ABC's Apologies for John Stossel's Lies About Organic Food Are Inadequate

The San Francisco Chronicle
Cultivating the Truth About Organics
By Brian Halweil

I WATCHED IN DISBELIEF as John Stossel, co-anchor of ABC's "20/20,"
delivered a half-hearted apology August 11 for falsifying evidence in a
report that claimed organic produce is potentially more dangerous than food
raised using toxic agrochemicals, antibiotics, added hormones, genetically
engineered seeds and massive animal-feeding factories.

In his apology, Stossel did admit that some tests he relied on to support
his conclusion had never been conducted. But he shrugged that off as a
minor oversight, maintaining that because organic farmers favor manure and
other natural fertilizers over synthetic chemicals, organic produce carries
a greater risk of E. coli infection and "could kill you."

What wasn't mentioned is that most of the manure spread on land in the
United States is, in fact, used by conventional farmers. The difference is
that organic farmers are the only ones required to farm in a way that might
minimize the risk of E. coli or other food-borne illness. Organic
certification standards require that all raw manure is applied to the
fields or orchards at least 60 days, and sometimes as many as 120 days,
before the produce is harvested -- a period that allows for ecological
processes that eliminate harmful microbes. (The pathogens become food for
other soil organisms or degrade from exposure to the elements).

Conventional growers, in contrast, can spray on raw, uncomposted manure
(even on fruits and veggies that are but days from being harvested), in
addition to human sewage sludge and slurry from industrial animal farms --
all practices that are explicitly forbidden under organic regulations.

There has been no systematic analysis of whether organic or nonorganic
foods carry a greater risk of E. coli O157 -- the particular strain that is
so deadly to humans and that we hear so much about in the news -- but the
prevailing epidemiology of this bug points to the safety of organic over
conventional farming. Nearly all cases of E. coli 0157 result from
consumption of contaminated meat, a function of the conditions of
industrial factory farms and meat processing plants. For livestock that are
used to eating mostly grass and straw, the feedlot diet of grain
concentrate encourages the proliferation of E. coli 0157 in the animal's
gut, while the highly confined and unsanitary conditions facilitate
transmission of the bugs between animals. At the same time, overuse of
antibiotics in the feedlot diet virtually ensures the potency of emerging
microbes. Meanwhile, meat packing at breakneck speed, often in close
proximity to animal carcasses and feces, paves the way for additional

In those cases that do occur in produce, the E. coli generally enters the
food chain at the packaging and handling stage, not the farm environment.

Here are a few other things that weren't mentioned:

ABC's false claims relied almost exclusively on testimony of Dennis Avery
of the agribusiness-funded Hudson Institute, whose thoughts on pesticides
and food-borne illness have already been widely discredited. Last year,
Avery manipulated data from the Centers for Disease Control in order to
back his claim that organic produce carries a greater risk of E. coli than
nonorganic produce. CDC officials have stated that their data do not
support Avery's claims -- a fact that might deter most journalists (even TV
journalists) from relying on Avery as a source.

The report also played down the risk of pesticide residues, claiming (with
data that did not exist) that organic produce has no fewer pesticide
residues than nonorganic produce. In truth, organic produce -- from bananas
to peppers to strawberries -- has been consistently shown to carry fewer
toxic pesticide residues than nonorganic produce. Some of the more recent
evidence includes the January 1998 issue of Consumer Reports, which tested
1,000 pounds of organic and nonorganic produce, and found that organic
produce consistently carried the lowest, and least-toxic, pesticide
residues. (The fact that even foods grown without pesticides may contain
trace pesticide residues is the unfortunate consequence of past pesticide
use which has left background pesticide levels in the soil, water supply
and even our bodies.)

Perhaps the most basic oversight of the report was the failure to mention
that organic farming -- the fastest growing sector of the food economy --
offers tremendous hope for reconciling the toll that industrial,
chemical-dependent farming has taken on rivers and streams, topsoil,
wildlife and the environment in general. By relying on a sophisticated
understanding of crop diversity, nutrient cycling, predator-prey
interactions and other ecological processes occurring in the field, instead
of chemical quick-fixes, organic farming provides a model for improving the
way we currently grow most of our food.

The fabrication of information on an ABC news report -- not to mention the
neglect of extensive evidence disputing its conclusions -- raises serious
questions of journalistic integrity. According to Brill's Content magazine,
over the last two years, Stossel has collected hundreds of thousands of
dollars in speaking fees from various industry and conservative groups,
including agribusiness interests. At the very least, this gives the
appearance of a potential conflict of interest, and with the organic food
market in this country growing by more than 20 percent a year, there is no
shortage of groups who feel threatened -- agrochemical companies, biotech
companies, and nonorganic food manufacturers and retailers.

"All we have in this business is our credibility -- your trust that we get
it right, Stossel reminds the audience in his apology. Unfortunately, for
his and ABC's reputation, this realization has come too late.

The writer is a staff researcher at the Worldwatch Institute in Washington, D.C.

Home | News | Organics | GE Food | Health | Environment | Food Safety | Fair Trade | Peace | Farm Issues | Politics
Español | Campaigns | Buying Guide | Press | Search | Donate | About Us | Contact Us

Organic Consumers Association - 6771 South Silver Hill Drive, Finland MN 55603
E-mail: Staff · Activist or Media Inquiries: 218-226-4164 · Fax: 218-353-7652
Please support our work. Send a tax-deductible donation to the OCA

Fair Use Notice: The material on this site is provided for educational and informational purposes. It may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. It is being made available in an effort to advance the understanding of scientific, environmental, economic, social justice and human rights issues etc. It is believed that this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have an interest in using the included information for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. The information on this site does not constitute legal or technical advice.