Conscious Evolution TV

Page 2,279«..10 20..2,2782,2792,280 2,281..2,290 2,300..»

TheHonestGuys – YouTube

Posted: February 3, 2017 at 9:41 am

Who we are, and what we do....

.................................................

If you enjoyed this video and would like to experience more please Subscribe to our channel (It's Free). NEW VIDEOS every Tuesday. Subscribe: http://www.youtube.com/theh...

We write and create high quality Guided Meditations videos that are freely viewable on YouTube. We have been creating these meditations since 2009.

The meditations were begun with one purpose: simply to try and help people. Every meditation is produced with genuine care and love for those people who use them, because we too, have needed the kind of help our meditations are trying to offer others.

Our ethos is to be as all-inclusive and as neutral as possible. We have no religious or other affiliations and try to keep most of our meditations suitable for everyone. We always welcome comments, feedback & suggestions and actively engage with our subscribers via our Facebook page. .................................................

Digital Downloads: A few places where you can purchase THG meditations.

CDBaby: http://ow.ly/ApQYy iTunes: http://ow.ly/ApR4V Amazon: http://tiny.cc/wc5qkx Google: http://ow.ly/ApRsq

Streaming on Tidal - http://goo.gl/0dMF2h

Streaming on Spotify - http://goo.gl/vlkA5u .................................................

Social media - Interact with us here :

Facebook : Our main THG community focused page. Interact on a daily basis. http://www.facebook.com/THG...

Twitter : Reference place to keep up to date with THG. http://twitter.com/TheHones...

Instagram: Behind the scenes photos of the THG team. http://instagram.com/thehon...

Google+ : Our Google+ profile page https://plus.google.com/+Th...

Website : Official website of 'The Honest Guys' http://www.thehonestguys.co.uk ..................................................

Check out some of the other videos on this channel (over 230+ and counting!) https://www.youtube.com/use...

..................................................

Check out the complete THG playlists here : https://www.youtube.com/use...

Samples of some of our playlists :

GUIDED MEDITATIONS Feeling tired or stressed? Sit back, relax and let the gentle guiding voice take you into a profound and deep state of relaxation. https://www.youtube.com/pla...

EPIC POWER-MEDITATIONS Epic power meditations are a new form of meditation/visualizations using the amazing skills of some outstanding composers and musicians. https://www.youtube.com/pla...

MIDDLE EARTH MEDITATIONS Escape the hustle and bustle of everyday life with these guided retreats into Middle Earth. Each story averages around 18 minutes and is designed as a powerful and effective respite for the mind, from the stresses and strains of daily life. Each story is unique, with narration, music and ambient sound effects brought vividly to life within your own mind. https://www.youtube.com/pla...

RELAXATION MUSIC & MEDITATION TOOLS These videos are designed to be played in the background, to help with study, sleep and relaxation. https://www.youtube.com/pla... .................................................. Show less

Read the original post:

TheHonestGuys - YouTube

Written by simmons |

February 3rd, 2017 at 9:41 am

Posted in Meditation

Organic Foods and Products – The New York Times

Posted: February 1, 2017 at 11:44 pm

Free Gentle Breath Meditations – an introduction | Unimed Living

Posted: at 11:44 pm

The Gentle Breath Meditation is simply a tool for reconnection through the focus on developing the quality of your breath.

The Free Meditation Library offers a range of supportive gentle breath meditations. These instructional meditations were recorded with a live audience of 150+ participants and are a sample of the many different ways the Gentle Breath Meditation can be delivered.

You may find particular meditations are more useful at different times depending on how you are feeling.

Enjoy meeting yourself there is nothing greater!

Once you know the techniques you can listen and simply apply them until such time that you can do the gentle breath meditation without the audio. Of course, it is also fine to continue with the audio support, as many do. More meditations will also be made available here in coming months.

Download one or the whole series and enjoy some time with yourself.

Filed under

Connection, Meditation, Breath, Gentle Breath Meditation

See the rest here:

Free Gentle Breath Meditations - an introduction | Unimed Living

Written by admin |

February 1st, 2017 at 11:44 pm

Posted in Meditation

Courses & Retreats – Meditation & Buddhism

Posted: at 11:44 pm

Courses & Retreats

Our meditation courses and retreats are an ideal way to get a gain experience of meditation and inner peace. These courses examine a particular topic in greater depth than would be possible in a drop-in meditation class.

Our courses and retreats are open to everyone and are suitable for all levels of experience, including beginners. For more information about specific courses or retreats, select a course from the list below or the menu on the right.

Buddhism presents scientific methods for improving our happiness and good qualities. The practices presented in Kadampa Buddhism are particularly suitable for our busy modern lives and enable us to transform problems into causes of happiness, improve relationships and create lasting inner peace. On this day course Gen Kelsang Dornying will explain some of the various mind-training techniques taught by Buddha and how to apply them both in meditation and daily life. By practising these instructions we will be able to let go of anger, anxiety and other painful thoughts and feelings, and replace them with peaceful, positive states of mind.

We are alive therefore we will die. This is the simplest, most...

According to Buddha all suffering and sickness, mental and physical, are caused by negative and painful states of mind, which he called the delusions. Normally, these delusions feel deeply ingrained. But throughconnecting to Medicine Buddha we can experience the pure nature of our mind, and heal ourselves of these inner diseases.

These weekend meditation retreats are suitable for everyone, and provide an excellent introduction to meditation.

Empowered by white taras powerful blessings and inspired by Gen Rabtens teachings,...

Read the original post:

Courses & Retreats - Meditation & Buddhism

Written by simmons |

February 1st, 2017 at 11:44 pm

Posted in Meditation

Organic Foods: What You Need to Know About Eating Organic …

Posted: January 31, 2017 at 6:43 am

The Benefits and Basics of Organic Food and How to Keep It Affordable

Organic food has become very popular. But navigating the maze of organic food labels, benefits, and claims can be confusing. Is organic food really better for your mental and physical health? Do GMOs and pesticides cause cancer and other diseases? What do all the labels mean? This guide can help you make better choices about shopping organic, including what to focus on and how to make eating organic more affordable.

The term organic refers to the way agricultural products are grown and processed. While the regulations vary from country to country, in the U.S., organic crops must be grown without the use of synthetic pesticides, bioengineered genes (GMOs), petroleum-based fertilizers, and sewage sludge-based fertilizers.

Organic livestock raised for meat, eggs, and dairy products must have access to the outdoors and be given organic feed. They may not be given antibiotics, growth hormones, or any animal by-products.

How your food is grown or raised can have a major impact on your mental and emotional health as well as the environment. Organic foods often have more beneficial nutrients, such as antioxidants, than their conventionally-grown counterparts and people with allergies to foods, chemicals, or preservatives often find their symptoms lessen or go away when they eat only organic foods.

Organic produce contains fewer pesticides.Chemicals such as fungicides, herbicides, and insecticides are widely used in conventional agriculture and residues remain on (and in) the food we eat.

Organic food is often fresher because it doesnt contain preservatives that make it last longer. Organic produce is often (but not always, so watch where it is from) produced on smaller farms near where it is sold.

Organic farming is better for the environment.Organic farming practices reduce pollution, conserve water, reduce soil erosion, increase soil fertility, and use less energy. Farming without pesticides is also better for nearby birds and animals as well as people who live close to farms.

Organically raised animals are NOT given antibiotics, growth hormones, or fed animal byproducts. Feeding livestock animal byproducts increases the risk of mad cow disease (BSE) and the use of antibiotics can create antibiotic-resistant strains of bacteria. Organically-raised animals are given more space to move around and access to the outdoors, which help to keep them healthy.

Organic meat and milk are richer in certain nutrients. Results of a 2016 European study show that levels of certain nutrients, including omega-3 fatty acids, were up to 50 percent higher in organic meat and milk than in conventionally raised versions.

Organic food is GMO-free.Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) or genetically engineered (GE) foods are plants whose DNA has been altered in ways that cannot occur in nature or in traditional crossbreeding, most commonly in order to beresistant to pesticides or produce an insecticide.

Unlike organic standards, there is no specific definition for local food. It could be grown in your local community, your state, your region, or your country. During large portions of the year it is usually possible to find food grown close to home at places such as a farmers market.

Financial: Money stays within the local economy. More money goes directly to the farmer, instead of to things like marketing and distribution.

Transportation: In the U.S., for example, the average distance a meal travels from the farm to the dinner plate is over 1,500 miles. Produce must be picked while still unripe and then gassed to "ripen" it after transport. Or the food is highly processed in factories using preservatives, irradiation, and other means to keep it stable for transport.

Freshness: Local food is harvested when ripe and thus fresher and full of flavor.

Small local farmers often use organic methods but sometimes cannot afford to become certified organic. Visit a farmers market and talk with the farmers to find out what methods they use.

The ongoing debate about the effects of GMOs on health and the environment is a controversial one. In most cases, GMOs are engineered to make food crops resistant to herbicides and/or to produce an insecticide. For example, much of the sweet corn consumed in the U.S. is genetically engineered to be resistant to the herbicide Roundup and to produce its own insecticide, Bt Toxin.

GMOs are also commonly found in U.S. crops such as soybeans, alfalfa, squash, zucchini, papaya, and canola, and are present in many breakfast cereals and much of the processed food that we eat. If the ingredients on a package include corn syrup or soy lecithin, chances are it contains GMOs.

The use of toxic herbicides like Roundup (glyphosate) has increased 15 times since GMOs were introduced. While the World Health Organization announced that glyphosate is probably carcinogenic to humans, there is still some controversy over the level of health risks posed by the use of pesticides.

While the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the biotech companies that engineer GMOs insist they are safe, many food safety advocates point out that no long term studies have ever been conducted to confirm the safety of GMO use, while some animal studies have indicated that consuming GMOs may cause internal organ damage, slowed brain growth, and thickening of the digestive tract.

GMOs have been linked to increased food allergens and gastro-intestinal problems in humans. While many people think that altering the DNA of a plant or animal can increase the risk of cancer, the research has so far proven inconclusive.

As mentioned above, one of the primary benefits of eating organic is lower levels of pesticides. However, despite popular belief, organic farms do use pesticides. The difference is that they only use naturally-derived pesticides, rather than the synthetic pesticides used on conventional commercial farms. Natural pesticides are believed to be less toxic, however, some have been found to have health risks. That said, your exposure to harmful pesticides will be lower when eating organic.

Most of us have anaccumulated build-up of pesticide exposurein our bodies due to numerous years of exposure. This chemical "body burden" as it is medically known could lead to health issues such as headaches, birth defects, and added strain on weakened immune systems.

Some studies have indicated that the use of pesticides even at low doses can increase the risk of certain cancers, such as leukemia, lymphoma, brain tumors, breast cancer and prostate cancer.

Children and fetuses are most vulnerableto pesticide exposure because their immune systems, bodies, and brains are still developing. Exposure at an early age may cause developmental delays, behavioral disorders, autism, immune system harm, and motor dysfunction.

Pregnant women are more vulnerable due to the added stress pesticides put on their already taxed organs. Plus, pesticides can be passed from mother to child in the womb, as well as through breast milk.

The widespread use of pesticides has also led to the emergence of super weeds and super bugs, which can only be killed with extremely toxic poisons like 2,4-Dichlorophenoxyacetic acid (a major ingredient in Agent Orange).

Rinsing reduces but does not eliminate pesticides. Peeling sometimes helps, but valuable nutrients often go down the drain with the skin. The best approach: eat a varied diet, wash and scrub all produce thoroughly, and buy organic when possible.

Organic food is often more expensive than conventionally-grown food. But if you set some priorities, it may be possible to purchase organic food and staywithin your food budget.

Some types of conventionally-grown produce are much higher in pesticides than others, and should be avoided. Others are low enough that buying non-organic is relatively safe. The Environmental Working Group, a nonprofit organization that analyzes the results of government pesticide testing in the U.S., offers a annually-updated list that can help guide your choices.

Fruits and vegetables where the organic label matters most

According to the Environmental Working Group, a nonprofit organization that analyzes the results of government pesticide testing in the U.S., the following fruits and vegetables have the highest pesticide levels so are best to buy organic:

Fruits and vegetables you don't need to buy organic

Known as the Clean 15, these conventionally-grown fruits and vegetables are generally low in pesticides.

While prominent organizations such as the American Heart Association maintain that eating saturated fat from any source increases the risk of heart disease, other nutrition experts maintain that eating organic grass-fed meat and organic dairy products doesnt carry the same risks. Its not the saturated fat thats the problem, they say, but the unnatural diet of an industrially-raised animal that includes corn, hormones, and medication.

According to Animal Feed, conventionally raised animals in U.S. can be given:

Shop at farmers' markets.Many cities, as well as small towns, host a weekly farmers' market, where local farmers sell their produce at an open-air street market, often at a discount to grocery stores.

Join a food co-op.A natural foods co-op, or cooperative grocery store typically offers lower prices to members, who pay an annual fee to belong

Join a Community Supported Agriculture (CSA) farm,in which individuals and families join up to purchase "shares" of produce in bulk, directly from a local farm. Localandorganic!

Buy in season Fruits and vegetables are cheapest and freshest when they are in season. Find out when produce is delivered to your market so you're buying the freshest food possible.

Shop around Compare the price of organic items at the grocery store, the farmers market and other venues (even the freezer aisle).

Remember that organic doesnt always equal healthyMaking junk food sound healthy is a common marketing ploy in the food industry but organic baked goods, desserts, and snacks are usually still very high in sugar, salt, fat, or calories. It pays to read food labels carefully.

Organic food is more labor intensive since the farmers do not use pesticides, chemical fertilizers, or drugs. Organic certification is expensive and organic feed for animals can cost twice as much. Organic farms tend to be smaller than conventional farms, which means fixed costs and overhead must be distributed across smaller produce volumes without government subsidies.

What do food labels such as organic, "natural," "free-range," and "non-GMO" really mean? Understanding the different terms is essential when youre shopping for organic foods. Read Organic Food Labels:What they Really Mean.

Organic Foods and Cafe

Posted: at 6:43 am

WHY ORGANIC?

Organic means growing our food, which is to nourish us, without chemical aids during the growing process such as fertilisers, pesticides, fungicides, herbacides, larbicides etc and during the processing like colours, sweeteners, preservatives, colouring, stabilisers, emulsifiers. Why is this important? Well our body knows how to break down and use fats, carbohydrates to sugars, protein, amino acids etc. The question is what about sodium benzoate or potassium sorbate? Well sorry our body does not know what to do with that. So what happens? These chemicals are dealt with by either being stored in the body, normally in fat or in the form of a tumour or syst (not necessarily carcinogenic) or taken out of our body by a white blood cell or bound by a trace element so that it can be identified as "trash" and then removed. This sounds good, but trace elements and white blood cells build our immune system which is supposed to keep us healthy by fighting o and identifying diseases, so in effect our body is fighting what we eat every morning, lunch and dinner. We are constantly under attack by whatever we eat!!! The net effect is that our populations get sick a lot more now, than in the past and diseases like cancer grows. Today we have overweight people that are infact totally malnourished with weak immune systems.

But there is hope. Don't panic just eat organic!

So while organic does not include all the nasties, what does it include? At OFC we make it our mission to buy as many Demeter Certified Biodynamic products because they are our guarantee that crops have been grown slowly and in harmony with nature. This ensures that the crop grows strong so we have the highest amount of nutrients and trace elements possible. These build our immune system and gives our body the tools to repair itself.So my advice is a lifestyle of biodynamic food, with rest rather than fatigue, and peace rather than stress.

This is the recipe for success. Nils El Accad.

Go here to read the rest:

Organic Foods and Cafe

Written by simmons |

January 31st, 2017 at 6:43 am

Posted in Organic Food

Organic farming – Wikipedia

Posted: at 6:43 am

Organic farming is an alternative agricultural system which originated early in the 20th century in reaction to rapidly changing farming practices. Organic agriculture continues to be developed by various organic agriculture organizations today. It relies on fertilizers of organic origin such as compost, manure, green manure, and bone meal and places emphasis on techniques such as crop rotation and companion planting. Biological pest control, mixed cropping and the fostering of insect predators are encouraged. In general, organic standards are designed to allow the use of naturally occurring substances while prohibiting or strictly limiting synthetic substances.[2] For instance, naturally occurring pesticides such as pyrethrin and rotenone are permitted, while synthetic fertilizers and pesticides are generally prohibited. Synthetic substances that are allowed include, for example, copper sulfate, elemental sulfur and Ivermectin. Genetically modified organisms, nanomaterials, human sewage sludge, plant growth regulators, hormones, and antibiotic use in livestock husbandry are prohibited.[3][4] Reasons for advocation of organic farming include real or perceived advantages in sustainability,[5][6]openness, self-sufficiency, autonomy/independence,[6]health, food security, and food safety, although the match between perception and reality is continually challenged.

Organic agricultural methods are internationally regulated and legally enforced by many nations, based in large part on the standards set by the International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movements (IFOAM), an international umbrella organization for organic farming organizations established in 1972.[7] Organic agriculture can be defined as:

an integrated farming system that strives for sustainability, the enhancement of soil fertility and biological diversity whilst, with rare exceptions, prohibiting synthetic pesticides, antibiotics, synthetic fertilizers, genetically modified organisms, and growth hormones.[8][9][10][11]

Since 1990 the market for organic food and other products has grown rapidly, reaching $63 billion worldwide in 2012.[12]:25 This demand has driven a similar increase in organically managed farmland that grew from 2001 to 2011 at a compounding rate of 8.9% per annum.[13] As of 2011, approximately 37,000,000 hectares (91,000,000 acres) worldwide were farmed organically, representing approximately 0.9 percent of total world farmland.[12]:1

Agriculture was practiced for thousands of years without the use of artificial chemicals. Artificial fertilizers were first created during the mid-19th century. These early fertilizers were cheap, powerful, and easy to transport in bulk. Similar advances occurred in chemical pesticides in the 1940s, leading to the decade being referred to as the 'pesticide era'.[14] These new agricultural techniques, while beneficial in the short term, had serious longer term side effects such as soil compaction, erosion, and declines in overall soil fertility, along with health concerns about toxic chemicals entering the food supply.[15]:10 In the late 1800s and early 1900s, soil biology scientists began to seek ways to remedy these side effects while still maintaining higher production.

Biodynamic agriculture was the first modern system of agriculture to focus exclusively on organic methods.[16][17][18][19]: Its development began in 1924 with a series of eight lectures on agriculture given by Rudolf Steiner.[20][21] These lectures, the first known presentation of what later came to be known as organic agriculture,[16] were held in response to a request by farmers who noticed degraded soil conditions and a deterioration in the health and quality of crops and livestock resulting from the use of chemical fertilizers.[22] The one hundred eleven attendees, less than half of whom were farmers, came from six countries, primarily Germany and Poland.[16] The lectures were published in November 1924; the first English translation appeared in 1928 as The Agriculture Course.[23]

In 1921, Albert Howard and his wife Gabrielle Howard, accomplished botanists, founded an Institute of Plant Industry to improve traditional farming methods in India. Among other things, they brought improved implements and improved animal husbandry methods from their scientific training; then by incorporating aspects of the local traditional methods, developed protocalls for the rotation of crops, erosion prevention techniques, and the systematic use of composts and manures.[24] Stimulated by these experiences of traditional farming, when Albert Howard returned to Britain in the early 1930s[25] he began to promulgate a system of natural agriculture.

In July 1939, Ehrenfried Pfeiffer, the author of the standard work on biodynamic agriculture (Bio-Dynamic Farming and Gardening),[26] came to the UK at the invitation of Walter James, 4th Baron Northbourne as a presenter at the Betteshanger Summer School and Conference on Biodynamic Farming at Northbourne's farm in Kent.[27] One of the chief purposes of the conference was to bring together the proponents of various approaches to organic agriculture in order that they might cooperate within a larger movement. Howard attended the conference, where he met Pfeiffer.[28] In the following year, Northbourne published his manifesto of organic farming, Look to the Land, in which he coined the term "organic farming." The Betteshanger conference has been described as the 'missing link' between biodynamic agriculture and other forms of organic farming.[27]

In 1940 Howard published his An Agricultural Testament. In this book he adopted Northbourne's terminology of "organic farming."[29] Howard's work spread widely, and he became known as the "father of organic farming" for his work in applying scientific knowledge and principles to various traditional and natural methods.[15]:45 In the United States J.I. Rodale, who was keenly interested both in Howard's ideas and in biodynamics,[30] founded in the 1940s both a working organic farm for trials and experimentation, The Rodale Institute, and the Rodale Press to teach and advocate organic methods to the wider public. These became important influences on the spread of organic agriculture. Further work was done by Lady Eve Balfour in the United Kingdom, and many others across the world.

Increasing environmental awareness in the general population in modern times has transformed the originally supply-driven organic movement to a demand-driven one. Premium prices and some government subsidies attracted farmers. In the developing world, many producers farm according to traditional methods that are comparable to organic farming, but not certified, and that may not include the latest scientific advancements in organic agriculture. In other cases, farmers in the developing world have converted to modern organic methods for economic reasons.[31]

Biodynamic agriculturists, who based their work on Steiner's spiritually-oriented anthroposophy, used the term "organic" to indicate that a farm should be viewed as a living organism,[19]:1719[27] in the sense of the following quotation:

"An organic farm, properly speaking, is not one that uses certain methods and substances and avoids others; it is a farm whose structure is formed in imitation of the structure of a natural system that has the integrity, the independence and the benign dependence of an organism"

The use of "organic" popularized by Howard and Rodale, on the other hand, refers more narrowly to the use of organic matter derived from plant compost and animal manures to improve the humus content of soils, grounded in the work of early soil scientists who developed what was then called "humus farming." Since the early 1940s the two camps have tended to merge.[32][33]

"Organic agriculture is a production system that sustains the health of soils, ecosystems and people. It relies on ecological processes, biodiversity and cycles adapted to local conditions, rather than the use of inputs with adverse effects. Organic agriculture combines tradition, innovation and science to benefit the shared environment and promote fair relationships and a good quality of life for all involved..."

Organic farming methods combine scientific knowledge of ecology and modern technology with traditional farming practices based on naturally occurring biological processes. Organic farming methods are studied in the field of agroecology. While conventional agriculture uses synthetic pesticides and water-soluble synthetically purified fertilizers, organic farmers are restricted by regulations to using natural pesticides and fertilizers. An example of a natural pesticide is pyrethrin, which is found naturally in the Chrysanthemum flower. The principal methods of organic farming include crop rotation, green manures and compost, biological pest control, and mechanical cultivation. These measures use the natural environment to enhance agricultural productivity: legumes are planted to fix nitrogen into the soil, natural insect predators are encouraged, crops are rotated to confuse pests and renew soil, and natural materials such as potassium bicarbonate[35] and mulches are used to control disease and weeds. Genetically modified seeds and animals are excluded.

While organic is fundamentally different from conventional because of the use of carbon based fertilizers compared with highly soluble synthetic based fertilizers and biological pest control instead of synthetic pesticides, organic farming and large-scale conventional farming are not entirely mutually exclusive. Many of the methods developed for organic agriculture have been borrowed by more conventional agriculture. For example, Integrated Pest Management is a multifaceted strategy that uses various organic methods of pest control whenever possible, but in conventional farming could include synthetic pesticides only as a last resort.[36]

Organic farming encourages Crop diversity. The science of agroecology has revealed the benefits of polyculture (multiple crops in the same space), which is often employed in organic farming.[37] Planting a variety of vegetable crops supports a wider range of beneficial insects, soil microorganisms, and other factors that add up to overall farm health. Crop diversity helps environments thrive and protects species from going extinct.[38]

Organic farming relies heavily on the natural breakdown of organic matter, using techniques like green manure and composting, to replace nutrients taken from the soil by previous crops. This biological process, driven by microorganisms such as mycorrhiza, allows the natural production of nutrients in the soil throughout the growing season, and has been referred to as feeding the soil to feed the plant. Organic farming uses a variety of methods to improve soil fertility, including crop rotation, cover cropping, reduced tillage, and application of compost. By reducing tillage, soil is not inverted and exposed to air; less carbon is lost to the atmosphere resulting in more soil organic carbon. This has an added benefit of carbon sequestration, which can reduce green house gases and help reverse climate change.

Plants need nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium, as well as micronutrients and symbiotic relationships with fungi and other organisms to flourish, but getting enough nitrogen, and particularly synchronization so that plants get enough nitrogen at the right time (when plants need it most), is a challenge for organic farmers.[39]Crop rotation and green manure ("cover crops") help to provide nitrogen through legumes (more precisely, the Fabaceae family), which fix nitrogen from the atmosphere through symbiosis with rhizobial bacteria. Intercropping, which is sometimes used for insect and disease control, can also increase soil nutrients, but the competition between the legume and the crop can be problematic and wider spacing between crop rows is required. Crop residues can be ploughed back into the soil, and different plants leave different amounts of nitrogen, potentially aiding synchronization.[39] Organic farmers also use animal manure, certain processed fertilizers such as seed meal and various mineral powders such as rock phosphate and green sand, a naturally occurring form of potash that provides potassium. Together these methods help to control erosion. In some cases pH may need to be amended. Natural pH amendments include lime and sulfur, but in the U.S. some compounds such as iron sulfate, aluminum sulfate, magnesium sulfate, and soluble boron products are allowed in organic farming.[40]:43

Mixed farms with both livestock and crops can operate as ley farms, whereby the land gathers fertility through growing nitrogen-fixing forage grasses such as white clover or alfalfa and grows cash crops or cereals when fertility is established. Farms without livestock ("stockless") may find it more difficult to maintain soil fertility, and may rely more on external inputs such as imported manure as well as grain legumes and green manures, although grain legumes may fix limited nitrogen because they are harvested. Horticultural farms that grow fruits and vegetables in protected conditions often relay even more on external inputs.[39]

Biological research into soil and soil organisms has proven beneficial to organic farming. Varieties of bacteria and fungi break down chemicals, plant matter and animal waste into productive soil nutrients. In turn, they produce benefits of healthier yields and more productive soil for future crops.[41] Fields with less or no manure display significantly lower yields, due to decreased soil microbe community. Increased manure improves biological activity, providing a healthier, more arable soil system and higher yields.[42]

Organic weed management promotes weed suppression, rather than weed elimination, by enhancing crop competition and phytotoxic effects on weeds.[43] Organic farmers integrate cultural, biological, mechanical, physical and chemical tactics to manage weeds without synthetic herbicides.

Organic standards require rotation of annual crops,[44] meaning that a single crop cannot be grown in the same location without a different, intervening crop. Organic crop rotations frequently include weed-suppressive cover crops and crops with dissimilar life cycles to discourage weeds associated with a particular crop.[43] Research is ongoing to develop organic methods to promote the growth of natural microorganisms that suppress the growth or germination of common weeds.[45]

Other cultural practices used to enhance crop competitiveness and reduce weed pressure include selection of competitive crop varieties, high-density planting, tight row spacing, and late planting into warm soil to encourage rapid crop germination.[43]

Mechanical and physical weed control practices used on organic farms can be broadly grouped as:[46]

Some critics, citing work published in 1997 by David Pimentel of Cornell University,[48] which described an epidemic of soil erosion worldwide, have raised concerned that tillage contribute to the erosion epidemic.[49] The FAO and other organizations have advocated a 'no-till' approach to both conventional and organic farming, and point out in particular that crop rotation techniques used in organic farming are excellent no-till approaches.[49][50] A study published in 2005 by Pimentel and colleagues[51] confirmed that 'Crop rotations and cover cropping (green manure) typical of organic agriculture reduce soil erosion, pest problems, and pesticide use.' Some naturally sourced chemicals are allowed for herbicidal use. These include certain formulations of acetic acid (concentrated vinegar), corn gluten meal, and essential oils. A few selective bioherbicides based on fungal pathogens have also been developed. At this time, however, organic herbicides and bioherbicides play a minor role in the organic weed control toolbox.[46]

Weeds can be controlled by grazing. For example, geese have been used successfully to weed a range of organic crops including cotton, strawberries, tobacco, and corn,[52] reviving the practice of keeping cotton patch geese, common in the southern U.S. before the 1950s. Similarly, some rice farmers introduce ducks and fish to wet paddy fields to eat both weeds and insects.[53]

Organisms aside from weeds that cause problems on organic farms include arthropods (e.g., insects, mites), nematodes, fungi and bacteria. Organic practices include, but are not limited to:

Examples of predatory beneficial insects include minute pirate bugs, big-eyed bugs, and to a lesser extent ladybugs (which tend to fly away), all of which eat a wide range of pests. Lacewings are also effective, but tend to fly away. Praying mantis tend to move more slowly and eat less heavily. Parasitoid wasps tend to be effective for their selected prey, but like all small insects can be less effective outdoors because the wind controls their movement. Predatory mites are effective for controlling other mites.[40]:6690

Naturally derived insecticides allowed for use on organic farms use include Bacillus thuringiensis (a bacterial toxin), pyrethrum (a chrysanthemum extract), spinosad (a bacterial metabolite), neem (a tree extract) and rotenone (a legume root extract). Fewer than 10% of organic farmers use these pesticides regularly; one survey found that only 5.3% of vegetable growers in California use rotenone while 1.7% use pyrethrum.[55]:26 These pesticides are not always more safe or environmentally friendly than synthetic pesticides and can cause harm.[40]:92 The main criterion for organic pesticides is that they are naturally derived, and some naturally derived substances have been controversial. Controversial natural pesticides include rotenone, copper, nicotine sulfate, and pyrethrums[56][57]Rotenone and pyrethrum are particularly controversial because they work by attacking the nervous system, like most conventional insecticides. Rotenone is extremely toxic to fish[58] and can induce symptoms resembling Parkinson's disease in mammals.[59][60] Although pyrethrum (natural pyrethrins) is more effective against insects when used with piperonyl butoxide (which retards degradation of the pyrethrins),[61] organic standards generally do not permit use of the latter substance.[62][63][64]

Naturally derived fungicides allowed for use on organic farms include the bacteria Bacillus subtilis and Bacillus pumilus; and the fungus Trichoderma harzianum. These are mainly effective for diseases affecting roots. Compost tea contains a mix of beneficial microbes, which may attack or out-compete certain plant pathogens,[65] but variability among formulations and preparation methods may contribute to inconsistent results or even dangerous growth of toxic microbes in compost teas.[66]

Some naturally derived pesticides are not allowed for use on organic farms. These include nicotine sulfate, arsenic, and strychnine.[67]

Synthetic pesticides allowed for use on organic farms include insecticidal soaps and horticultural oils for insect management; and Bordeaux mixture, copper hydroxide and sodium bicarbonate for managing fungi.[67] Copper sulfate and Bordeaux mixture (copper sulfate plus lime), approved for organic use in various jurisdictions,[62][63][67] can be more environmentally problematic than some synthetic fungicides dissallowed in organic farming[68][69] Similar concerns apply to copper hydroxide. Repeated application of copper sulfate or copper hydroxide as a fungicide may eventually result in copper accumulation to toxic levels in soil,[70] and admonitions to avoid excessive accumulations of copper in soil appear in various organic standards and elsewhere. Environmental concerns for several kinds of biota arise at average rates of use of such substances for some crops.[71] In the European Union, where replacement of copper-based fungicides in organic agriculture is a policy priority,[72] research is seeking alternatives for organic production.[73]

Raising livestock and poultry, for meat, dairy and eggs, is another traditional farming activity that complements growing. Organic farms attempt to provide animals with natural living conditions and feed. Organic certification verifies that livestock are raised according to the USDA organic regulations throughout their lives.[74] These regulations include the requirement that all animal feed must be certified organic.

Organic livestock may be, and must be, treated with medicine when they are sick, but drugs cannot be used to promote growth, their feed must be organic, and they must be pastured.[75]:19ff[76]

Also, horses and cattle were once a basic farm feature that provided labor, for hauling and plowing, fertility, through recycling of manure, and fuel, in the form of food for farmers and other animals. While today, small growing operations often do not include livestock, domesticated animals are a desirable part of the organic farming equation, especially for true sustainability, the ability of a farm to function as a self-renewing unit.

A key characteristic of organic farming is the rejection of genetically engineered plants and animals. On 19 October 1998, participants at IFOAM's 12th Scientific Conference issued the Mar del Plata Declaration, where more than 600 delegates from over 60 countries voted unanimously to exclude the use of genetically modified organisms in food production and agriculture.

Although opposition to the use of any transgenic technologies in organic farming is strong, agricultural researchers Luis Herrera-Estrella and Ariel Alvarez-Morales continue to advocate integration of transgenic technologies into organic farming as the optimal means to sustainable agriculture, particularly in the developing world,[77] as does author and scientist Pamela Ronald, who views this kind of biotechnology as being consistent with organic principles.[78]

Although GMOs are excluded from organic farming, there is concern that the pollen from genetically modified crops is increasingly penetrating organic and heirloom seed stocks, making it difficult, if not impossible, to keep these genomes from entering the organic food supply. Differing regulations among countries limits the availability of GMOs to certain countries, as described in the article on regulation of the release of genetic modified organisms.

Organic farmers use a number of traditional farm tools to do farming. Due to the goals of sustainability in organic farming, organic farmers try to minimize their reliance on fossil fuels. In the developing world on small organic farms tools are normally constrained to hand tools and diesel powered water pumps. A study evaluated the use of open-source 3-D printers (called RepRaps using a bioplastic polylactic acid (PLA) on organic farms.[79]PLA is a strong biodegradable and recyclable thermoplastic appropriate for a range of representative products in five categories of prints: handtools, food processing, animal management, water management and hydroponics.[79] Such open source hardware is attractive to all types of small farmers as it provides control for farmers over their own equipment; this is exemplified by Open Source Ecology, Farm Hack and FarmBot.[80]

Standards regulate production methods and in some cases final output for organic agriculture. Standards may be voluntary or legislated. As early as the 1970s private associations certified organic producers. In the 1980s, governments began to produce organic production guidelines. In the 1990s, a trend toward legislated standards began, most notably with the 1991 EU-Eco-regulation developed for European Union,[81] which set standards for 12 countries, and a 1993 UK program. The EU's program was followed by a Japanese program in 2001, and in 2002 the U.S. created the National Organic Program (NOP).[82] As of 2007 over 60 countries regulate organic farming (IFOAM 2007:11). In 2005 IFOAM created the Principles of Organic Agriculture, an international guideline for certification criteria.[83] Typically the agencies accredit certification groups rather than individual farms.

Organic production materials used in and foods are tested independently by the Organic Materials Review Institute.[84]

Using manure as a fertiliser risks contaminating food with animal gut bacteria, including pathogenic strains of E. coli that have caused fatal poisoning from eating organic food.[85] To combat this risk, USDA organic standards require that manure must be sterilized through high temperature thermophilic composting. If raw animal manure is used, 120 days must pass before the crop is harvested if the final product comes into direct contact with the soil. For products that don't directly contact soil, 90 days must pass prior to harvest.[86]

The economics of organic farming, a subfield of agricultural economics, encompasses the entire process and effects of organic farming in terms of human society, including social costs, opportunity costs, unintended consequences, information asymmetries, and economies of scale. Although the scope of economics is broad, agricultural economics tends to focus on maximizing yields and efficiency at the farm level. Economics takes an anthropocentric approach to the value of the natural world: biodiversity, for example, is considered beneficial only to the extent that it is valued by people and increases profits. Some entities such as the European Union subsidize organic farming, in large part because these countries want to account for the externalities of reduced water use, reduced water contamination, reduced soil erosion, reduced carbon emissions, increased biodiversity, and assorted other benefits that result from organic farming.[56]

Traditional organic farming is labor and knowledge-intensive whereas conventional farming is capital-intensive, requiring more energy and manufactured inputs.[87]

Organic farmers in California have cited marketing as their greatest obstacle.[88]

The markets for organic products are strongest in North America and Europe, which as of 2001 are estimated to have $6 and $8 billion respectively of the $20 billion global market.[55]:6 As of 2007 Australasia has 39% of the total organic farmland, including Australia's 1,180,000 hectares (2,900,000 acres) but 97 percent of this land is sprawling rangeland (2007:35). US sales are 20x as much.[55]:7 Europe farms 23 percent of global organic farmland (6,900,000ha (17,000,000 acres)), followed by Latin America with 19 percent (5.8 million hectares - 14.3 million acres). Asia has 9.5 percent while North America has 7.2 percent. Africa has 3 percent.[89]

Besides Australia,[1] the countries with the most organic farmland are Argentina (3.1 million hectares - 7.7 million acres), China (2.3 million hectares - 5.7 million acres), and the United States (1.6 million hectares - 4 million acres). Much of Argentina's organic farmland is pasture, like that of Australia (2007:42). Spain, Germany, Brazil (the world's largest agricultural exporter), Uruguay, and the UK follow the United States in the amount of organic land (2007:26).

In the European Union (EU25) 3.9% of the total utilized agricultural area was used for organic production in 2005. The countries with the highest proportion of organic land were Austria (11%) and Italy (8.4%), followed by the Czech Republic and Greece (both 7.2%). The lowest figures were shown for Malta (0.1%), Poland (0.6%) and Ireland (0.8%).[90][91] In 2009, the proportion of organic land in the EU grew to 4.7%. The countries with highest share of agricultural land were Liechtenstein (26.9%), Austria (18.5%) and Sweden (12.6%).[92] 16% of all farmers in Austria produced organically in 2010. By the same year the proportion of organic land increased to 20%.:[93] In 2005 168,000 ha (415,000 ac) of land in Poland was under organic management.[94] In 2012, 288,261 hectares (712,308 acres) were under organic production, and there were about 15,500 organic farmers; retail sales of organic products were EUR 80 million in 2011. As of 2012 organic exports were part of the government's economic development strategy.[95]

After the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, agricultural inputs that had previously been purchased from Eastern bloc countries were no longer available in Cuba, and many Cuban farms converted to organic methods out of necessity.[96] Consequently, organic agriculture is a mainstream practice in Cuba, while it remains an alternative practice in most other countries.[97][98] Cuba's organic strategy includes development of genetically modified crops; specifically corn that is resistant to the palomilla moth[97]

In 2001, the global market value of certified organic products was estimated at USD $20 billion. By 2002, this was USD $23 billion and by 2015 more than USD $43 billion.[99] By 2014, retail sales of organic products reached USD $80 billion worldwide.[100] North America and Europe accounted for more than 90% of all organic product sales.[100]

Organic agricultural land increased almost fourfold in 15 years, from 11 million hectares in 1999 to 43.7 million hectares in 2014.[100] Between 2013 and 2014, organic agricultural land grew by 500,000 hectares worldwide, increasing in every region except Latin America.[100] During this time period, Europes organic farmland increased 260,000 hectares to 11.6 million total (+2.3%), Asias increased 159,000 hectares to 3.6 million total (+4.7%), Africas increased 54,000 hectares to 1.3 million total (+4.5%), and North Americas increased 35,000 hectares to 3.1 million total (+1.1%).[100] As of 2014, the country with the most organic land was Australia (17.2 million hectares), followed by Argentina (3.1 million hectares), and the United States (2.2 million hectares).[100]

In 2013, the number of organic producers grew by almost 270,000, or more than 13%.[100] By 2014, there were a reported 2.3 million organic producers in the world.[100] Most of the total global increase took place in the Philippines, Peru, China, and Thailand.[100] Overall, the majority of all organic producers are in India (650,000 in 2013), Uganda (190,552 in 2014), Mexico (169,703 in 2013) and the Philippines (165,974 in 2014).[100]

Studies comparing yields have had mixed results.[101] These differences among findings can often be attributed to variations between study designs including differences in the crops studied and the methodology by which results were gathered.

A 2012 meta-analysis found that productivity is typically lower for organic farming than conventional farming, but that the size of the difference depends on context and in some cases may be very small.[102] While organic yields can be lower than conventional yields, another meta-analysis published in Sustainable Agriculture Research in 2015, concluded that certain organic on-farm practices could help narrow this gap. Timely weed management and the application of manure in conjunction with legume forages/cover crops were shown to have positive results in increasing organic corn and soybean productivity. More experienced organic farmers were also found to have higher yields than other organic farmers who were just starting out.[103]

Another meta-analysis published in the journal Agricultural Systems in 2011 analyzed 362 datasets and found that organic yields were on average 80% of conventional yields. The author's found that there are relative differences in this yield gap based on crop type with crops like soybeans and rice scoring higher than the 80% average and crops like wheat and potato scoring lower. Across global regions, Asia and Central Europe were found to have relatively higher yields and Northern Europe relatively lower than the average.[104]

A 2007 study[105] compiling research from 293 different comparisons into a single study to assess the overall efficiency of the two agricultural systems has concluded that "organic methods could produce enough food on a global per capita basis to sustain the current human population, and potentially an even larger population, without increasing the agricultural land base." The researchers also found that while in developed countries, organic systems on average produce 92% of the yield produced by conventional agriculture, organic systems produce 80% more than conventional farms in developing countries, because the materials needed for organic farming are more accessible than synthetic farming materials to farmers in some poor countries. This study was strongly contested by another study published in 2008, which stated, and was entitled, "Organic agriculture cannot feed the world"[106] and said that the 2007 came up with "a major overestimation of the productivity of OA" "because data are misinterpreted and calculations accordingly are erroneous." Additional research needs to be conducted in the future to further clarify these claims.

A study published in 2005 compared conventional cropping, organic animal-based cropping, and organic legume-based cropping on a test farm at the Rodale Institute over 22 years.[107] The study found that "the crop yields for corn and soybeans were similar in the organic animal, organic legume, and conventional farming systems". It also found that "significantly less fossil energy was expended to produce corn in the Rodale Institutes organic animal and organic legume systems than in the conventional production system. There was little difference in energy input between the different treatments for producing soybeans. In the organic systems, synthetic fertilizers and pesticides were generally not used". As of 2013 the Rodale study was ongoing[108] and a thirty-year anniversary report was published by Rodale in 2012.[109]

A long-term field study comparing organic/conventional agriculture carried out over 21 years in Switzerland concluded that "Crop yields of the organic systems averaged over 21 experimental years at 80% of the conventional ones. The fertilizer input, however, was 34 51% lower, indicating an efficient production. The organic farming systems used 20 56% less energy to produce a crop unit and per land area this difference was 36 53%. In spite of the considerably lower pesticide input the quality of organic products was hardly discernible from conventional analytically and even came off better in food preference trials and picture creating methods"[110]

In the United States, organic farming has been shown to be 2.9 to 3.8 times more profitable for the farmer than conventional farming when prevailing price premiums are taken into account.[111] Globally, organic farming is between 22 and 35 percent more profitable for farmers than conventional methods, according to a 2015 meta-analysis of studies conducted across five continents.[112]

The profitability of organic agriculture can be attributed to a number of factors. First, organic farmers do not rely on synthetic fertilizer and pesticide inputs, which can be costly. In addition, organic foods currently enjoy a price premium over conventionally produced foods, meaning that organic farmers can often get more for their yield.

The price premium for organic food is an important factor in the economic viability of organic farming. In 2013 there was a 100% price premium on organic vegetables and a 57% price premium for organic fruits. These percentages are based on wholesale fruit and vegetable prices, available through the United States Department of Agricultures Economic Research Service.[113] Price premiums exist not only for organic versus nonorganic crops, but may also vary depending on the venue where the product is sold: farmers markets, grocery stores, or wholesale to restaurants. For many producers, direct sales at farmers markets are most profitable because the farmer receives the entire markup, however this is also the most time and labor-intensive approach.[114]

There have been signs of organic price premiums narrowing in recent years, which lowers the economic incentive for farmers to convert to or maintain organic production methods.[115] Data from 22 years of experiments at the Rodale Institute found that, based on the current yields and production costs associated with organic farming in the United States, a price premium of only 10% is required to achieve parity with conventional farming.[115] A separate study found that on a global scale, price premiums of only 5-7% percent were needed to break even with conventional methods.[112] Without the price premium, profitability for farmers is mixed.[55]:11

For markets and supermarkets organic food is profitable as well, and is generally sold at significantly higher prices than non-organic food.[116]

In the most recent assessments of the energy efficiency of organic versus conventional agriculture, results have been mixed regarding which form is more carbon efficient. Organic farm systems have more often than not been found to be more energy efficient, however, this is not always the case. More than anything, results tend to depend upon crop type and farm size.[117]

A comprehensive comparison of energy efficiency in grain production, produce yield, and animal husbandry concluded that organic farming had a higher yield per unit of energy over the vast majority of the crops and livestock systems.[118] For example, two studies - both comparing organically- versus conventionally-farmed apples - declare contradicting results, one saying organic farming is more energy efficient, the other saying conventionally is more efficient.[117][119]

It has generally been found that the labor input per unit of yield was higher for organic systems compared with conventional production.[117]

Most sales are concentrated in developed nations. In 2008, 69% of Americans claimed to occasionally buy organic products, down from 73% in 2005. One theory for this change was that consumers were substituting "local" produce for "organic" produce.[120][121]

The USDA requires that distributors, manufacturers, and processors of organic products be certified by an accredited state or private agency.[122] In 2007, there were 3,225 certified organic handlers, up from 2,790 in 2004.[123]

Organic handlers are often small firms; 48% reported sales below $1 million annually, and 22% between $1 and $5 million per year.[124] Smaller handlers are more likely to sell to independent natural grocery stores and natural product chains whereas large distributors more often market to natural product chains and conventional supermarkets, with a small group marketing to independent natural product stores.[123] Some handlers work with conventional farmers to convert their land to organic with the knowledge that the farmer will have a secure sales outlet. This lowers the risk for the handler as well as the farmer. In 2004, 31% of handlers provided technical support on organic standards or production to their suppliers and 34% encouraged their suppliers to transition to organic.[125] Smaller farms often join together in cooperatives to market their goods more effectively.

93% of organic sales are through conventional and natural food supermarkets and chains, while the remaining 7% of U.S. organic food sales occur through farmers' markets, foodservices, and other marketing channels.[126]

In the 2012 Census, direct-to-consumer sales equaled $1.3 billion, up from $812 million in 2002, an increase of 60 percent. The number of farms that utilize direct-to-consumer sales was 144,530 in 2012 in comparison to 116,733 in 2002.[127] Direct-to-consumer sales include farmers markets, community supported agriculture (CSA), on-farm stores, and roadside farm stands. Some organic farms also sell products direct to retailer, direct to restaurant and direct to institution.[128] According to the 2008 Organic Production Survey, approximately 7% of organic farm sales went direct-to-consumers, 10% went direct to retailers, and approximately 83% went into wholesale markets. In comparison, only 0.4% of the value of convention agricultural commodities went direct-to-consumers.[129]

While not all products sold at farmers markets are certified organic, this direct-to-consumer avenue has become increasingly popular in local food distribution and has grown substantially since 1994. In 2014, there were 8,284 farmers markets in comparison to 3,706 in 2004 and 1,755 in 1994, most of which are found in populated areas such as the Northeast, Midwest, and West Coast.[130]

Organic production is more labor-intensive than conventional production.[131] On the one hand, this increased labor cost is one factor that makes organic food more expensive.[131] On the other hand, the increased need for labor may be seen as an "employment dividend" of organic farming, providing more jobs per unit area than conventional systems.[132] The 2011 UNEP Green Economy Report suggests that "[a]n increase in investment in green agriculture is projected to lead to growth in employment of about 60 per cent compared with current levels" and that "green agriculture investments could create 47 million additional jobs compared with BAU2 over the next 40 years."[133] The UNEP also argues that "[b]y greening agriculture and food distribution, more calories per person per day, more jobs and business opportunities especially in rural areas, and market-access opportunities, especially for developing countries, will be available."

In 2007 the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) said that organic agriculture often leads to higher prices and hence a better income for farmers, so it should be promoted. However, FAO stressed that by organic farming one could not feed the current mankind, even less the bigger future population. Both data and models showed then that organic farming was far from sufficient. Therefore, chemical fertilizers were needed to avoid hunger.[134] Other analysis by many agribusiness executives, agricultural and ecological scientists, and international agriculture experts revealed the opinion that organic farming would not only increase the world's food supply, but might be the only way to eradicate hunger.[135]

FAO stressed that fertilizers and other chemical inputs can much increase the production, particularly in Africa where fertilizers are currently used 90% less than in Asia.[134] For example, in Malawi the yield has been boosted using seeds and fertilizers.[134] FAO also calls for using biotechnology, as it can help smallholder farmers to improve their income and food security.[136]

Also NEPAD, development organization of African governments, announced that feeding Africans and preventing malnutrition requires fertilizers and enhanced seeds.[137]

According to a more recent study in ScienceDigest, organic best management practices shows an average yield only 13% less than conventional.[138] In the world's poorer nations where most of the world's hungry live, and where conventional agriculture's expensive inputs are not affordable by the majority of farmers, adopting organic management actually increases yields 93% on average, and could be an important part of increased food security.[135][139]

Organic agriculture can contribute to ecologically sustainable, socio-economic development, especially in poorer countries.[140] The application of organic principles enables employment of local resources (e.g., local seed varieties, manure, etc.) and therefore cost-effectiveness. Local and international markets for organic products show tremendous growth prospects and offer creative producers and exporters excellent opportunities to improve their income and living conditions.[citation needed]

Organic agriculture is knowledge intensive. Globally, capacity building efforts are underway, including localized training material, to limited effect. As of 2007, the International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movements hosted more than 170 free manuals and 75 training opportunities online.[citation needed]

In 2008 the United Nations Environmental Programme (UNEP) and the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) stated that "organic agriculture can be more conducive to food security in Africa than most conventional production systems, and that it is more likely to be sustainable in the long-term"[141] and that "yields had more than doubled where organic, or near-organic practices had been used" and that soil fertility and drought resistance improved.[142]

The value of organic agriculture (OA) in the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals (MDG), particularly in poverty reduction efforts in the face of climate change, is shown by its contribution to both income and non-income aspects of the MDGs. These benefits are expected to continue in the post-MDG era. A series of case studies conducted in selected areas in Asian countries by the Asian Development Bank Institute (ADBI) and published as a book compilation by ADB in Manila document these contributions to both income and non-income aspects of the MDGs. These include poverty alleviation by way of higher incomes, improved farmers' health owing to less chemical exposure, integration of sustainable principles into rural development policies, improvement of access to safe water and sanitation, and expansion of global partnership for development as small farmers are integrated in value chains.[143]

A related ADBI study also sheds on the costs of OA programs and set them in the context of the costs of attaining the MDGs. The results show considerable variation across the case studies, suggesting that there is no clear structure to the costs of adopting OA. Costs depend on the efficiency of the OA adoption programs. The lowest cost programs were more than ten times less expensive than the highest cost ones. However, further analysis of the gains resulting from OA adoption reveals that the costs per person taken out of poverty was much lower than the estimates of the World Bank,[144] based on income growth in general or based on the detailed costs of meeting some of the more quantifiable MDGs (e.g., education, health, and environment).[145]

Agriculture imposes negative externalities (uncompensated costs) upon society through public land and other public resource use, biodiversity loss, erosion, pesticides, nutrient runoff, subsidized water usage, subsidy payments and assorted other problems. Positive externalities include self-reliance, entrepreneurship, respect for nature, and air quality. Organic methods reduce some of these costs.[146] In 2000 uncompensated costs for 1996 reached 2,343 million British pounds or 208 per ha (84.20/ac).[147] A study of practices in the USA published in 2005 concluded that cropland costs the economy approximately 5 to 16 billion dollars ($3096/ha - $1239/ac), while livestock production costs 714 million dollars.[148] Both studies recommended reducing externalities. The 2000 review included reported pesticide poisonings but did not include speculative chronic health effects of pesticides, and the 2004 review relied on a 1992 estimate of the total impact of pesticides.

It has been proposed that organic agriculture can reduce the level of some negative externalities from (conventional) agriculture. Whether the benefits are private or public depends upon the division of property rights.[149]

Several surveys and studies have attempted to examine and compare conventional and organic systems of farming and have found that organic techniques, while not without harm, are less damaging than conventional ones because they reduce levels of biodiversity less than conventional systems do and use less energy and produce less waste when calculated per unit area.[150][151]

A 2003 to 2005 investigation by the Cranfield University for the Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs in the UK found that it is difficult to compare the Global Warming Potential (GWP), acidification and eutrophication emissions but "Organic production often results in increased burdens, from factors such as N leaching and N2O emissions", even though primary energy use was less for most organic products. N2O is always the largest GWP contributor except in tomatoes. However, "organic tomatoes always incur more burdens (except pesticide use)". Some emissions were lower "per area", but organic farming always required 65 to 200% more field area than non-organic farming. The numbers were highest for bread wheat (200+% more) and potatoes (160% more).[152][153]

The situation was shown dramatically in a comparison of a modern dairy farm in Wisconsin with one in New Zealand in which the animals grazed extensively.[154] Using total farm emissions per kg milk produced as a parameter, the researchers showed that production of methane from belching was higher in the New Zealand farm, while carbon dioxide production was higher in the Wisconsin farm. Output of nitrous oxide, a gas with an estimated global warming potential 310 times that of carbon dioxide was also higher in the New Zealand farm. Methane from manure handling was similar in the two types of farm. The explanation for the finding relates to the different diets used on these farms, being based more completely on forage (and hence more fibrous) in New Zealand and containing less concentrate than in Wisconsin. Fibrous diets promote a higher proportion of acetate in the gut of ruminant animals, resulting in a higher production of methane that must be released by belching. When cattle are given a diet containing some concentrates (such as corn and soybean meal) in addition to grass and silage, the pattern of ruminal fermentation alters from acetate to mainly propionate. As a result, methane production is reduced. Capper et al. compared the environmental impact of US dairy production in 1944 and 2007.[155] They calculated that the carbon footprint per billion kg (2.2 billion lb) of milk produced in 2007 was 37 percent that of equivalent milk production in 1944.

Researchers at Oxford university analyzed 71 peer-reviewed studies and observed that organic products are sometimes worse for the environment.[156] Organic milk, cereals, and pork generated higher greenhouse gas emissions per product than conventional ones but organic beef and olives had lower emissions in most studies.[156] Usually organic products required less energy, but more land.[156] Per unit of product, organic produce generates higher nitrogen leaching, nitrous oxide emissions, ammonia emissions, eutrophication and acidification potential than when conventionally grown.[157] Other differences were not significant.[157] The researchers concluded, as there is not singular way of doing conventional or organic farming, that the debate should go beyond the conventional vs organic debate, and more about finding specific solutions to specific circumstances.[157]

Proponents of organic farming have claimed that organic agriculture emphasizes closed nutrient cycles, biodiversity, and effective soil management providing the capacity to mitigate and even reverse the effects of climate change[158] and that organic agriculture can decrease fossil fuel emissions.[159] "The carbon sequestration efficiency of organic systems in temperate climates is almost double (575-700 kg carbon per ha per year - 510-625 lb/ac/an ) that of conventional treatment of soils, mainly owing to the use of grass clovers for feed and of cover crops in organic rotations."[160]

Critics of organic farming methods believe that the increased land needed to farm organic food could potentially destroy the rainforests and wipe out many ecosystems.[161][162]

According to the meta-analysis of 71 studies, nitrogen leaching, nitrous oxide emissions, ammonia emissions, eutrophication potential and acidification potential were higher for organic products,[157] although in one study "nitrate leaching was 4.4-5.6 times higher in conventional plots than organic plots".[163]

Excess nutrients in lakes, rivers, and groundwater can cause algal blooms, eutrophication, and subsequent dead zones. In addition, nitrates are harmful to aquatic organisms by themselves.[164]

The Oxford meta-analysis of 71 studies proved that organic farming requires 84% more land, mainly due to lack of nutrients but sometimes due to weeds, diseases or pests, lower yielding animals and land required for fertility building crops.[157] While organic farming does not necessarily save land for wildlife habitats and forestry in all cases,[156] the most modern breakthroughs in organic are addressing these issues with success.[165][166][167]

Professor Wolfgang Branscheid says that organic animal production is not good for the environment, because organic chicken requires doubly as much land as "conventional" chicken and organic pork a quarter more.[168] According to a calculation by Hudson Institute, organic beef requires triply as much land.[169] On the other hand, certain organic methods of animal husbandry have been shown to restore desertified, marginal, and/or otherwise unavailable land to agricultural productivity and wildlife.[170][171] Or by getting both forage and cash crop production from the same fields simultaneously, reduce net land use.[172]

In England organic farming yields 55% of normal yields.[173][174] While in other regions of the world, organic methods have started producing record yields.[175][176]

In organic farming synthetic pesticides are generally prohibited. A chemical is said to be synthetic if it does not already exist in the natural world. But the organic label goes further and usually prohibit compounds that exist in nature if they are produced by Chemical synthesis. So the prohibition is also about the method of production and not only the nature of the compound.

An non exhaustive list of organic approved pesticides with theirs Median lethal dose

While there may be some differences in the amounts of nutrients and anti-nutrients when organically produced food and conventionally produced food are compared, the variable nature of food production and handling makes it difficult to generalize results, and there is insufficient evidence to make claims that organic food is safer or healthier than conventional food.[180][181][182][183][184] Claims that organic food tastes better are not supported by evidence.[181][185]

Supporters claim that organically managed soil has a higher quality[186] and higher water retention.[187] This may help increase yields for organic farms in drought years. Organic farming can build up soil organic matter better than conventional no-till farming, which suggests long-term yield benefits from organic farming.[188] An 18-year study of organic methods on nutrient-depleted soil concluded that conventional methods were superior for soil fertility and yield for nutrient-depleted soils in cold-temperate climates, arguing that much of the benefit from organic farming derives from imported materials that could not be regarded as self-sustaining.[189]

Read the original:

Organic farming - Wikipedia

Written by simmons |

January 31st, 2017 at 6:43 am

Posted in Organic Food

#5 Organic Food Gimlet Media

Posted: at 6:43 am

Its an epic three-way battle this week organic vs conventional vs science. Three out of every four American grocery stores sell organic products, but what are you really getting when you buy them? Better taste? Fewer toxic chemicals? A cleaner environment? Farmers Mark, Andy, and Brian Reeves, nutritional epidemiologist Dr. Kathryn Bradbury, Prof. Cynthia Curl, and Prof. Navin Ramankutty help us sort it all out.

Sponsors:

For 15% off your first purchase at Ministry of Supply, clickhere, and use offer code SCIENCEVS15 at checkout. This offer is good through September 10th, 2016.

Credits:

This episode has been produced by Heather Rogers, Lynn Levy, Caitlin Kenney, Austin Mitchell, and Kaitlyn Sawrey. Editing by Annie-Rose Strasser and Alex Blumberg. Fact checking by Michelle Harris. Production Assistance by Diane Wu and Shruti Ravindran. Special thanks to Stevie Lane and Joseph Lavelle Wilson. Sound design and music production by Matthew Boll, mixing by Martin Peralta and Haley Shaw. Music written by Bobby Lord.

Selected References:

Organic Food | Organic Foods | Benefits Of Organic Food

Posted: at 6:43 am

To call a food organic simply means that its been produced using environmentally sound methods methods that emphasize the use of renewable resources, soil conversation, and water conservation to keep a high quality growing environment.

Organic foods are produced without pesticides & chemical fertilizers. They dont have genetically modified organisms, are not processed with irradiation, industrial solvents, or with chemical food additives.

For meats and dairy, organic implies that the livestock has been raised in a healthy, humane environment, with fresh air and outdoor access, no antibiotics, or growth hormones. The livestock is fed organically grown feed.

To see the USDAs exact definition & regulations, you can check out the National Agricultural Libraryand the USDAs National Organic Program.

There are four levels of organic labeling.

Where organic food has legal definitions & standards for what it actually is created with, the word natural in food labeling does not. In general, its supposed to imply that the food is minimally processed and does not contain any manufactured ingredients. However, there are no official standards for natural food. The FAO (Food & Agricultural Organization) does not recognize the term natural. The FDA and USDA both do not have any rules for natural labeling. In fact, the FDA has discouraged the food industry from using the term.

In a perfect world, food manufacturers would not call their food or ingredients natural if they werent but as there is no legal meaning to natural, it means manufacturers have almost free reign to call their foods natural even if they are not.

There is even an act, The Food, Drug, & Cosmetic Actthat prohibits labeling food that is false or misleading, however, it doesnt give any specifics.

Ultimately, it is up to you, the consumer, to be responsible with your food purchase choices.

1. Organic Farming is less toxic for the environment.

Industrial farming uses synthetic pesticides, which can drift downstream and cause serious damage to non-farming communities. These farming methods can damage the soil and make it harder to grow healthy crops for future generations. Organic farming limits these toxic chemicals in our environment.

2. Organic Farming is better for your body.

When foods are grown with pesticides & chemicals, where do you think those chemicals end up? Pesticides can do decrease fertility, increase your risk of cancer, and do damage to your nervous system. Organic foods generally have higher levels of vitamins, minerals, and antioxidants than their conventional counterparts.

3. Organic Food Tastes Great!

The truth is, organic food simply tastes better. It makes sense that the food that is grown in a real growing environment would be more flavorful.

4. Helps Local & Family Farmers

While organic farming has grown from nothing to a $51 billion dollar industry in the span of around 20 years, only .7% of the total worlds farmland is organically farmed. There are over 13,000 certified organic producers in the United States. The more demand for organic food, the bigger the industry will get. And as the industry grows, more farms will use organic farming methods to satisfy the demand. So its a win-win! You eat organic foods, and more organic foods get farmed.

5. Organic Food Meets Strict USDA Standards

The USDA has created standards for organic foods and organic farming designed to protect you when purchasing organic foods. Organic foods are safe, good for you, and highly regulated to make sure that you continue to be safe in choosing organic foods.

Theres a lot of misinformation out there about organic food here are the top 3 myths that weve found and information dispelling them.

1. Organic Food is the same as Natural Food

Organic food actually has legal definitions and regulations as to what you can call organic, and what you cannot. Natural food does not so natural food is NOT the same organic food.

2. Organic Food Costs Too Much

While organic food in general is 10-40% more expensive than its conventional counterparts, we believe that the benefits of eating organically far outweigh the costs. You are what you eat the more organically grown food you put in your body, and the less toxic chemicals you put in your body, the better.

3. Organic Food Has No Taste

This is simply untrue. Although taste is ultimately subjective, we believe that organic snack food tastes phenomenal, organic fruits and vegetables are much better tasting than their conventional versions, and organic meats simply cannot be beat by conventional ones.

We sell a large amount of high quality organic foods here on True Foods Market. Just search Organic in our search bar to see what we have to offer!

Heres a sample of some of the organic foods that we sell:

Peanut Butter: http://truefoodsmarket.com/peanutbutter-creamy-unsalted-org-16-ozs.html

Baby Food: http://truefoodsmarket.com/baby-sweet-peas-organic-3-x-4-ozs.html

http://truefoodsmarket.com/cabana-banana-organic-3-x-4-ozs.html

http://truefoodsmarket.com/country-apples-organic-3-x-4-ozs.html

Rice: http://truefoodsmarket.com/long-grain-brown-rice-organic-2-lbs.html

http://truefoodsmarket.com/lundberg-basmati-white-rice-organic-2-lbs.html

Oats: http://truefoodsmarket.com/steel-cut-oats-whole-grain-organic-35-ozs-35-ozs.html

http://truefoodsmarket.com/certified-gluten-free-rolled-oats-44-ozs.html

Pasta: http://truefoodsmarket.com/angel-hair-semolina-pasta-org-12-ozs-12-ozs.html

http://truefoodsmarket.com/brown-rice-penne-pasta-organic-12-ozs.html

http://truefoodsmarket.com/spaghetti-whole-wheat-organic-2-5-lbs.html

http://truefoodsmarket.com/penne-pasta-ww-organic-2-5-lbs.html

Quinoa: http://truefoodsmarket.com/quinoa-organic-33-oz-33-oz.html

Coffee: http://truefoodsmarket.com/maya-chocolate-herbal-coffee-organi-11-ozs.html

http://truefoodsmarket.com/maya-chai-herbal-coffee-organic-11-ozs.html

http://truefoodsmarket.com/maya-caffe-herbal-coffee-organic-11-ozs.html

Marinara Sauce: http://truefoodsmarket.com/pasta-sauce-marinara-organic-25-ozs.html

Condiments

Yellow Mustard: http://truefoodsmarket.com/yellow-mustard-organic-16-ozs.html

Dijon Mustard: http://truefoodsmarket.com/dijon-mustard-organic-8-ozs.html

Tomato Ketchup: http://truefoodsmarket.com/tomato-ketchup-organic-24-ozs.html

Salsa: http://truefoodsmarket.com/salsa-mild-16-ozs.html

Seasonings

Chili Powder: http://truefoodsmarket.com/chili-powder-mild-organic-4-ozs.html

Cayenne Pepper: http://truefoodsmarket.com/cayenne-ground-organic-4-ozs.html

Cilantro: http://truefoodsmarket.com/cilantro-cut-sifted-organic-4-ozs.html

Cinnamon: http://truefoodsmarket.com/cinnamon-ground-organic-4-ozs.html

Coriander Seed: http://truefoodsmarket.com/coriander-seed-ground-organic-4-ozs.html

Cumin Seed: http://truefoodsmarket.com/cumin-seed-ground-organic-4-ozs.html

Curry Powder: http://truefoodsmarket.com/curry-powder-organic-4-ozs.html

Garlic Granules: http://truefoodsmarket.com/garlic-granules-organic-4-ozs.html

Garlic Powder: http://truefoodsmarket.com/garlic-powder-organic-4-ozs.html

If you enjoy Organic Foodthen youve come to the right place at True Foods Market. Happy shopping!

See more here:

Organic Food | Organic Foods | Benefits Of Organic Food

Written by simmons |

January 31st, 2017 at 6:43 am

Posted in Organic Food

Step aerobics – Wikipedia

Posted: January 29, 2017 at 2:40 am

Step aerobics is a form of aerobic exercise using of an elevated platform (the step). The height can be tailored to individual needs by inserting risers under the step. Step aerobics classes are offered at many gyms and fitness centers which have a group exercise program.

Step aerobics was developed by Gin Miller around 1989[citation needed]. After a knee injury, Gin consulted with an orthopedic doctor, who recommended she strengthen the muscles supporting the knee by stepping up and down on a milk crate and from this she developed the step regimen.

Step aerobics can also be involved in dancing games, such as Dance Dance Revolution or In the Groove.

Often moves are referred to as Reebok step moves in reference to one of the first makers of the plastic step commonly used in gyms.

The "basic" step involves stepping one foot first on the step then the other on top of the platform then stepping the first foot back on the floor with the second following. A "right basic" would involve stepping right foot up, then the left, then returning to the floor alternating right then left.

Many instructors of step will switch immediately between different moves, for example between a right basic and a left basic without any intervening moves, forcing people to "tap" their foot instead of shifting weight. However, one form of step is called tap-free or smooth step in which feet always alternate without the ambiguous "taps" that can make learning step difficult for beginners. This requires a bit of foresight and planning by the instructor in order to insert a transitional or switching move that maintains the natural alternating weight shift akin to walking. For example, from a series of right basics one may insert a "knee up" (which involves stepping up and lifting the knee and returning the lifted leg to the ground, thereby switching feet) and then continuing to a left basic. However, this requires planning and the extra beats required for the transitional move.

Common moves include:

Many instructors will prepare a set of moves that will be executed together to form the choreography of the class. Usually, the choreography will be timed to 32 beats in a set, ideally switching legs so that the set can be repeated in a mirrored fashion. A set may consist of many different moves and the different moves may have different durations. For example, a basic step as described above takes 4 beats (for the 4 steps the person takes). Similarly, the "knee up" move also takes 4 beats. Another common move, the repeater knee, is an 8-beat move.

Classes vary in the level of choreography. Basic level classes will tend to have a series of relatively basic moves strung together into a sequence. More advanced classes incorporate dance elements such as turns, mambos, and stomps. These elements are put together into 23 routines in each class. One learns the routines during the class and then all are performed at the end of the class. Regardless of the complexity of the choreography, most instructors offer various options for different levels of intensity/dance ability while teaching the routines.

Like other forms of exercise, step aerobics helps burn calories and fat. The number of calories burned depends on the speed of movements, step height, length of exercise, and the persons height and weight.

Here is the original post:

Step aerobics - Wikipedia

Written by simmons |

January 29th, 2017 at 2:40 am

Posted in Aerobics

Page 2,279«..10 20..2,2782,2792,280 2,281..2,290 2,300..»

TheHonestGuys – YouTube

Organic Foods and Products – The New York Times

Free Gentle Breath Meditations – an introduction | Unimed Living

Courses & Retreats – Meditation & Buddhism

Organic Foods: What You Need to Know About Eating Organic …

Organic Foods and Cafe

Organic farming – Wikipedia

#5 Organic Food Gimlet Media

Organic Food | Organic Foods | Benefits Of Organic Food

Step aerobics – Wikipedia

Pages

Categories

Partners

Recommended Resources

Archives