New Analysis Reveals Organic Apple Growing Methods More Environmentally Harmful, Less Sustainable, Worse for Farm Workers
Alex Avery
November 2, 2006
A comprehensive analysis of data and methods from a widely cited 2001 study published in the journal Nature that claimed conventional apple production methods were six times worse for the environment, in fact, shows that the conventional methods have only one quarter of the environmental impact [than organic farming methods have] and are far more protective of human and farm worker health.
The original study, conducted by John Reganold at Washington State University and colleagues, was widely cited in the mainstream media as proof of organic farming’s environmental superiority. The study was covered by the New York Times, NPR, LA Times, and Voice of America. Yet from the beginning there were serious flaws and biases evident in the study. Soon after the study’s publication, The Truth About Organic Foods author Alex Avery raised serious doubts about its conclusions in a joint submission to Nature with Dr. Anthony Trewavas of the University of Edinburgh. After over six months of review and two rounds of edits and responses, Nature’s editors unfortunately decided that the criticisms and discussion were “too specialized” for the journal’s general readership and declined to publish Avery’s and Trewavas’ criticisms. Instead, Avery used the study and its problems as the basis for his chapter on the environmental impacts of organic pesticides and alternative methods in the forthcoming authoritative American Chemistry Society text, Certified Organic and Biologically Derived Pesticides (Felsot and Racke, available here).
Now this critique has been expanded in a new report from the director of the Crop Protection Research Institute, Leonard Gianessi. The report lays bare and in plain language how Reganold et al. grossly over applied unnecessary pesticide sprays to the conventional portions of the small research plot (~4 acres), despite the fact that there were no differences in pest or disease pressures between organic and conventionally-treated trees. Gianessi also documents how Reganold et al. completely ignored the major environmental impacts from organic weed control methods and their well-documented serious health impacts on farm workers.
The full critique of the Nature study, including its clear organic biases and major methodological flaws can be found here.
