• NeatNit@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    5 days ago

    IIRC there is a legally defined set of criteria to call foodstuffs organic. It does mean something, but if has nothing to do with chemistry’s definition of organic.

    • PapaStevesy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      5 days ago

      Yeah, there’s still legally-defined sets of criteria for how to marry a child in the majority of US states, that’s not a good precedent for anything.

      • NeatNit@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        5 days ago

        That’s hardly relevant. All I’m saying is that this label is not a “blatant lie” like this thread calls for, it means something and it’s regulated.

        • PapaStevesy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          5 days ago

          It’s very relevant, it being codified is the foundation of your argument. Lies can be codified and laws can be ignored. And both often are. Sure it’s not a traditional lie, it’s more like a lie of implication. Like labeling your product “0% poison” and running a big ad campaign about how your competitors don’t say their products are poison-free. Just pick a different word that doesn’t already apply to all food.