Biodynamics: The Next Green Wine

By Virginia Prescott on Wednesday, September 2, 2009.

U.S. food consumers are becoming more interested in how their food is grown and where it comes from, and that interest is extending to wine, as well.

Last year we talked about higher-end boxed wine coming back into fashion. Its packaging has a lower carbon footprint, and stays fresh longer. There’s now organic, local and sustainablly-grown wine.

The latest buzzword? Biodynamic. It’s a method of farming that fosters a diverse ecosystem, and foregoes chemical fertilizers or pesticides. Corby Kummer writes about biodynamic wine in the new issue of Technology Review. He’s a senior editor at The Atlantic and the author of The Joy of Coffee and The Pleasures of Slow Food.

Technology Review: In Vino Veritas (subscription required)

(Photo by pteittinen via Flickr/Creative Commons)

Add new comment

I just heard this segment while at lunch. Please, can somebody explain to me what chemicals are being avoided when you're farming organic? Organic farming still uses fertilizer and pesticides, but they just come from a natural source. They also carry the same chemical load as artificially produced fertilizers and pesticides, so I don't see what you're gaining exactly.

Also, how can burring cow manure based on phases of the moon be any better than if they didn't go by phases of the moon? Sounds more like wishful thinking than anything else.

I invite people to check out the following links:

http://skeptoid.com/episodes/4026

http://skeptoid.com/episodes/4019

http://skeptoid.com/episodes/4166

Submitted by Travis Roy on Wed, 09/02/2009 - 11:30.

There is nothing open-minded or scientific in Prescott''s skeptical and even knee-jerk dismissal of aspects of biodynamicism that seem strange to her. When something works, science tries to understand. Real science requires suspending disbelief and bias.

Submitted by NHPR Listener 222 on Wed, 09/02/2009 - 11:32.

Please reply with the evidence that biodynamics work. It's all based on a lot of stuff that we know doesn't work. It calls for preparations in homeopathic amounts. We know homeopathy is bunk, it has failed double blind trials.

It talks about cosmic forces but you have no idea what that really means.

"In a 1994 analysis, Holger Kirchmann concluded that Steiner's instructions were occult and dogmatic, and cannot contribute to the development of alternative or sustainable agriculture and that many of Steiner's statements are not provable because scientifically clear hypotheses cannot be made from his descriptions (for example, it is hard to prove that you have harnessed "cosmic forces" in the foods). Kirchmann asserted that when methods of biodynamic agriculture were tested scientifically, the results were unconvincing."

Submitted by Travis Roy on Wed, 09/02/2009 - 13:07.

If a Skeptic is dismissing Biodynamics on the basis of it being "strange," they're not being a good Skeptic at all. While it's correct that science neccessitates an open mind and checking our bias at the door, it also demands we use critical thinking and follow the evidence to find supported conclusions. In the case of Biodynamics, there simply isn't any evidence to be had. There is no proposed mechanism by which Biodynamic preparations strengthen the farm's "life force," nor any strict definition of "life force" supported by any experimental evidence. In short, Skeptics are completely open minded - if there is evidence.

Submitted by Aaron Barden on Thu, 09/03/2009 - 09:41.

Idea Smackdown: Round III

About us

Word of Mouth is all about what's new. Online and on-air, the show looks at our fascinating and ever-changing world, and puts the latest ideas under a microscope. Word of Mouth investigates everything from science and technology, to health and the environment, to new trends in popular culture. The show airs Monday through Thursday at noon and is hosted by Virginia Prescott.