Editor's response to an anonymous post ... from Horizon

I received an anonymous comment to the “Corporate Organics” post regurgitating spin from Horizon’s corporate website and questioning the facts presented in that article (which is footnoted btw).  If you want a critical or negative comment posted you should have the courage to sign it and, if it is supported by credible fact, it will be posted. Disagreement is fine but anonymous corporate bull has no place in a truthful discussion. 

Also, it was apparent that the post was from a representative of Horizon (or maybe Dean Foods), not only from the reference to the corporate website, but by the use of the exact phrasing that was used in response to a critical comment from another user on Horizon’s FaceBook wall.   I will take this as a sign that I am doing a good job of exposing corporations that are profiting by misleading consumers. 

In my opinion content on corporate websites does not count as an objective and credible source for data.  The entire purpose of the site is to convince consumers to purchase their products.  If you look at the websites from Aurora and Horizon they both are committed to sustainable organic dairy farming but the facts suggest otherwise.  Does Horizons website reference the fact that they are under the umbrella of Dean Foods, one of the Nation’s largest food companies?  If they do I didn’t see it, maybe it is in small print in an obscure location on their site where they also reveal the source of the 5% of milk they claim isn’t from family farms.  Aurora doesn’t mention being sanctioned by the USDA on their site.  Do you know how bad you have to be to be sanctioned by the USDA?  Bad.  Take a look at my post on Organic Food Safety to get an idea of what can be considered passable on an “organic” farm by the USDA, if you don’t believe me.

Read a first hand account of a visit a Horizon dairy at http://dir.salon.com/story/news/feature/2005/04/13/milk