The Soil Association, Britain’s largest organic certification body has announced that products will not be certified as 'organic' if they contain additives made by the rapidly burgeoning nanotechnology industry.

The ban will particularly affect sunscreens and cosmetics – one of the UK’s fastest growing organic sectors. 

Health concerns have prompted the ban on products containing man-made 'nanoparticles' – super-fine particles with dimensions smaller than 125 nanometres (millionths of a millimetre).

Scientists fear nanoparticles could pass from cosmetics through the skin and the body’s internal membranes.

Biological Farmers of Australia (BFA) welcomes the move of its sister organization in the UK and indeed notes that BFA had moved to place an interim ban on nanotechnology back in mid 2007, pending further information on the issue.

The new technology has implications for a multitude of sectors, from food, to paints and industrial manufacturing.

Chairman of the Organic Standards Committee for BFA Dr Andrew Monk noted “the [Standards] Committee reviewed the nanotechnology issue some 6 months ago using the most recent evidence and information available to industry. It resolved unanimously to not permit such technologies in organic food products regulated in Australia under the BFA Group's organic Bud logo. 

“The industry is a progressive, science based industry, however it is ultimately also fundamentally focused on its key stakeholder - the consumer - and ensuring that food products made available to them bearing a symbol such as the organic Bud confirms the best efforts are made, and the greatest precautions taken, in getting that food to their tables in a safe and natural way. It is simply too early in its development phase to give a technology such as nano a green light.” said Dr Monk.
 

Australian organic meat exporters say their business could be bolstered by the US Food and Drug Administration’s recent decision to approve the consumption of food from cloned animals and their offspring. 

“The decision has re-ignited a focus on organic – sales of organic beef and dairy products from Australia could be boosted as consumers in the United States search for an alternative source of protein and dairy products,” says Ms Dalene Brook, Business Development Manager of OBE Beef, Australia’s largest organic beef co-operative. 

Australia has the largest area of certified organic land in the world (approximately 11.8million hectares certified to international standards) due to vast areas of rangelands certified for organic cattle and fat land production. 

“Australia has some of the highest standards of food safety and traceability in the world protecting its primary industry environment. Australia’s clean and green reputation is highly regarded and a valuable asset for exporters in markets worldwide,” says Ms. Brook.

In south-west Queensland, OBE runs 70,000 certified organic cattle on 7 million certified organic hectares of land, and is well positioned to accommodate overseas markets seeking high-grade beef produced to organic standards. They are among a number of successful livestock industry groups. 

Certified organic is one of the few regulatory systems already in place to guarantee accountability of source in livestock, amid rising consumer concerns that any cloned meat introduced on market will not be labelled accordingly (meat from cloned animals would be identical to a natural source and impossible to identify). 

Spokesperson for Meat and Livestock Australia (MLA), Damon Whittock says that MLA will closely monitor the attitudes of consumers and export markets but that cloned meat was not likely to enter the Australian food chain in the near future. 

“Cloned cattle do exist in Australia (there are less than 100), but they are incredibly expensive to produce and used for research purposes. They do not enter the food chain. 

“Food Safety Australia New Zealand (FSANZ) will make the decisions on the safety of cloned beef… and consumer attitudes will ultimately determine whether it will be accepted and hence made commercially viable,” he said. 

BFA spokesperson and Standards Committee Chair, Dr. Andrew Monk says cloned meat concerns are the latest in a series of proposed food modification techniques that stringent standards for certified organic production offer an alternative to. Reproductive hormones and cloning are prohibited under the Australian Organic Standard.

“In a world of food increasingly tampered with in competition for the greatest slice of the 
agri-food market, certified organic is becoming a haven for those in search of naturally produced food,” he says. 

“With no planned requirement that labels identify cloned animal foods, and with the exemption of labeling of many GM foods, as well as products utilizing nanotechnology, organic logos such as the Australian Certified Organic “Bud” will hold even greater importance for consumers who care about where their food comes from, and how it is produced.”

Dr. Monk says BFA does not reject the progressive benefits of technology but takes a precautionary approach in the interests of human health and safety, while being unrepentantly focused on consumer concerns and interests. 

The BFA has a vision for the organic industry in Australia - to grow organic food sales to 10 per cent of the food market in Australia by 2020. Product traceability is one good reason to buy organic and assist the organic industry to achieve its goal. More information is available at http://www.bfa.com.au 

The announcement that EU energy ministers have agreed to increase the share of biofuels used in transport to 10% by 2020 has drawn criticism from The House of Commons Environmental Committee that are supported by UK organic group The Soil Association on the grounds bio-crops may be unsustainable and damaging to the environment.

In a recent press release The Soil Association stated it welcomed the committee's conclusions that any expansion of biofuel production may damage rather than benefit the environment. The committee said it recognised that some biofuels were sustainable and could be used to reduce emissions, but that current biofuel technology could result in damaging land use (including water pollution and loss of biodiversity) in the UK; and the loss of crucial rainforests round the world.

It said the government should concentrate on the use of sustainable biofuels, such as waste vegetable oil and other biofuel technologies with robust measures put in place to guard against environmental damage. 

Robin Maynard, Campaigns Director said:
“The Committee’s report exposes the false green mantle masking the true costs of and vested interests behind the push for biofuels. The main crops proposed for producing biofuels, oil-seed rape and sugar-beet, are simply old commodity crops seeking to revive flagging markets. 

“The biotech industry is trying to use biofuels to by-pass public hostility to GM crops.”

“If the EU and UK Governments are serious about enabling agriculture to play its part in addressing climate change, they should support, sustainable organic farming which uses less energy to produce our food and brings proven benefits to the environment.”

The (Australian) Climate Institute in its report Agricultural Alliance on Climate Change has said supply of biofuel in Australia is expected to exceed the Government’s target of 350 ML by 2010, and significant further expansion of domestic biofuel production in the medium term would be possible with step changes in production technologies, or specific policy action in addition to the introduction of emissions trading.

The report said realising the benefits of increased production and use of biofuel would require all stakeholders to be involved in developing practical pathways for commercialising biofuels that were environmentally sustainable and did not disrupt food and fibre production; and would take a significant increase in research and development into prospective second generation biofuels that were relevant to Australia.

In a speech at the Energy Biotechnology Frontier Symposium last November, Professor John Manners from the CSIRO Plant Industry said there are currently three potential models of biofuel production:

1) Where the same feedstock can be used for either food or biofuel production interchangeably (eg ethanol production from sugarcane and corn in Brazil and the USA/ the production of biodiesel from vegetable oils in Europe. This model has raised the food versus fuel debate and is considered by many to be unsustainable.)

2) Where a biofuel is produced from a waste co-product of food production (Eg The production of ethanol from corn stover residues and the fibrous bagasse that remains after juice extraction from sugarcane. These are financially attractive renewable feedstocks that could be quickly adopted industries, but have a high expense of fermentation of residues.) 

3) Where marginal land that is not highly suited to food production is used to produce hardy non-food crops that act as dedicated feedstocks for biofuels. (Examples of these under discussion are the grass Miscanthus as a feedstock for ethanol and the shrub Jatropha as a source of oil for biodiesel, but these will require the establishment of totally new production and processing industries. Sugarcane has many qualities that make it attractive as a feedstock for biofuel production.)

Data Link Soil Association Press Release: http://www.soilassociation.org/web/sa/saweb.nsf/
848d689047cb466780256a6b00298980/775949301b9f1311802573d70048d60f!OpenDocument 

Data Link Climate Institute Agricultural Alliance on Climate Change Report http://www.climateinstitute.org.au//index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=97&Itemid=41 

Data Link speech Professor John Manners at Energy Biotechnology Frontier Symposium: http://www.csiro.au/files/files/phb6.pdf

By Shane Heaton, BFA Nutritionist

A third of cancers are caused by diet and lack of exercise and could be prevented, according to a new report from the World Cancer Research Fund that took 200 scientists 5 years to produce. They reviewed 7,000 studies on causes of cancer and have now published the most authoritative overview of the role that food, drink, obesity and exercise play in causing cancer. So here¹s their top 7 tips for a healthier life, free of cancer, followed by two more from me at the end:

1. Avoid being overweight. Excess body fat was found to trigger various cancers and a body mass index (BMI) of 25 or less should be your goal. To calculate your BMI, divide your weight in kilograms by your height in meters squared. For example 80kgs divided by 1.8 meters squared = 24.7. Over 25 is overweight, and over 30 is obese. Under 18.5 is considered unhealthy also.

2. To keep that weight off, the next tip is an obvious one: Exercise regularly. Thirty minutes of vigorous exercise daily, or 60 minutes of moderate exercise. If like me you know you should but don¹t make the time ­ it's time to start.

3. Still on the theme of avoiding excess weight, the third tip is to avoid energy dense foods rich in fat and sugar. Obvious culprits are fried foods, fast food, and sugary soft drinks.

4. So on a more positive note, what should you eat? Lots of fruits and vegetables. At least 5 portions a day, though nine is better. Nutritionists actually used to recommend 9 portions of fruit and veg a day, and the advice only changed to 5 to give people eating very little fruit and veg a more realistic target! I once asked Craig Sams what he thought of the 5-a-day campaign and he replied, 'I'm not halving my fruit and veg intake for anyone!' In addition to fruits and vegetables the WCRF recommend eating cereals, grains or pulses with every meal.

5. Next is a controversial tip that was all over the media when this report was first released. Eat less red meat, and don't eat preserved meat like ham and bacon at all. Too much red meat was found to raise the risk of various cancers, and regular consumption of meats preserved with sodium nitrite, like ham and bacon, were found to raise the risk of cancer by around 10 per cent. See my additional tip 9 below for an important caveat to this advice.

6. Don't drink too much alcohol. The WCF panel recommended women should have no more than one drink a day, and men no more than two.

7. Reduce your salt intake to no more than 6 grams a day. Salt's been known to raise your blood pressure for years, but excessive consumption of salt or salty foods has now also been linked to a greater cancer risk.

So they're the WCRF¹s top 7 tips for avoiding cancer, but there are at least two more I think really should be pointed outŠ

8. If you smoke, quit. According to the WCRF, the seven tips above ³could play almost as big a role as stopping smoking in preserving us from disease.² So you can see how significant a difference stopping smoking can make ­ a bigger difference than the next 7 anti-cancer tips combined! If you don¹t smoke, it may be a revelation to you that not exercising or eating healthily is almost as bad as smoking, so a good incentive to follow these seven tips, huh?

9. And finally, a capstone tip that the WCRF overlooked. Go organic.
Occupational and environmental exposures to pesticides have been repeatedly linked to various cancers, and dietary exposures are an unnecessary burden on your body. So yes, eat more fruit and veg as in tip number 4 above, but make them organic. You¹ll feel better about eating them and probably find it easier to eat more fruit and veg because of it. Furthermore, the advice in tip 5 above needs one important caveat: If you enjoy red meat, ham and bacon, enjoy them in moderation by making them organic. Organic red meat actually contains more of various substances known to be cancer-protective, and organic ham and bacon aren¹t preserved with sodium nitrite ­ the main risk factor leading to the WCRF advice to avoid them completely.

View Upcoming Events; Submit your news to the editors

Your Organic Advantage
Editor: Holly Vyner

BIOLOGICAL FARMERS OF AUSTRALIA CO OP LTD - THE VOICE OF ORGANICS
http://www.bfa.com.au/
Ph: 07 3350 5716 (International +61 7 3350 5716)
 
AUSTRALIAN CERTIFIED ORGANIC PTY LTD - THE STANDARD IN ORGANICS
http://www.australianorganic.com.au/

Ph: 07 3350 5706 (International +61 7 3350 5706)

This message contains privileged and confidential information intended only for the use of the addressee named above. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, you must not disseminate copy or take any action in reliance on it. If you have received this message in error, please notify Biological Farmers of Australia Co-op Ltd immediately. Any views expressed in, or attached to, this message are those of the individual sender, except where the sender specifically, and with authority, states them to be the views of Biological Farmers of Australia Co-op Ltd.
Biological Farmers of Australia Co-op Ltd may use virus scanning software, but makes no representation or warranty regarding the virus free status of this message or of any attachment. The opening of any attachment is at the recipient's risk and Biological Farmers of Australia Co-op Ltd shall not be responsible for any consequences of so doing.