Attacking Organics: Slate’s Stance Slanders Soil

Posted by Lisa Carey

I just read “Is Organic Agriculture Polluting our Food with Heavy Metals?” by James McWilliams on Slate.com. I know Slate to be unafraid to take a stance, and be heavily weighted towards one side of an issue. But this recent article has me a bit baffled; I have to admit.
Slate’s article talks about the findings of lead and other poisonous metals found in the soils used in organic farming. They name the cause of these findings the fertilizer (mostly manure) that is being used. At first the article makes these great claims that the primary cause of lead exposure to be from fruit and grain consumption. But then they go on to say that, “findings might be preliminary and inconsistent”.

This particular article seemed to reach a bit far for me. I think that McWilliams and his editors at Slate were searching for a hard-hitting anti-organic article. But, in my personal opinion, they shot themselves in the food (accidental typo leads to a funny little pun if I do say so myself). The article says that “scientists have not conducted enough research to make a determination”. Well, if enough research hasn’t been done, why are we making such a fuss about it? Call for more research if you actually think that these “trace amounts” of elements are more hazardous than the trace amounts that have been in the soil used to grow the crops we’ve been eating since the beginning of time. Don’t scare the public away from organic food production and consumption over something that they will find (at least the same amount, usually more) in their conventional food as well.
McWilliams goes on to discuss that pollutants from the air are being absorbed into the soil. “‘Atmospheric deposition’–the transfer of pollutants from the air to the earth–has nothing to do with organic practices per se but is, rather, the result of industrial processes beyond the farmer’s control.” So in the studies that they cited where there were trace elements of mercury or lead, how do they know where it came from? Did they test the air as well? Or just the soil and the fertilizer used? If they claim that pollutants are now being absorbed from the air, then they have to test that as well in order to get an accurate result.
My favorite part of the article, however, is this: “Fortunately, complete despair may still be avoided. Consider this: Plant biologists are working to genetically modify a fern plant that, when ashed and dusted on soil, is capable of sucking up zinc. The dust can then be gathered so the recovered zinc may be recycled and put to better use.” Ah…genetically modifying our food once again. Do they not think that once this magic dust is sprinkled over our food crops, that something potentially harmful could be absorbed from it as well?
Minerals are found in soil. That’s why plants grow in soil. Yes, we should absolutely avoid contamination of soil, water, air, etc. But, we need to also avoid jumping the gun when it comes to condemning a practice that is working diligently to improve quality of live and food.
We’d love to hear your thoughts.