a kind of "super food."
Consumer concerns
About 60 per cent of our processed foods contain some genetic modifications, but consumers in Canada would be hard pressed to find out what is and isn't altered.
Advocacy groups such as Greenpeace and the Council of Canadians argue GM foods are a health risk. They say the food industry should be more transparent in its creation and testing of GM foods. They also point out that there are no long-term studies on the effects of modified foods on human health.
They want an independent testing agency to monitor the effects of modified foods.
Greenpeace Canada has released its own shoppers' list of GMO-free foods.
Consumers in Europe have exerted more pressure on their governments. Both Nestlé U.K. and Unilever U.K. have dropped GM ingredients from their products. But their North American arms have not.
In the U.S., new voluntary rules have been created. Most of the suggested rules came from the food industry itself.
Labelling
At least 35 countries have adopted mandatory labelling for any product that has been genetically modified. The European Parliament passed laws in July 2003 on GMOs, lifting the seven-year ban on the introduction of new biotech products. As of April 18, 2004, all products containing an ingredient that contains more than 0.9 per cent of GMOs must be labelled. Animal feed containing GMOs will also have to be labelled.
The new rules will allow GMOs as long as they are clearly labelled. It requires grocers to label products containing more than 0.9 per cent biotech material, and force producers to trace the products at all stages of the production.
In 1998, a moratorium on new biotech foods was introduced after consumers voiced concerns over the possible health risks associated with the modified products.
In Canada, a free vote in Parliament Oct. 17, 2001, defeated a bill by Liberal MP Charles Caccia. His private member's bill, C-287, would have required mandatory labelling of genetically altered foods.
Instead, the federal government has instructed a committee to look into the matter and report back.
Health Canada has taken the position that GM foods are just as safe as conventional foods. Food must be labelled in Canada if it is pasteurized, irradiated, or contains possible allergens such as peanuts.
Food manufacturers are allowed to put voluntary labels such as "fat-free" or even, as one East Coast potato company said, "derived from plant biotechnology," but there are no rules concerning GM foods.
The Canadian Food Inspection Agency, under the auspices of Health Canada, deals with food safety and other trade-related requirements. It monitors quality, packaging, labelling and testing of food products.
The CFIA will inspect a food product and call it "GMO-free" if it's to be exported to a country that requires such a label. But there are no rules governing GMO labels for food products sold within Canada.
Consumer groups charge the government has been slow to react to changes in the food industry. But the government says it wants to have the infrastructure in place to ensure whether a food has been altered.
In May 2003, North American scientists, consumer groups and businesses came together to develop a set of industry-wide safety standards for genetically modified foods.
Headed by the University of Minnesota, the Safety First initiative will aim to set standards for building human and environmental safety into the development process for two classes of GM foods:
What is transgenic foodstuff?
When speaking about transgenic foodstuff we refer to those vegetables and cereals which have been genetically modified so as to obtain a bigger production. Among these products we could mention certain varieties of corn, soy bean, cotton, tomatoes and potatoes.
Some research has been done also for transgenic cultivation of melons, plums, tobacco... and even for animals such as transgenic pigs.
In fact, one of the most common technics for plants consists in the use of genetic substance of a virus or bacterium to obtain the incorporation of the new genetic code in the host organism.
The advantages of transgenic vegetables
The promotion of transgenic vegetables by this branch of multinational firms rests fundamentally on a twofold conception: a larger productivity and the possibility of doing away with hunger in the world.
A larger productivity
Incorporating insecticide in the plant itself brings forth a greater efficiency in the struggle against specific parasites, such as corn deathwatch, which are not beaten efficaciously by means of external distribution of insecticides. This yields a bigger production as a result. At present the experience of USA farmers place the increase in productivity at a 9%.
More ecological
These new insecticide distribution technics allow for a much more localized application and prevents dispersion in the environment.
Doing away with hunger in the world
One of the slogans set forth by transgenic vegetable producer firms states that doing away with hunger in the world is possible. Needless to say that the problem of hunger does not lie in the lack of resources but in their distribution.
The hazards of transgenic foodstuff
Here are some of the possible objections to transgenic foodstuff:
Lack of information and transparency
Some transgenic vegetables, such as soy bean and corn, are used mixed up indiscriminately with non-modified cereals. This, together with the absence of a legislation on control and labelling of these new products, leads to the fact that consumers have no rights to either being conscious of what they are consuming or choosing between consuming or not consuming transgenic foodstuff.
Besides, transgenic foodstuff is used to feed cattle and fowl. Knowing how the animals we consume were fed is next to impossible.
Absence of ethic and political justifiability
Another set of objections to transgenic foodstuff points to the needlessness and hence the lack of ethic feelings towards genetic manipulation.
On the other hand, certain political positions point out that there is a greater concern in the interests of some firms than in the well-being of society.
Environmental hazards
There are more and more perceptions giving to understand that genetic engineering implies a new liability to environment, especially in so far as the effects on biodiversity and genetic contamination are concerned.
A diminishing amount of cultivated species and the expansion of toxic species for some organisms are examples of liability to the maintenance of biodiversity.
Moreover, genetic information introduced into transgenic vegetables has a remote possibility of migrating and installing itself in other organisms as if it were a virus. This may cause the presence of bacteria resistant to the antibiotics used in the selection of modified organisms, as well as new plagues resistant to the same insecticides or herbicides, or both, as the cultivated plants.
Economic control
On the lines laid down by producer firms some procedures of transgenic seed producion may lead to a new dependency of the South from the North and of the entire world from such multinational firms:
- Doubtful procedure with regard to registration of trade marks.
- Acquisition of conventional seed producer firms so as to shut them out from marketing or make use of them as distributors of modified seeds.
- Binding seed purchasers to signing contracts including prohibition to keep in reserve part of the seeds, the obligation to using herbicides from the same commercial firm, etc.
- Research in technology of sterilizing seeds so as to make their conservation impossible and make it necessary to buy fresh seeds every year.
Conclusions
A growth in productivity does not necessarily imply a larger profit. To what extent the costs to obtain this growth in productivity have varied (costlier seeds, a larger consumption of herbicides, etc.) should be assessed also.
What for does one want more production when market regulations compel to throw away foodstuff in order to keep up prices from sinking or to restrict production so as not to exceed the quota established by the EU?
Transgenic foodstuff comprises some environmental dangers to health which could possibly be assumed; but at what price? Certainly not at no price.
New tecnics have been achieved step by step. Mankind will certainly find the way to make good use of them.
The biggest danger probably is to be found in the economic control which the world could fall into. The day might come in which what the soil produces could be someone else’s property and when one would not even have a right to nourish oneself. It is too much of a risk...
Monsanto, www.monsanto.com.
- Greenpeace, www.greenpeace.org.
- Novartis, www.novartis.com.
- The Ecologist Vol.28, No. 5 (IX-1998).
- Quaderns per a la solidaritat, 5 (V-1999), Justícia i Pau.
- Greenpeace 48 (IV/1998), pp. 14-16.
- Greenpeace 49 (I/1999), pp. 16-21.