Comments Requested by the USDA on the proposed
National Organic Program and NPPB analysis of the proposal.

In response to the notice published March 13, 2000, in the Federal Register, the APS would like to comment on the proposed rule on the establishment of the National Organic Program. 

The American Phytopathological Society (APS), founded in 1909, is the premier educational, professional and scientific society dedicated to the promotion of the plant health and plant disease control for the common good. The Society represents more than 5,000 microbiologists, including scientists and science administrators in academic, industrial and government institutions working in a variety of areas, including applied and environmental plant pathology, food, horticultural and forestry science, and biotechnology, including basic and applied research on producing transgenic plants resistant to pathogens and abiotic stresses.

As consumer surveys have shown, they perceive organic foods as better tasting, more healthful, and raised using environmentally friendly methods. The USDA has for more than 90 years used a "seal of approval" for meat and poultry that implies safe food. Although the proposed USDA organic food "seal of approval" connotes particular production and processing practices that are not necessarily based on sound science, and is not intended to represent the safety of the food, consumers through past experience will assume the organic seal of approval implies the food is safe.

Organic foods are broadly defined as foods grown and processed without chemicals that will harm the land and water. Hence, manure instead of synthetic chemicals is used as a principal fertilizer for growing organic produce. The proven association of foodborne pathogens with both fresh produce and manure raises concerns regarding the microbiological safety of fruits and vegetables grown in soil fertilized by manure. Research is needed to identify conditions for the safe use of manure in fruit an vegetable production, which is not dealt with in the cited composting standards. In addition, the heavy metal copper is allowed in production and its use need not be identified in the final product.

Studies on the microbiological safety of organic foods are limited. Available data on pathogen and copper prevalence, as well as toxins produced by fungi (mycotoxins), indicate that organic foods are no safer than, and may not be as safe as, conventionally grown foods. 

Biotechnology can be used to increase the microbiological safety of foods. Through genetic modification, produce may be selected to express resistance products or natural anti-microbials that reduce the threat of foodborne pathogens. Excluding genetically modified foods from the organic food rule greatly reduces the tools available to increase the microbiological safety of a category of foods that are of potentially greater risk to human health than conventionally grown foods. 

The U.S. organic standards should not be used to restrict the rest of the U.S. food and agriculture system from the benefits of modern approaches to plant disease and pest control. This could be the case if, by these organic standards, cross-pollination between an organic crop and a neighboring transgenic crop would be considered adulteration of the organic crop. Pollen spread from field to field is no different biologically or mechanistically than the spread of pathogens or insect pests from field to field, although clearly pollen is not physically injurious to the impacted crop in the same way that pathogens and insect pests are injurious to an impacted crop. Accordingly, just as the spread of a pathogen or insect pest from a transgenic to an organic crop would not be treated as "adulteration" of the organic crop, so the spread of pollen with a transgene should not be considered as adulteration of the organic crop. In fact, farmers attempting to grow crops without the benefit of modern technologies, e.g., chemistries directed at specific pathogen enzymes or metabolic pathways or genes for defense introduced into the host plant using genetic engineering techniques, could benefit from their neighbors using these technologies if these uses resulted in lower thresholds of pathogen spores or insect pest populations available to spread into organically farmed fields. 

The USDA should require a disclaimer on all labels that the organic seal is unrelated to safety standards. By proposing a marketing standard mandated by Congress, it nevertheless gives an implied federal safety seal of approval that organic is superior to conventional food. Research to date, according to a meta-analysis of 150 papers does not support the conclusion of superior quality or safety1. Further, a disclaimer may deter legal action against USDA by consumers contracting illness after consumption of organic foods. 

The APS is pleased to have the opportunity to provide comments in response to the proposed rule for the National Organic Program and hopes that these comments and recommendations provide assistance. 

Sincerely, 
Neal K. Van Alfen
APS President

1. Woese, K. Et al., 1997. A comparison of organically and conventionally grown foods - results of a review of the relevant literature. J. Sci. Food Agric. 74:281-293.

© Copyright 2000 by
The American Phytopathological Society