Ha! This is silly.

Organic ingredients does not equal an organic product.

Though I understand not wanting to ingest food covered with chemicals, I think I am missing something about organics. I thought that the reason farmers used pesticides and fertilizers was to increase crop yield per acre. Thereby using less land to feed people.

Would it not be better to use "just enough" fertilizer and pesticides in combination with other options such as zero till and natural pest enemies?

I guess my question is are we trading what is good for our bodies (no pesticides or chemicals) for what is good for the planet (fewer acres of land used for farming)?

General Mills switched to whole grain a couple of years ago, which should be applauded. There's nothing intrinsically wrong with Oreos, just the way they're made. I know a lot of people who attack Oreos on principle, and have a deeper problem with humble pleasures in general.

Mega-food companies have to make more efforts to make their products less evil, but health food advocates have to back off on slingin' the guilt.

Hey, fatties can be green too. ;)

I think it's great. Not that people should buy Oreos in bulk now -- they're still a sometimes food -- but it's a success no matter where organics show up.

Look at it this way: if somebody's going to buy Oreos (they are yummy), would you rather they buy this or the regular, non-organic kind?

As organics go mainstream, they're going to be co-opted by the process food industry. Yes, that gives a lot of folks around here the shivers, but it does mean much, more of the food being produced in the environment is being produced a little bit more responsibly. Or at least with the pretense of responsibility. That wouldn't have happened if organics just stayed on the hobby farms.

You can't let perfect be the enemy of the good. All food should be produced organically. Even junk food. So this is a good thing.

Just remember that cookies are a sometimes food.

I think it's a good idea!

I just love oreos and now I can tell my husband I'm snacking on the good stuff. :)

None of the above. It's not the best thing in the world, and it's not the worst. It's good that the idea of organic is going mainstream, and it will pave the way for a more healthy way of thinking about food. Now that organic is a household word, and pantry filling product, we can work to create an even more sustainable process that builds on the idea of organic, but adds in other elements, such as permaculture, local eating, socially responsible business, cruelty free agriculture, and equal trade, too.

It seems like part of the issue you have with this is use of the word "organic" and what that word should mean--a perfectly valid subject. However, it is with no small sense of irony that I remind you that "organic" does not in fact mean low-fat, low-calorie, low-sugar, not packaged, or non-processed, any more than "healthy" equals "thin." The fact that Oreos are cookies does not make them intrinsically un-"organic"; indeed, our thriving local organic/vegan bakery would take umbrage at that conclusion, and rightly so. It is simply not accurate.

Now whether or not these "organic" Oreos are in fact organic, as one commenter hinted at, is a valid and interesting question. What "organic" as an official label should tell consumers, how a product should be made or what percentage of organic ingredients it should use before it can be labeled "organic," these are legitimate concerns. Claiming that a sweet treat can't be "organic" because some people have their knickers in a twist about caloric intake and other people's physical size is, well, not legitimate.

The purpose of organically growing is to keep the pesticides and other junk from entering the ground and our food. It has nothing to do with grow-able acreage but rather crop yield. The reasons for growing organic are plentiful and the only reason we ever switched away from organic growing was cost. Americans are cheap and don't want to pay the actual cost of many items.

Anyways, back on topic, this is a good idea. Spreading awareness is important, and most people just don't give a crap about environmentalism. So we have to come at them slowly with changes...

Getting pissy with companies that are making small steps to a larger change is like pissing in the wind...

I think we need to realize that there is a separation of what is healthy for us to eat and what is healthy for the earth. Yes, oreo's are not the healthiest choice for humans to eat, but it is very good that some of the ingredients are being produced in a more environmentally friendly way.

Organic to me doesn't mean health food, it just means that the ingredients where gathered in a better way(which also makes makes them healthier which could be where all the confusion is).

Well there in lies the rub, pure organic ingredients does not intrinsically equate to nutritious products once the large food manufacturers have got their hands on it and pushed it through their processing plants. It’s a little like low fat foods, they are not necessarily healthy they are just low in fat.
The way I see it is that the organic movement is increasingly going to be faced with pressures from both the large retailers and the big food processors who want to incorporate the organic appeal into their product range, they will push and pull the definition of organic to its limit to allow them to continue with their industrial low cost processing methods. Equally the very term organic may get fundamentally compromised by their marketing tactics. It will only take a few “exposes” of the real nutritional value of say a processed cookie that has a couple of organic ingredients in it to throw consumer doubt on the whole idea of organic as healthy.
There is no question that organic and healthy foods are coming out of the niche and into the mainstream, and this is a good thing, however organic food ingredient production does not benefit from the same economies of scale as industrial food production- there are only so many cows that can be organically grazed on a hectare of land, only so much wheat that can be grown while ensuring soil sustainability. This means that more and more farmland needs to be converted over to organic production, this process is not overnight. There are going to be problems in the supply chain, with bottle necks at a basic commodity level, and maybe later at packing plants, and food manufacturing if we are to ensure a proper separation between organic and none organic products. This will cause huge problems for the supermarkets and the food producers who will naturally try and cut corners to get to market as quickly as possible.
We have to watch very carefully the way the market is growing, give it all our support so that it stays true to the core organic values, and keep up the media pressure to stop the message being drowned out by the advertising try to hijack the word Organic.
In the UK we already have a number of “organic” food labeling schemes, each one slightly different, the big retailers and food producers are busy trying to torpedo the idea of a compulsory government regulated food labeling scheme, Even within the best of our quality regulators, the Soil Association, there is pressures as the implications of the explosion in organic is being absorbed and thought through.
There is no simple or clear answer, or if there is I am too simple to understand it, however I think that we have to ensure that the essential link between organic and healthy must be maintained and that this territory should not be yielded to the food processors.

Gee whiz, it's just like every other "low-fat", "low-sodium", fiber-and-vitamin-added sugar pop cereal or candy snack - touting the "health" benefits is just another marketing ploy.

When you're eating junk food, why even bother with organic? It's not solving the sugar addiction, just displacing the guilt!

"Made with Organic Ingredients" means absolutely nothing. That's the objectionable part. When I see a USDA, or better, label on it proclaiming it's truly organic, then I'll give it praise!

Lets not jump to conclusions about Oreo's being organic, a trip to their website doesnt even have them as a listed product. You would think they would promote them if they made them at least on their own website. So it could be a doctored picture. I would wait before giving up the Newman O's.

This is STUPID!!! Helathy food and organic food are two totally different things!!!! Organic means better for the environment, not you!!!! Also, I question the benefit of having all our food organic since organic food takes mroe space to grow won't it be destroying much of our natural environment like it is Brazil? I think a balance of organic farms not polluting the environment and regular farms to save space is a good mix!!!! How about you?

Arghh... this is like listening to people talk about herbal supplements as being somehow intrinsically better than medicine, because what? The packaging says it's from a natural source? As opposed to the packaged medicine that could be from a natural source but doesn't say so? Because you could get a super-dose of the herbal suppliment because it comes from an unregulated industry?

Organic food in no way relates to the nutritive quality of the food. That's simply ridiculous. And yet I know there are many people who think that. You can see it in these comments. Organic simply means that you are probably not be ingesting as many chemicals some of which are known to have long term detrimental effects. I love organic food, but let's not pretend that it's somehow intrinsically healthy. There are plenty of organic white breads with the nutritive content of Elmer's glue.

Regarding the concern: The world can't afford to go organic because it would take too much land.

Samuel Fromartz, author of Organic Inc., points out that chemical farming may churn out more food per acre under ideal conditions, but over the long term -- including drought periods -- the yield difference dwindles. Moreover, pummeling the soil with chemicals may eventually sap land of any productivity at all. As Fromartz points out, India -- which bought Borlaug's Green Revolution package wholesale, and is often cited as one of the effort's great successes -- is now experiencing a severe soil- and water-depletion crisis.
[From http://www.grist.org/comments/food/2007/01/03/economist/]

In one sense, sustainable organic agriculture may take more land to allow fields to be left fallow every few years. Fallow means letting weeds grow or planting a nitrogen-fixing cover crop that is turned back into the soil. Fallowed land is not wasted -- it can support wildlife or farmers may raise pastured livestock on it. Eating low on the food chain combined with organic agriculture would require much less land overall.

Just because something is organic (or, as here, made from some organic ingredients), doesn't mean you have to eat it. No matter what they say about organic broccoli, there's no way I'm eating it (conventionally grown broccoli, either - that stuff tastes nasty). That said, I'm not opposed to seeing more organic broccoli show up in my grocery store. The more demand for orgainc produce rises, the more the price will come down, and that's good for us all. If the makers of Oreos are increasing the demand for orgainc flour, the cheaper it will eventually be when I want to use some orgainc flour to bake a loaf of bread. Plus, fewer pesticides and fertilizer run-off in the environment is a plus no matter what the end product will be.

ive had these, they taste strange. the newman o's and even the whole foods store brand are better, the oreos have an odd aftertaste. the chips ahoy made with organic ingredients are another story tho, they taste like chips ahoy and 3 cookies contain fewer calories and fat than one matts chocolate chip cookie.

i realize cookies and candy arent health food, but its still nice to be able to indulge from tme to time without having to worry about artificial flavors and colors.

Just wanted to point out something slightly problematic about a few of the previous comments: processed organic cookies are being compared to home/local bakery made organic cookies.
Yes, cookies, in moderation, will not have any drastic negative effects on one's health. This is in reference to cookies made from ingredients grown sustainably, without synthetic pesticides, fertilizers and herbacides. Cookies such as these cannot be processed with preservatives or any other synthetic ingredients.
Removing harmful pesticides and fertilizers from the cooking-making cog in the non-sustainable industrial food system is only very marginally a good thing (in that it is good for the environment), when compared with the extreme impact of synthetic food additives on the environment and our physical health.

i thought organic was about a better earth... not about a better health (well sort of). what is the deal with you people who claim just because its a freaking cookie it cant be organic?? that is dumb. im young and new to the organic scene but even i know that organic doesnt mean healthier. and any idiot who will eat more organic cookies than regular ones because they say they are organic is just that... an idiot. i know that organic means using less chemicals and earth destroying things to help with keeping the environment healthier and keeping chemicals out of our bodies... not eat me im healthier. i am kind of disappointed in reading some of these comments. i find it surprising to see people on treehugger downing products and companies that are just trying to improve the way they make and produce food. and what does it hurt that not ALL the ingredients arent organic. atleast they are trying people. anyways... i think this is awesome. the more organic products that are brought mainstream = less money = happy me because i cant afford alot. only some. and thats a start. just like this is...

It is nice to see more organic items, but they are only making these type of products because they see that there is a large amount of money being spent on organic food. They don't want to miss out! So they do the minimum, they don't care about health.