Why Does It Cost More To Eat Healthy?

By Cliff Walsh


While there are a lot of positive characteristics to a healthy, organic diet, it is definitely more costly. The wide range of prices from organic to pesticide-laden produce to the chemical experiments called processed foods, stem from a handful of issues. Because organic farmers don't use pesticides, they need to use significantly more natural fertilizers as well as a lot more hands-on work and logistics planning, like crop rotation. The cost to certify a farm or food manufacturer is also substantial.

Perhaps the most frustrating reason, though, is that the government subsidizes unhealthy, chemical-laden foods while it penalizes organic foods. It all comes down to the approval and certification processes that are currently in place. When a chemical company or food manufacturer wants to bring a new chemical or food additive to market, the process is grossly in favor of the petitioning company. The majority of food additives in our food, which reduce nutritional value and lower the costs of making such food, are added to the food supply through a self-approval process known as GRAS, which stands for generally recognized as safe.

This is where it gets dicey. The government is easily circumvented because a food producer is able to fund private research to support its new product claim. If the additive comes up safe in the company's own checks, it is automatically ready for use in the food supply. The FDA has no oversight. The company isn't even required to make the government aware of the product's approval. It is a voluntary system. It is not difficult to understand that companies can bring dangerous chemicals to market in very little time (and no research on long-term risks) with little cost. This self-approval process has flooded the grocery store aisles with loads of untested chemicals, ranging from artificial flavors, food coloring, and sugar substitutes.

In contrast, the organic farmer or food preparer is required to go through a certification process by third parties authorized by the government's oversight bodies. This is at the cost of the producer. It is up to the petitioner to prove its products are organic, which is perfectly understandable. My concern lies with the drastically different approval processes. Why should organic farmers be put at a disadvantage in bringing their products to market when the food additive executives do not? It is ludicrous to think that the food industry is allowed to approve its own products for use, particularly when you consider we are ingesting these products, often without our knowledge. The dangers to our health are unquantifiable yet the food manufacturers continue to get paid.

I've had a lot of people tell me the best thing to focus on is to close the loophole and create more oversight on the chemical companies. New laws could be helpful, but fighting the food lobby is not an easy task. Not only do they spend millions of dollars each year influencing politicians, they also have rotating door policies where employees go to work for the government and then come back. They are working together. The singular option we can control are our dollars and what we use them for.

If we choose healthier foods, like organic and non-GMO products, we boost demand and profitability for the organic industry supplying us. This allows them to spread their costs over greater volume and reduce prices to the consumer. Conversely, less demand for unhealthy processed foods means lower profit for those producers. These companies are certainly not worried about our health. I bet they will be a lot more concerned about declining bank accounts. It's time to set a new course and take back our food supply.




About the Author:



No comments:

Post a Comment