USDA Certification for Organic Foods (Policy), Article Critique Example

Organic foods: Are they safer, more nutritious? By Mayo Clinic

My argument is if organic and conventional foods have the same value why are orgaic ones more costly? Is it that USDA certification for organic foods creates an advantage for businesses to capitalize on it and charge consumers more? Mayo clinic staff advances that organic foods have become a more featured product in many supermarkets and the consumer fad is that it is more nutritious. This is in fact a fallacious representation (Mayo clinic, 2013).

Reports have been that USDA’s Agricultural Marketing Service offers two organic certification cost-share programs. In the first instance producers in 15 States benefit from financial assistance in the growing of organic vegetables, fruits and other edible products. The financial resource input in this venture is somewhere in the vicinity of $1.0 million yearly under the Agricultural Management Assistance (AMA) program, which is a provision of the Federal Crop Insurance Act. Secondly, an expanded assistance program exists whereby all U.S. farmers and handlers of agricultural produce benefit under the 2002 Farm Act through a one-time funding of $5.0 million, which has to be distributed among participating states (USDA, 2013).

Here is the question again why is organic food so costly?

This being the facts regarding organic food production in United States of America then the distribution and consumer costs should be lower than conventional produce, which have to utilize fertilizers. Mayo clinic article continues to further advance comparing organic with conventional produced foods that organic refers to the way farmers cultivate the produce. More importantly, the technique is intended to encourage soil and water conservation while reducing pollution (Mayo Clinic, 2013).

More importantly, these farmers do not use conventional means to prevent weeds from growing, enhance growth or prevent diseases among livestock and plants. They use manure to fertilize crops and crop rotation strategies to enhance growth or prevent disease. Are organic foods safer to use than conventional? From research they are not. Are they more nutritious? Again analysts contend that they are not. Then why do they cost more?

Farmers and businesses argue that costs incurred are due to the USDA certification program. All USDA approved organic products must have a label. Farmers who sell less than $5,000 worth of produce are exempted from the certification process, but are expected to cultivate the produce under specified USDA regulations. However, whatever costs may have incurred from the certification process was already accounted for in grants offered to farmers for participating in the program. Therefore, paying more for organic produced items is a business tactic used by organizations to gain more profit from an already subsided commodity.

Consequently, according to the article under review many consumers tend to think that natural and organic means the same. The difference is only foods that have been grown according to USDA standards are classified organic. Precisely, they must contain the organic label to be authentic. Conclusively, organic foods are not better in any way than conventionally grown ones. Manure can be just as harmful as fertilizers and crop rotation as dangerous as continually growing plants on the same soil without resting the land (Mayo Clinic, 2013). As such, consumers ought not to be trapped in the fallacy of organic and natural because they are all the same. The difference is the consumer pays more while farmers and businesses make a huge profit.

Works cited

Mayo Clinic. Nutrition and Health Eating. Mayo Clinic 2013. Print.

USAD .Organic Policy. Economic Research service. United States department of Agriculture. 2013. Print