Opinion
United States First Amendment Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
MONDAY, NOVEMBER 29, 2010
WWW.KANSAN.COM
Follow Opinion on Twitter.
@kansanopinion
FREE FOR ALL
To contribute to Free For All, visit Kansan.com or call (785) 864-0500.
--organic industry, a review from the University of London covering 11 studies found that there was no difference between the nutritional value of organic foods and that of modernly grown produce.
--organic industry, a review from the University of London covering 11 studies found that there was no difference between the nutritional value of organic foods and that of modernly grown produce.
To the cute guy at Radio Shack you made my day with your smile. Too bad my mother was with me or i'd ask for your name and #.
I've been watching Fox News...still haven't heard any news on foxes. They lie!
--organic industry, a review from the University of London covering 11 studies found that there was no difference between the nutritional value of organic foods and that of modernly grown produce.
I woke up this morning and realized I used a bag of oranges as a pillow.
--organic industry, a review from the University of London covering 11 studies found that there was no difference between the nutritional value of organic foods and that of modernly grown produce.
Dammit, North Korea, quit effing around and play nice. Seriously, I'm tired of this
--organic industry, a review from the University of London covering 11 studies found that there was no difference between the nutritional value of organic foods and that of modernly grown produce.
I don't want to go back to school. I'm too school for you.
--organic industry, a review from the University of London covering 11 studies found that there was no difference between the nutritional value of organic foods and that of modernly grown produce.
After the FFA columns
this should wide on
long of be at Monday.
a break, least 3
--organic industry, a review from the University of London covering 11 studies found that there was no difference between the nutritional value of organic foods and that of modernly grown produce.
--organic industry, a review from the University of London covering 11 studies found that there was no difference between the nutritional value of organic foods and that of modernly grown produce.
Sometimes I stargaze when I'm bored. Or, when I look into your eyes.
Going postal.
--organic industry, a review from the University of London covering 11 studies found that there was no difference between the nutritional value of organic foods and that of modernly grown produce.
--organic industry, a review from the University of London covering 11 studies found that there was no difference between the nutritional value of organic foods and that of modernly grown produce.
I have no life in my home town...
I feel as though non- conformists all conform to each other...
--organic industry, a review from the University of London covering 11 studies found that there was no difference between the nutritional value of organic foods and that of modernly grown produce.
--organic industry, a review from the University of London covering 11 studies found that there was no difference between the nutritional value of organic foods and that of modernly grown produce.
Let's give peace a chance.
As usual, I'm counting on KU basketball to make up for all the inadequacies of our football team.
--organic industry, a review from the University of London covering 11 studies found that there was no difference between the nutritional value of organic foods and that of modernly grown produce.
Great. Just had an epic dream about a super cute girl i thought I was over... FML
--organic industry, a review from the University of London covering 11 studies found that there was no difference between the nutritional value of organic foods and that of modernly grown produce.
I am such a creeper, I can't believe I just did that.
--organic industry, a review from the University of London covering 11 studies found that there was no difference between the nutritional value of organic foods and that of modernly grown produce.
I just shaved my legs to procrastinate on this paper.
--organic industry, a review from the University of London covering 11 studies found that there was no difference between the nutritional value of organic foods and that of modernly grown produce.
Farewell, LimeWire. It's been real
--organic industry, a review from the University of London covering 11 studies found that there was no difference between the nutritional value of organic foods and that of modernly grown produce.
Holy smoke Elijah took that tackle better than our football team
--organic industry, a review from the University of London covering 11 studies found that there was no difference between the nutritional value of organic foods and that of modernly grown produce.
I want a KU snuggle for Christmas.
--organic industry, a review from the University of London covering 11 studies found that there was no difference between the nutritional value of organic foods and that of modernly grown produce.
Sorry I broke up with you.
The person I'm most thankful for is three hours away.
SKEPTICISM
Organic food option not as wholesome as it appears
There's no doubt you've seen it before. Whether in Dillons, Hy-Vee, or even Wal-Mart, the little green and white USDA organic sticker seems to have found its way into almost every aisle of almost every grocery store in the country.
There are organic eggs, celery, chili, and even organic kitchen cleaners—all which proudly display a seal proclaiming government approval of their organic production
Foods that are labeled organic by the FDA must meet a set of stringent and comprehensive guidelines that prohibit the use of certain materials (no synthetic pesticides or fertilizers) in their production. Any genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and non-free-range conditions for animals are also not allowed in the production of these goods.
But, ask most people about what exactly organic is, and they won't go into detail about the farming practices behind it; rather, they'll tell you: it's not only better for you, but also better for the environment.
I doubt many people would be against either of these benefits, so if the statements were true, thered really be no reason to delve deeper into the underbelly of organic food, but therein lies the problem—neither claim really holds much water
The USDA itself argues nothing in favor of the purported health benefits of organic; in an interview with the New York Times in 2009, a spokesperson for the agricultural department said that the USDAS organic program "is a marketing program that sets standards for what can be certified as organic. Neither the enabling legislation nor the regulations address food safety or nutrition."
Contrary to claims from the
BY ANDREW HOLTZEN
aholtzen@kansan.com
Environmental concerns are also often cited as reason to buy organic, but consider this: although organic farming may benefit the environment in some regards, a study in Science concluded that organic plots of land produced 20 percent less than conventional plots.
According to these findings, in order for organic farming to become the norm, more land would have to be cleared for agriculture; looks like "save the rainforest" and "buy organic" cannot be uttered in the same breath.
Even if all arable land on earth were used to grow organic crops, that still might not be enough to feed 6.7 billion people. Norman Borlaug, Nobel laureate and leader of the "Green Revolution" contends that if all farming were converted to organic and cropland expanded, only 4 billion people could be fed, at best.
Organic food finds a lot of its support from people who are opposed to unbridled capitalism and who carry a sentiment that corporations are indifferent to the environment and the health of customers. Without a doubt there are
ample reasons for such an opinion, but organic food doesn't offer a better alternative.
The image of the small organic farmer is part of a bygone era in the early history of organic food—before it had evolved into $26.6 billion industry. In his book "The Omnivore's Dilemma", Michael Pollan argues that a more accurate depiction of many organic farms would be something similar to the huge industrial farms seen recently in movies like "Food Inc." and "The Future of Food."
Organic food commands higher prices than conventional agriculture and therefore, captures a high-value market of shoppers who are willing to pay more for a particular product. As the organic food industry has grown in the past decade, large-scale food producers have taken note and jumped on the organic bandwagon.
For example, Horizon Organic—which controls 50 percent of the market for organic milk—is owned by the agribusiness corporation Dean Foods, which boasted an impressive $12.5 billion in revenue in 2008.
Organic food as a supplement to conventional agriculture is not the problem. Many people choose to buy organic simply because they claim it tastes better, and they are entitled to that opinion. What's alarming is that there are those who have sought to line their pockets off of others' good intentions through deceptive marketing that uses potentially harmful misinformation and a cultivated image of wholesome business.
Holtzen is a junior from Fayetteville, Ark., in chemistry and Spanish.
CARTOON
TECHNICAL DIFFICULTIES AT THE ECONOMIC TEAM
QUICK-
MORE
CHARTS!
NICHOLAS SAMBULAK
START deserves ratification
GUEST COLUMN
I will refrain from any Cold War cliches as best I can, but talking about the United States, Russia and arms control is going to make that harder than hiding missiles in Cuba. The Senate is currently threatening to stall debate on the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START) legislation, which poses some enormous diplomatic problems. If they fail to ratify such an important treaty before the end of the year, Congress risks not only disappointing Russia, but also lowering American credibility around the world.
Sen. Kyl is now leading the Republican obstruction to reaching an agreement; it is perplexing as to why they are abandoning their conservative icon Ronald Reagan when a chance to do something he would do is staring them in the face. Republicans are so afraid of appearing on the same piece of paper with President Obama that they have concluded doing nothing is the best option. They should listen to fellow Sen. Richard Lugar (R-Ind.), who said, "Every senator
If Congress does not do its duty, Russia won't even entertain the idea of such a deal again for a long time. President Dmitri Medvedev risked a lot to get his government to support the treaty and won't be happy if Obama fails on his promise. Is that worth having the satisfaction that they defeated an Obama policy goal? Furthermore, failure to renew this deal will discredit the United States' dedication to future negotiations with other nations; if we couldn't deliver on this, will next time be any different?
has an obligation in the national security interest to take a stand, to do his or her duty." That's why he is asking Democrats to vote anyway — he understands the larger consequences.
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton pointed out a further ramification of putting negotiations on hold: American inspectors haven't been allowed into Russian military installations in over a year. And it's unbelievable that Republicans also ignored Sen. John Kerry's
(D-Mass.) point that there is high bipartisan support for the treaty. This is an opportunity for Republicans to come out against the status quo of petty partisanship in Washington, but it's as if they have selective amnesia that causes them to forget everything they've previously said about the Obama administration.
Democrats should follow through on Lugar's proposal. It's far better for a few Democrats to lose their seats in Congress in 2012 because they did the right thing than have the whole Russian Parliament, along with the rest of Europe, laughing at our dysfunctional domestic politics. Democrats are trying to draw just one positive achievement from the empty, all-consuming petty void that our politics have become, and it's about time the GOP lend a hand.
— From UWIRE. Kevin Bunkley for The Hoya at Georgetown U.
↑
CAMPUS
University environmental progress is encouraging
As world leaders convene in Cancun to address the challenge of climate change, few observers expect a consensus to form on solving the problem. The divisions between developing and affluent nations, energy producers and energy consumers — to say nothing of the domestic disputes between left and right — appear unbridgeable for now.
So if you're looking for an antidote to your cynicism on one of the great problems confronting our generation, don't look to Cancun. Instead, look no further than Mount Oread.
This month brought the welcome news that the University has improved its score on the 2011 College Sustainability Report Card. Despite highly publicized efforts to emphasize locally cultivated food and ramp up recycling, the University had previously been mired in the C-range. This year, though, the University earned a B.
There is no question that there's room to improve. But the upward trend is an encouraging one.
One area that drew the report's effusive praise was the University's investment priorities. The administration's focus on green buildings, recycling and staying local brought a grade of A in that category. While the University to date has lagged in eco-friendly construction, the commitments of Chancellor Bernadette Gray-Little to enhance energy conservation on campus garnered the report's recognition. A good grade on investments indicates the report's judgment that the University is headed in the right direction.
It's important not to lose sight of the central role of student organizations in fostering this progress. Under the leadership of President Michael Wade Smith and Vice President Megan Ritter, the Student Senate has aimed high in its quest to instill environmentally friendly
Politics on Campus
practices at the University. Moreover, KU Sustainability and other ecologically-minded groups provide the determination and support base required to make the Senate and Administration's objectives a reality.
BY LUKE BRINKER
lbrinker@kansan.com
The University's performance on its latest progress report illustrates a fundamental truth about effecting change. The inability of national and international actors to reach an accord on capping carbon emissions is both morally and economically inexcusable. Without a political solution, it will be impossible to spur the investment needed to avert the worst-case scenarios of climate change.
But it is equally true that absent the will of people everywhere to change the way they go about such mundane tasks as disposing of waste, using electricity, consuming food, transporting themselves, and building their homes and offices all the political will in the world will prove inadequate.
The old cliché about thinking globally and acting locally has a great deal of merit. In a globalized society, the imperative for global action to confront global problems is particularly acute. But the actions of local communities can demonstrate to the global powers-that-be that being environmentally conscious and morally and economically thriving are not mutually exclusive.
Brinker is a sophomore from Topeka in history.
Responses to the news of the week on Kansan.com
"I didn't find this as an issue of maintenance staff and what their abilities were for controlling it. I found it disturbing that the student housing representative in the first published article acted as if there was no problem. 'We're getting to the full renovations as quickly as feasible,' Robertson said. 'In the meantime, I think they're in pretty good shape.' I don't see how you can think visible mold and leaking pipes is seen as 'pretty good shape' Before a problem can be fixed, one must admit to there being a problem."
—"JW" in response to "McCollum mold legitimate problem" on Nov. 22.
"—'rahrah28' in response to "McCollum mold legitimate problem" on Nov. 23.
Chatterbox
HOW TO SUBMIT A LETTER TO THE EDITOR
LETTER GUIDELINES
**LETTER GUIDELINES**
Send letters to kananopdesk@gmail.
com. Write LETTER TO THE EDITOR in the e-mail subject line.
Length: 300 words
The submission should include the author's name, grade and hometown.
Find our full letter to the editor policy online at kansan.com/letters.
Alex Garrison, editor
864-4810 or agarrison@kansan.com
CONTACT US
Nick Gerik, managing editor
864-4810 or nigerik@yahoo.com
Erin Brown, managing editor
864-4810 or ehrown@kansan.com
David Cawthon, kansan.com managing editor 864-4810 or dcwthon@kansan.com
Emily McCoy, Kansas TV assignment editor 864-4810 or emscoy@kansas.com
Jonathan Shorman, opinion editor
864-9242 or jshorman.kansas.com
Shauna Blackmon, associate opinion editor
864-9242 or blskommon.kansas.com
Joe Garev$^1$, business manager
864-4358 40 jorgearev@kansan.com
Amy O'Brien, sales manager
864-4477 or obriennev@kansan.com
Malcolm Gibson, general manager and news adviser
Jon Schilt, sales and marketing adviser
864-7666 or jschiltkansan.com
THE EDITORIAL BOARD
THE EDITORIAL BOARD Members of the Kansan Editorial Board are Xantria Gickel, Erin Brown, David Blackman, Jonathan Shaun and Shaun Blackmon.
1 2