Will organic additives be found in compliance with the present regulations for feed additives?

Government regulatory and monitoring of good quality feeds (organic/ free from unwanted residues) is a major concern in developing countries. Developing countries at the bottom of the economic hierarchy (no freedom of choice) are at the mercy of unscrupulous traders. The present information highway and rapid information dissemination enabled the rich to avoid such safety food issues. Additional burden of the high cost of organic certification (international standard) is biased in favor of the developed (rich) nation. 

I am very sorry, but I can not help you because I am not expert in animal feeding.

first thing is the cost of production as that will impact the selling price and farmers always prefer cheaper ingredients.

again its efficacy should be tested and established properly show that the acceptability will be increased.

if it is costly, then added advantage should be made understood but this is very difficult to make farmer understand.

again in organic farming people should be made aware about the importance of its products. as the creamy layer people will always follow the better option even if it is costly. but in india they are less

rate of organic feed additives production is relatively low.

cost of raw materials, restriction that follow schools of thinking rather than scientific logic (this is a highly biased view regarding the DACH markets)

we can use of agricultural by-product (plant secondary metabolites and bioactive compounds) as feed additives to have enriched and low cost production.

providing organic feeds are much more important than finding organic feed additive.

because of not many organic feed producers are selling the organic feeds. 

Producing pure organic products are something ideal and if we want be realistic, we cannot expect pure organic product, because, the conventional and organic product in a feed chain are very close related to each other. So, as a result it is hard or may be impossible for us clearing one feed chain form any inorganic (≠organic) product. According to, too many changes that we do in wild organisms or even, our changes in climate (purity and conditions)!

However if we decrease our wills from organic product only to some product that are not contaminated internally with any un-biological product only in its own product procedure –with no attention to inputs’ procedure of product- we could say we have organic product. It means in the field of organic products a need to exact Terminology to orient consumers’ expectations.

On the other hand decades of conventional products consuming have deep possible effects on organisms that force them to undergo some adaptations. So, main question is, Do anybody could ensure consumers that changing to organic diets have no impairment on adapted internal biological and metabolic systems?

It does not mean that we must continue our way on consuming conventional products but returning to organic products only as a consequence of some reports on potent disadvantages of conventional ones, is not logical (changing to organic as a response of unhealthiness of conventional). This blind return is kind of competition with natural adaptably of biological organisms.

As a solution, flash back to the reasons of immigrating from organic to conventional may help us to answer, how much, how deep, how long, how fast, and … we must return back to organic diets.

Here, in LATAM the mayor constrait is the cost of that items, because the economical situation is not the best in developing countries as Ecuador; also we have no clear goverment regulations.

The grading of livestock feed must be elevated to highest level, but it is too costly. As of now there are only three grades that i know, (1) Feed Grade, (2) Food Grade, (3) Pharmacological Grade. There have been heavy metal residues we have published in feed, there is no way the private company will consider the determination of presence of heavy metals in their feed. For Organochlorine Pesticide Residue alone in the Philippines it cost 15,000/ sample (320 USD/sample). Plus the AAS-FLAME method for some heavy metals each cost 100 USD. Practically not possible for the poor people to have access to high quality food. In the presence of these residues farmers should not think of integrating manure as fertilizer.

Checking for the presence of noxious compounds in feedstuffs is not a very effective way of ensuring good quality feeds (being organic or not), Prevention, although not always easy, is much better (see attachments)

Article The risk of contamination of food with toxic substances pres...

Article Prevention and control of contaminants of industrial process...

The major constraint is finding naturally occurring (organic) compounds in feedstuffs typically fed to organic livestock that would supply high quality and adequate amounts of given nutrients or phytochemicals, thus, minimizing the need for feed additives. Furthermore, consumers are driving this debate because they are demanding livestock products that have been produced without the use of feed additives. 

Dear all,

Thanks for your comments. Many of you commented on chemical residues. This make sense, because it is understood (by people, it does not always happen in real life if one analyzes the products) that organic products have a lower charge of residues.

However, this does not mean organic, nor organic means zero residues or 'pure'. What does 'pure' mean? Maximum chemical residues in feed are commonly fixed by feed regulations., while organic production must comply with with specific rules for this kind of production (always complying also with general feed regulations).

Of course organic feedstuff should be provided before than feed additives (either under organic or conventional production). However, my question was focused on feed additives in fact because I see the difficulty to the companies to provide with these products. In my experience, difficulty to separate the two lines of products (along with the cost it carries and the need for more workers), bureaucracy and low demand are the main barriers. Of course low demand also reduces the take off of this subsector. Moreover, in the past years (before the 100% rule in organic feed) exceptions to the organic rules (permissibility) were also behind this, since there was still room to provide with some conventional feedstuff.

However, feed additives sector and regulation in organic livestock farming remains quite unclear. Plant extracts and similar products (sometimes called 'natural') are allowed. However, they are not produced by companies certified as such, and they are not 'natural' at all to my understanding; they are extracted or synthesized.

This remind me to the banning in the use of some reproductive technologies that do not introduce residues are not in confrontation with organic principles. Moreover, such techniques would help to facilitate the selection of desired characteristics (robustness, productivity, etc.) and would reduce the transmission of infectious diseases. 

To end and broaden the initial question: what about the sense of the organic regulation regarding organic feed additives and its future?

firstly the costs of organic feed addtive that affect the total cost of feed production secondery the effeciency of organic additives .in enhanicing feed efficiency i.e improving feed conversion ratio and protein productive value.... and the acceptance of final product by the consumer .

Thanks Magdy, 

Do you have any data on efficiency and protein value of organic feed?

Regards.