By Robert Arnason | Opinion
Canadian organic farmers and organic trade associations have said they maintain a ‘live and let live’ philosophy, where they accept all forms of agricultural production.
It appears organic farmers in Saskatchewan never received the ‘live and let live’ memo.
A group of organic producers in Saskatchewan raised approximately $5,000 to convince French scientist Gilles Seralini to be a keynote speaker at the Organic Connections conference, scheduled for Nov. 7 and 8 in Regina.
Seralini published one of the most controversial scientific studies of 2012, when he concluded that rats fed Roundup Ready corn were more likely to develop cancerous tumours than a control group of rats.
Read Also
Late season rainfall creates concern about Prairie crop quality
Praying for rain is being replaced with the hope that rain can stop for harvest. Rainfall in July and early August has been much greater than normal.
Dozens of international scientific associations, including six French academies, slammed the methodology and data analysis in Seralini’s study. They said it was shoddy science and denounced his conclusions as fear mongering.
The journal Food and Chemical Toxicology retracted Seralini’s paper in 2013. The journal said he looked at a small sample of animals and the breed of rat in the study has a natural propensity to develop tumours.
Critics have described Seralini as an anti-GMO activist because he often behaves like a public relations flack. Following his study he arranged exclusive interviews with journalists to tout his research.
Despite the condemnation, or possibly because of it, GMO and pesticide haters have vigorously defended Seralini and his research. Many claim he is a victim of an agro-chemical conspiracy, where all critics of biotech must be silenced.
While Seralini has his supporters, an organic producer in Manitoba said Organic Connection’s decision to engage the French scientist is a waste of time and money. He said organic growers need information about agronomy and best practices so the industry can become more productive and successful.
“A business person and farmer’s time is valuable. To spend time at a meeting slagging Monsanto is stupid,” he said. “Our time could be better spent learning about crop rotation, cover crops, green manure.”
Debbie Miller, Organic Connections president, said the organization isn’t afraid of difficult topics.
“We don’t shy away from controversy. We’re ready to hear all opinions,” she said. “I’ve read the criticisms of him and I’ve also read a lot of other information refuting
some of that criticism. I’m ready to listen to him with an open mind.”
Miller and the organizers of Organic Connections are free to invite and listen to any speaker they choose, but agricultural conferences typically serve the interests and needs of producers.
Over the last six years I have attended dozens of forums, workshops and seminars for conventional farmers. From all those events, I cannot recall a farm organization purposely inviting a speaker to vilify or denigrate organic farming.
Yes, speakers have made off-the-cuff remarks about organic agriculture and disputed health claims around organic food. But that is the exception, not the rule.
Conventional producers are preoccupied with solving problems and challenges within their industry because they want to operate profitable and sustainable farms.
Terry Daynard, former managing director of the Ontario Corn Producers’ Association and member of the Ontario Agricultural Hall of Fame, has said that organic activists have a distinct agenda from organic farmers.
“Condemnation of others, rather than support for organic farming itself, has become their raison d’etre.”
Since organic producers in Saskatchewan are spending $5,000 to listen to a non-scientist rant about the evils of GMOs and glyphosate, Daynard is half right.
Organic farmers may also be more interested in pointing fingers and stoking controversy, than they are in growing crops and raising animals.
