On March 6, 2019 Clif Bar took out a full-page ad in the New York Times challenging Kind to go organic. Accompanying this ad was a letter addressing Kind, RX Bar and Larabar and asking them to join the organic movement. “Do a truly kind thing and make an investment in the future of the planet and our children’s children by going organic,” the letter reads. It goes on to list the primary benefits of organic food, such as reduced pesticides, and then finishes with a pledge to share Clif Bar’s decade-plus of knowledge in sourcing organic ingredients, as well as donate 10 tons of organic ingredients should Kind take up the challenge.[1] Kind fired back by asking the FDA to crack down on companies making misleading nutritional claims stating the sugar content of the Clif bars. Kind’s policy suggestions, backed by 10 health experts, would ask that companies remove statements such as “good source of fiber” and “excellent source of protein” from packaging.[2] The snack bar feud has brought two important points to light. First, the FDA has done a poor job of cracking down on misleading health claims; including claims that organic equals healthy and Second, Organic is a meaningless claim when it comes to environmental friendliness.
Clif Bar claiming that products made with organic ingredients are healthier is extremely misleading in that it just isn’t true. The human body processes things like sugar and fat the exact same way no matter what the source is. Organic Cane Sugar will spike your blood sugar and contribute calories just as well as high fructose corn syrup will. Human physiology does not know the difference. Further, Clif Bars contain a whopping 21 grams of sugar per a 68 gram bar. Sugar makes up 31% of the “healthy” and organic Clif bar. For comparison, your average 12 oz can of cola contains 33 grams of sugar per 369 gram serving, making sugar only 9% of your cola. Medical research has shown that high sugar consumption can cause an unhealthy weight. Those that are obese have an increase risk of Type 2 Diabetes, heart disease and kidney problems.[1] In the United States the trend in lower sugar beverages has been on the rise with consumers actively seeking low sugar and no sugar added beverages. Sodas and juice beverages have been on a rapid decline since 2014. Additionally, many States are taking an active role in making over consumption of sugar less attractive by initiating a “soda tax” on sugary beverages. [2] Given that the FDA has decided to force manufacturers to call out sugars by changing the Nutrition Facts Panels to reflect Added Sugars in all foods and beverages starting in 2020, it is only a matter of time before all food stuffs need to address this issue.
The claim of Organic on a label is not only meaningless but very misleading to consumers. One common misconception is that organic agriculture does not use pesticides. In fact, there is a long list of pesticides that are approved for use in organic farming and can be found on the USDA Organic Program’s website. Most are considered non-synthetic but there are a few synthetics lists as they are much more effective than their non-synthetic counterparts. While the less we impact our environment, the better off we are, there is not enough research to show that non-synthetic pesticides actually help us achieve this goal. A recent study compared the effectiveness of a rotenone-pyrethrin mixture versus a synthetic pesticide, imidan. Rotenone and pyrethrin are two common organic pesticides; imidan is considered a "soft" synthetic pesticide (i.e., designed to have a brief lifetime after application, and other traits that minimize unwanted effects). It was found that up to 7 applications of the rotenone- pyrethrin mixture were required to obtain the level of protection provided by 2 applications of imidan.
It seems unlikely that 7 applications of rotenone and pyrethrin are really better for the environment than 2 applications of imidan, especially when rotenone is extremely toxic to fish and other aquatic life. It should be noted, however, that we don't know for certain which system is more harmful. This is because we do not look at organic pesticides the same way that we look at conventional pesticides. We don't know how long these organic pesticides persist in the environment, or the full extent of their effects. When you look at lists of pesticides allowed in organic agriculture, you find warnings such as, "Use with caution. The toxicological effects of [organic pesticide X] are largely unknown," or "Its persistence in the soil is unknown." Again, researchers haven't bothered to study the effects of organic pesticides because it is assumed that "natural" chemicals are automatically safe. [3]
While organic farming can be good for the environment on a small, local scale it is just not sustainable on a larger scale in order to feed mass populations. Organic farmers produce far less food per unit of land than a conventional farmer. Yields of organic farms are 20 to 50% less than conventional farms. Roughly 800 million people suffer from hunger and malnutrition globally with an estimated 16 million that will die from lack of food. If we were to switch to 100% organic farming it is estimated that the number of those suffering from hunger jumps from 800 million to 1.3 billion if the same land mass was used. In order to accommodate current global needs with 100% organic farming we would have to expand the units of land farmed by a minimum of 20%. This would cause the destruction of protected and wild habitats and devastate many endangered species.[4]
Organic foods are not healthier, they are not better for the environment and it is not a sustainable farming practice on a large scale. Foods that claim that organic is better are presenting consumers with misinformation and misleading claims. It is my hope that companies like Clif Bar will stop feeding the misinformation machine and focus on real health for their consumers.
[1] www.diabetes.org. April 2019
[2] “Consumers are demanding more from their beverage experiences.” www.fooddive.com. January 22 2018
[3] Open Computing Facility. About Organic Farming. www.ocf.berkely.edu. 2019
[4] “Organic Farming VS Conventional Farming.” Scientific America. Christine Wilcox. 2018
