I found this cartoon about pesticides in fruits.
I think it`s kind of funny because since the people became aware of the toxicity in the air, water or, like in this case their food, they started to rethink about how their food has to look like. Only some years ago the apples had to be big, red and round whereas nowadays the people try to avoid pesticides or other toxic substances by buying organic food even if the price is almost 50-100 percent higher than of non-organic food and does not look that perfect.
This is precisely my point about the historical specificity of signs. Show us the photo of the plump, pristine Red Delicious Apple twenty years ago, and we would have said that the photo signifies "natural food," "wholesome eating," "an apple a day keeps the doctor away." Nowadays, the same pristine apple might signify the opposite to some: "unnatural," "freakishly homogenous," "overperfect," "doctored," "pesticide-laden."
ReplyDeleteMy wife keeps tabs on the most dangerous fruits and vegetables to buy non-organically. I'm not sure how they would translate into the EU, but I would hazard a guess that many of the top violators (apples among them) are most likely the same. Celery, peppers, carrots, potatoes, etc. Others, like avocados, for example--whose skins are tough and impermeable--don't show any marked improvement in safety when bought nonorganically. Something to think about when shopping: How much pesticide is used on the particular item? How permeable is the item (and thus susceptible to toxins)? Does one eat the skin, even if washed thoroughly (which often can't eradicate the compounds)? And on which items is the label of "organic" less significant? We are always caught between the "fear mongering" that scares us into buying higher priced items, and the realities surrounding large-scale industrial farming. Being a savvy consumer is one potential road to sanity and safety.
And to those who suggest that organic foods are elitist, only for the rich, I would direct them to Michael Pollan's witty retort: I doubt any argument in which McDonald's and its ilk claim the moral high ground."
ReplyDeleteYou all should read some Michael Pollan. I may have one or two pieces on my computer for anyone interested.