IT IS a shame that myths about organic food are so widely taken as fact.

According to these, organic is somehow healthier than conventionally grown produce, contains fewer pesticides, and the methods are supposed to be better for the environment.

These myths have become so accepted by some that those who can afford it often shell out extra hard-earned cash for something they mistakenly believe is better.

In reality we could improve our diet much more effectively simply by eating more fruit and vegetables, rather than by opting for organic.

It suits the organic producers fine to perpetuate these falsehoods by doing nothing to correct the widely spread misinformation.

Much has been written on the subject, and to take one of the myths, a little research soon reveals the extent to which pesticides are used by organic growers; they are still chemicals, and are still ecologically damaging.

In addition, organic growers will not endorse technology that might reduce or eliminate the use of pesticides completely, for example, GMOs.

Organics demonises mainstream methods and new technology, but a combination of ideas from both camps could result in progress we could all benefit from.

The penchant in some quarters locally (for example Stroud Community Agriculture) for Steiner ‘biodynamic’ produce is enhanced by the way it is described as organic, and somehow becomes respectable.

Organic is not all it is cracked up to be, and the sooner we admit this, the better for everyone.

No doubt the mere mention of GMOs will infuriate some, and criticism of organic will not go unchallenged, but we should look into the subject properly, and join the debate.

H Saunders

Bowbridge