A combination of record floods and record numbers of organic farms has led to concerns about the safety of groceries--organic and otherwise
EarthTalk® is written and edited by Roddy Scheer and Doug Moss and is a registered trademark of E - The Environmental Magazine (www.emagazine.com). Send questions to: earthtalk@emagazine.com. Subscribe: www.emagazine.com/subscribe. Free Trial Issue: www.emagazine.com/trial.
See what we're tweeting about
robinlloyd99 'Wired' Overhauls Print Magazine http://t.co/t4SDAT7mhx "wanted a design that made the magazine appeal to both sexes, & not just to men"
DNLee5 For @TheDarkSci A Guide for Scientists on Giving Comments to Journalists http://t.co/fy5vJmnNkM via @ngphenomena @edyong209 #science #NABJ
Horganism Scientists discover evidence of multiverses... Not! http://t.co/X6NbeCIb0C
Deadline: Jul 25 2013
Reward: Varies
This challenge provides an opportunity for Solvers to build a web-based or mobile “app” to explore data relationships in scholarly conte
Deadline: Jun 30 2013
Reward: $1,000,000 USD
This is a Reduction-to-Practice Challenge that requires written documentation and&
Powered By: 
YES! Send me a free issue of Scientific American with no obligation to continue the subscription. If I like it, I will be billed for the one-year subscription.
4 Comments
Add CommentHow are the famers supposed to remove their crops that have ben inundated in a way so as not to contaminate unaffected crops if they're told to now use their farm equipment in the flooded areas or on flooded crops?! Are they going to be expected to remove the flooded crops and dispose of them properly by HAND? Perhaps they're expected to double their fleet and use half on only the flooded crops. What a boost to the local economies that'll be.....lemonaide from lemons I guess.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this@mikeknr
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI wouldn't worry too much about making sense of the article. ET articles always seem to follow the same pattern:
1) attention-grabbing headline,
2) true statements and an actual authoritative scientific paper only vaguely related to the topic at hand,
3) wild unsupported claims made in a reasonable tone but unrelated to the true statements, and
4) links, setting something authoritative-looking next to the website of the article's sponsor
It's just an elaborate form of advertising. If I ran an environmental organization, it's not a form of advertising I would want to be associated with. Scientific American likely grabs ET articles because they're freely available and have traffic-driving headlines.
Organic Schmorganic.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this60 days?! SIXTY DAYS?! No organic certifier worth their kosher salt would certify produce organic if it were grown on a field recently flooded by contaminated water. It takes FIVE YEARS to turn an ordinary, non-organic farm into a certified organic farm, & the qualifications are stringent. That qualification assumes that the ground was previously only contaminated with the usual fertilizers & pesticides. I imagine that what will happen is that the growers will have to stop using those fields for organic produce for a lengthy period, probably measurable in years, conceivably, in some instances, forever, thus increasing the impact as compared to conventional farming. ... <sigh> ...
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this