Is it really worth it to buy organic chicken?
Options
Replies
-
Probably not. You probably want to avoid buying meat in a supermarket altogether and look for a local farmer where you can verify how the animal is raised and slaughtered. That's expensive and why I don't eat as much meat as I used to.1
-
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Hopefully this works.
I work for a french based cheese making company and this was an article that one of our marketing managers sent to us. Food for thought I guess.
I don't see anything wrong with rich people spending money to feel better about their purchases. It's not as if their buying organic is preventing non-organic farming. Or that if they buy non-organic produce the non-organic growers will suddenly start shipping produce to the world's poorest inhabitants.
I do when it means that rich people are misleading us about the benefits and whether pesticides aren't used on organics (they are) or creating laws so that poor people can't grow enough food to feed their populations. That's exactly what's going on out there internationally. European countries and the U.S. are being pressured by the organics industry to ban GMOs. Third world countries pick that up and they have start banning them, too, as their people starve. Crops that could literally help feed their starving poor can't be grown in favor of non-GMO crops that take more land and resources and produce less food. It's pathetic.
It's horrifying to me that entitled people who have more than enough food and have never known hunger can sit back and watch children in other countries go blind and let people starve to death all so they can feel superior and pretend that they're eating more "healthy" when it's really not the case.
http://www.wsj.com/articles/we-may-starve-but-at-least-well-be-gmo-free-1457653915
https://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2014/05/23/gmos-are-key-tool-addressing-global-hunger/SPlNunvLl5WjovCpXvsihJ/story.html1 -
SusanMFindlay wrote: »Strawblackcat wrote: »I think so, if only for the more humane tendencies of organic meat producers. The chickens can't be kept in cages, must have access to the outdoors (although, you have to research the company that you're buying from to figure out if the chicken actually ever went outdoors),
This is not true. You're conflating organic and free-range. "Free range" are the chickens who must have access to the outdoors (though, unless raised on a small farm, are usually too scared to actually go out there; chickens like familiar places and tend to stay put).
https://www.ams.usda.gov/sites/default/files/media/Organic Livestock Requirements.pdf
"Must be allowed access to the outdoors except under inclement weather conditions".2 -
according to the farm they slit the throat which is a pretty well known "ethically" way to kill an animal.
Rather than "ethically," I believe what you mean to say is that the chickens are killed "humanely."
Any quick kill would be considered humane. Slit the throat, break the neck or chop off the head, it's really all the same.
Humanely is ethically. It is unethical to euthanize, kill, and/or slaughter animals inhumanely. Exsanguination (slitting the throat) as the sole method of euthanasia/slaughter, without rendering unconscious first, is not humane and thus de facto unethical. Decapitation and cervical dislocation are both humane and thus ethical.
https://www.avma.org/KB/Policies/Documents/euthanasia.pdf
And:
https://www.avma.org/KB/Resources/Reference/AnimalWelfare/Documents/Humane-Slaughter-Guidelines.pdf0 -
Produce & meat may be better for you due to the lack of insecticides and chemicals added but I never buy organic anything because of the higher price for all things organic.
It's absolutely not true that organic means chemical or pesticide free. It means they must use naturally occurring pesticides - for example, using rotenone-pyrethrin on their crops (chemicals that come from peas and chrysanthemums). In fact, since these are less potent of insecticides, "organic" crops typically use much higher amounts of pesticide. This is a problem as the pesticides are also less specific, meaning they are more harmful to humans than many synthetic pesticides.
There are no shortage of naturally occurring toxins in the world. Many of the world's deadliest toxins are fully organic.2 -
Strawblackcat wrote: »SusanMFindlay wrote: »Strawblackcat wrote: »I think so, if only for the more humane tendencies of organic meat producers. The chickens can't be kept in cages, must have access to the outdoors (although, you have to research the company that you're buying from to figure out if the chicken actually ever went outdoors),
This is not true. You're conflating organic and free-range. "Free range" are the chickens who must have access to the outdoors (though, unless raised on a small farm, are usually too scared to actually go out there; chickens like familiar places and tend to stay put).
https://www.ams.usda.gov/sites/default/files/media/Organic Livestock Requirements.pdf
"Must be allowed access to the outdoors except under inclement weather conditions".
Then this is just one more example of the term "organic" being used opaquely and as a blanket marketing term for a variety of practices, some better than others. Whether indoors or outdoors has nothing to do with the "organicness" of an animal, and I suspect this is a relatively new addition to the definition. I don't disagree that it's a good thing; it's just a thing that has its own name. Plus, I'm not in the US so I have a whole different set of government definitions and regulations.
And that's with me ignoring my professional training that tells me *every* plant and animal is organic because, well, carbon based.
1 -
SusanMFindlay wrote: »Strawblackcat wrote: »SusanMFindlay wrote: »Strawblackcat wrote: »I think so, if only for the more humane tendencies of organic meat producers. The chickens can't be kept in cages, must have access to the outdoors (although, you have to research the company that you're buying from to figure out if the chicken actually ever went outdoors),
This is not true. You're conflating organic and free-range. "Free range" are the chickens who must have access to the outdoors (though, unless raised on a small farm, are usually too scared to actually go out there; chickens like familiar places and tend to stay put).
https://www.ams.usda.gov/sites/default/files/media/Organic Livestock Requirements.pdf
"Must be allowed access to the outdoors except under inclement weather conditions".
Then this is just one more example of the term "organic" being used opaquely and as a blanket marketing term for a variety of practices, some better than others. Whether indoors or outdoors has nothing to do with the "organicness" of an animal, and I suspect this is a relatively new addition to the definition. I don't disagree that it's a good thing; it's just a thing that has its own name. Plus, I'm not in the US so I have a whole different set of government definitions and regulations.
And that's with me ignoring my professional training that tells me *every* plant and animal is organic because, well, carbon based.
I think that it is supposed to call back to the origins of the organic food movement, which was more similar to what is called "veganic" or "biodynamic" today. Basically, you would know where all of your food came from exactly (everything local),no synthetic pesticides would be used, and all animals would be raised on pasture, in an environment that would allow them to express their natural behaviors. USDA Organic certifacation still bans synthetic pesticides, but it centralizes food production since most organic farms nowadays are large operations in a few areas of the country. Some factory farming-Esque practices are also borrowed, depending on the particular farm, to increase scale. The outdoor access requirement is to try and force farmers to allow hens to live in an environment that would more closely resemble their natural envrioment. But, you're right in saying that the effectiveness of that regulation in achieving that is highly variable. Like I said, you have to do research into the sources of your meat to make sure that you're really getting what you're paying for.0 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Organic, yes. Anything organic is regulated. Anything other than organic, NOPE.
They can still call a chicken 'organic' by simply feeding it organic feed - an organic chicken does not mean the chicken lived a care free, all natural chicken lifestyle. This chicken may never see the light of day and still be grown at a crazy pace to get it to market quickly, and yet it can still labelled organic. Maybe OP was wondering only about health benefits from organic vs non-organic meat, but I know many people pay more for organic livestock thinking it was raised humanely or given a chance to roam outside foraging, which is not necessarily the case.
How does one grow a chicken at a crazy pace?
Lock them up, stop from moving around much and feed feed feed. Same way you or I can gain weight very very quickly
That wouldn't increase the size of the muscle, which is the part we buy. I wish it did though.0 -
rankinsect wrote: »Produce & meat may be better for you due to the lack of insecticides and chemicals added but I never buy organic anything because of the higher price for all things organic.
It's absolutely not true that organic means chemical or pesticide free. It means they must use naturally occurring pesticides - for example, using rotenone-pyrethrin on their crops (chemicals that come from peas and chrysanthemums). In fact, since these are less potent of insecticides, "organic" crops typically use much higher amounts of pesticide. This is a problem as the pesticides are also less specific, meaning they are more harmful to humans than many synthetic pesticides.
There are no shortage of naturally occurring toxins in the world. Many of the world's deadliest toxins are fully organic.
Do you have a source for the bolded part?0 -
extra_medium wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Organic, yes. Anything organic is regulated. Anything other than organic, NOPE.
They can still call a chicken 'organic' by simply feeding it organic feed - an organic chicken does not mean the chicken lived a care free, all natural chicken lifestyle. This chicken may never see the light of day and still be grown at a crazy pace to get it to market quickly, and yet it can still labelled organic. Maybe OP was wondering only about health benefits from organic vs non-organic meat, but I know many people pay more for organic livestock thinking it was raised humanely or given a chance to roam outside foraging, which is not necessarily the case.
How does one grow a chicken at a crazy pace?
Lock them up, stop from moving around much and feed feed feed. Same way you or I can gain weight very very quickly
That wouldn't increase the size of the muscle, which is the part we buy. I wish it did though.
That would be nice, huh? Or maybe not. I'd probably just be all bulky.0 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »rankinsect wrote: »Produce & meat may be better for you due to the lack of insecticides and chemicals added but I never buy organic anything because of the higher price for all things organic.
It's absolutely not true that organic means chemical or pesticide free. It means they must use naturally occurring pesticides - for example, using rotenone-pyrethrin on their crops (chemicals that come from peas and chrysanthemums). In fact, since these are less potent of insecticides, "organic" crops typically use much higher amounts of pesticide. This is a problem as the pesticides are also less specific, meaning they are more harmful to humans than many synthetic pesticides.
There are no shortage of naturally occurring toxins in the world. Many of the world's deadliest toxins are fully organic.
Do you have a source for the bolded part?
http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/science-sushi/httpblogsscientificamericancomscience-sushi20110718mythbusting-101-organic-farming-conventional-agriculture/
Or look up the MSDS on common pesticides on the "approved" list.0 -
Strawblackcat wrote: »Like I said, you have to do research into the sources of your meat to make sure that you're really getting what you're paying for.
This is the key. I wouldn't pay more for meat labeled "organic" in a grocery store, without knowing more, since it usually doesn't mean much (on the things I care about). I would (and do) pay more for meat I knew the source of, such as from a local farm I knew something about. That's mostly for reasons other than nutrition, for me, so if the OP is just asking about nutrition, it's irrelevant anyway.1 -
Yep. I'd buy from a local farmer over "big business" organic any day.0
-
I'll pay more for chickens that didn't have their beaks ripped off as soon as they reach adulthood. And then are stuffed into a small cage with 25 other birds. And are then fed massive amounts of antibiotics to pre-emptively treat the infections caused by tearing at each other in impossibly crammed conditions causing open bloody wounds. Also, a lot of non-organic chickens are drugged with hormones so that they constantly lay eggs. I don't know if all organic chickens are treated more humanely before a quick slaughter, but some stores who specialize in organic won't buy from purveyors unless they know for sure.
ETA: sorry, some of this has already been mentioned upthread.
The key thing with eggs is to buy eggs laid by hens kept in small flocks. Sadly, in large flocks, even if "free range", hens have a tendency to peck each other to death, which makes debeaking an horrific lesser of two evils.
I need to research whether the conditions ducks are reared in for egg laying are comparable. Duck eggs are usually sold alongside the small chicken flock eggs, over here, but are almost twice the size of some of those! There's a few farm shops I will gladly shop at where I know the birds have had a good life (you get chased by curious turkeys at one of them!) but they're a bit out of the way for a weekly shop.0 -
It is definitely worth buying organic chicken and pork if you don't have a local farmer you can buy from. Even Stanford, with their financial conflicts of interest within the biotech industry, concluded that buying organic chicken reduces your exposure to antibiotic-resistant bacteria by 30%. I think the many industry apologists here on MFP will have a hard time spinning that one.
The risk for isolating bacteria resistant to 3 or more antibiotics was higher in conventional than in organic chicken and pork (risk difference, 33% [CI, 21% to 45%]).0 -
For chicken, no. I do buy free range just because I'm an animal lover. However, I ALWAYS buy organization c berries because he pesticides used on berries, especially strawberries, are particularly nasty0
-
Best not to eat meat at all 0
-
-
Factory chickens are treated like crap. It is a terrible industry. They are pumped full of things that probably shouldn't be ingested by them or us. Oh, and by the way.....the government just made it legal for chickens to be killed in the US, shipped to CHINA to be processed, and then shipped back to the US for you to buy.
Personally, I only buy and eat local, organic, pasture-raised meats (and wild caught fish).
Is it more expensive? Sure. But the medical bills I will avoid later in life make it worth it
0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.5K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 392 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 926 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions