From the Ground Up? The Principles of Australian Organic Agriculture - Re-Thinking Organic Food and Farming in a Changing World - page 220

The process of genetic modification results in synthetically constructed enti-
ties achieved by joining fragments of DNA from different organisms, including
organisms of different species (such as rice with daffodils or fish with tomatoes).
It results in combinations of genetic material that could not occur through normal
reproduction and hybridization.
Just as organic growers of the 1950s, viewed all synthesized products with
suspicion and distrusted government and scientific claims about their 'safety', so do
organic growers oppose genetically modified organisms on precautionary grounds
as well as on principle. There is currently no conclusive evidence confirming the
presence or absence of health effects of genetically modified organisms (Pretty
2001 ). Therefore, organic standards take a precautionary approach, reasoning that
actions should be avoided if there is a possible threat of serious or irreversible
environmental damage (Standards Australia 2009 ).
Organic growers today, unlike their counterparts in earlier decades have access
to a plethora of manufactured products which are 'chemical free' and considered to
be organically acceptable. During the 1990s and 2000s organic remedies began to
be manufactured commercially on an industrial scale and organic farmers now have
access to manufactured remedies such as concentrated seaweed fertilizer, organic
fruit fly bait and garlic spray. Brice Douglas uses powdered sulfur to control pests
on his cattle (Douglas 2006 ). Similarly, Anthony Sheldon uses a commercially
manufactured, but organically certified product, to control fly-strike in his sheep
(Sheldon 2006 ). Anthony Sheldon sees the substitution of 'unsafe' manufactured
products with 'safe' manufactured products as an important part of the future of
organics. He sees large chemical industries as having a role in Australian organic
farming, manufacturing non-toxic agricultural products:
If more of these products can work their way into the market to replace stuff that is toxic
it can only do good. They are not putting themselves out of business because they are still
making a product that does the job but is safe. Hopefully that type of thing is the way of
the future. The big companies that supply chemicals now, they have the expertise and, in
time, could make natural products. They could still be in business but selling stuff that is
non-toxic and it has got to be a good thing (Sheldon 2006 ).
Relying on manufactured products to control pests and diseases, maintain fertility
and contain weeds has come to be known, among organic growers, as 'input
substitution'; replacing poisonous, synthesized 'conventional' chemicals with non-
toxic, non- polluting 'organic' substances. Australian organic standards incorporate
both an input substitution and systemic approach to organic farming. Organic
standards encourage farmers to use systemic preventative measures. Organically
allowable products that are not toxic to humans, animals and non-target species, not
polluting and not synthesized are allowed but only 'as needed' an uncharacteristic
response to unusual events (Standards Australia 2009 , 4.5.2). They encourage
farmers to work towards less reliance on external inputs and develop systemic
management strategies to prevent pests and disease.
Some organic growers such as writer Jackie French and Hardy Vogtmann of
the International Federation of Organic Agricultural Movements (IFOAM) criticize
the input substitution approach to organic farming in Australia (Vogtmann 2005 ;