Click here to read about some of the people we've helped.  We're here to help you, too. Get four essential health reports when you join our e-news community.

FREE REPORT. Your key pointers to a life-transforming diet

Find out the best diet for you in one of four free reports we'll give you when you join the WDDTY community. We'll also send you up-to-the-moment health news and advice twice a week, packed full of insights that may well transform your own health.

First Name:Email:


Family matters

Is the soil association really the bad guy over organic meat?

The piece by Carmel McHenry in the March issue (vol 9, no 12) makes some useful points, but I wonder if the issues are best aired by pillorying the Soil Association as being contaminated by commercial interests. A piece entitled "The selling (out) of organic meat" which then restricts itself to the curing of organic bacon, in which the Soil Association "concedes" that it has granted licences for some additives and "admits" it received some sponsorship from Sainsbury plc, may be sharp journalism but does it illuminate the area in which the discussion needs to take place?

The Soil Association's decisions on standards are not set in stone, are the subject of continuous debate and were the theme of a conference to be held in April/May this year. The Soil Association and Helen Browning both deny that there is any element of commercialism in their decision to permit a limited amount of sodium nitrite to be used in the curing of bacon and ham. Helen Browning's notes on Organic Standards make it clear that nothing is added to her organic meat.

When I first read the criticism that sodium nitrite was being used in organic bacon curing, I consulted a lecturer in inorganic chemistry at the University of Leicester who, while making no comment on the organic issue, confirmed the sound sense of the science underlying the decision.

Namely that, since using sodium nitrate (saltpetre) in the process produced variable (and, therefore, unpredictable) levels of sodium nitrite in the product, to use specific levels of sodium nitrite would give a control not otherwise available. This is purely a food safety issue.

We are all aware that there are dangers of botulism, salmonella and E-coli in food processing. We also know that certain substances are carcinogens.

The problems besetting the bacon curer seem to my unspecialised mind, to fall into the category of being damned if you do, and damned if you don't.

If the curer does not use sodium nitrate/sodium nitrite, he runs the risk of not eliminating botulism in the product; if the curer uses salt only, he runs the risk of not making bacon at all. Dr R S Dunning, Leicester......



WDDTY Blog Speak

The selling (out) of organic meat - Amid health scares about genetically modified food, BSE, salmonella and E coli, it's no surprise that consumers have turned to organic produce. ...

Organic Meat - As recently as 30 years ago, people who insisted on eating only organic food—if they could find it—were ridiculed as food faddists and cranks. Well, a...

Don't use carcinogens for curing meat - ...

The case against mass slaughter - The Soil Association has recently come out against the government's policy on FMD. Here is the edited crux of the argument for an alternative put forw...

Viagra interacts with organic nitrates - The list of potentially fatal interactions with Viagra continues to grow. ...

Organic Box Schemes - UK sales of organic food jump-ed from just over £100 million in 1993/94 to £1.12 billion in 2003/04, with consu-mers spending almost £2 million extra...

Soil quality worsens as chemicals increase - Disastrous mismanagement of our soil and intensive farming methods have created such poor food quality that high-dose supplements are not a luxury, bu...

Reducing your exposure to pesticides - Eat organic food, including meat, whenever possible, especially when you are pregnant or conceiving. Organic crops usually contain no pesticide resid...