organic food essay conclusion

by Chris Woodford. Last updated: February 24, 2016. Two words, more than any others, helped to spark the organic revolution in farming: silent spring. Back in the 1960s, when the Green Revolution's industrial-scale use of pesticides and fertilizers was helping to bring about a massive increase in crop yields, the seemingly solitary voice of science writer Rachel Carson raised a note of caution about chemicals that might be doing more harm than good. Through a combination of determined campaigning, poetic writing, and carefully informed science, Carson alerted humanity to the dangers of agrochemicals that would kill not just bugs and bacteria but (in her eyes) also decimate the vibrant ecosystems built on top of them. A half century later, organic food is mainstream—obligatory for many parents, highly desirable for many more. But is it really better for our health and the environment? Why does it often cost more? And if it's so good, all round, why don't we do all our farming that way? Let's take a closer look! Photo: Organic vegetables are often supplied loose in a reusable box to minimize packaging and reduce the food's overall carbon footprint. That's an illustration of the comprehensive approach taken by most organic growers: they consider the cradle-to-grave (lifecycle) environmental impact of their product, not just the effect of agrochemicals on the food itself. What is organic farming? The easy answer comes in one sentence: instead of using artificial chemical fertilizers or pesticides to boost yields, organic farming uses traditional, mostly natural methods to achieve the same ends. But a negative definition— no pesticides —doesn't capture the positive essence of what organic farming is all about: organic farming isn't merely a matter of not doing something: it's about placing a healthy, vibrant, environment (human, animal, plant, and soil) at the heart of.
David C. Holzman David C. Holzman writes on science, medicine, energy, economics, and cars from Lexington and Wellfleet, MA. His work has appeared in Smithsonian, The Atlantic Monthly, and the Journal of the National Cancer Institute. A widely reported Stanford University study1 concluding there is little difference in the healthfulness and safety of conventional and organic foods has been criticized by experts in the environmental health sciences for overlooking the growing body of evidence on the adverse effects of pesticides. Critics take to task the authors’ omission of relevant studies and overinterpretation of the data. The meta-analysis of 237 studies, published in the September 2012 Annals of Internal Medicine, largely focused on nutrient content and viral/bacterial/fungal contamination of organic versus conventionally grown foods. Nine studies reporting pesticide residues, including three of residues exceeding federal limits, were included in summary analyses. The authors concluded that the studies reviewed do not support what they call the “widespread perception” that organic foods overall are nutritionally superior to conventional ones, although eating an organic diet may reduce exposures to pesticides and antibiotic-resistant bacteria.1 A Stanford press release quoted senior author Dena Bravata as saying, “There isn’t much difference between organic and conventional foods, if you’re an adult and making a decision based solely on your health.”2 (According to the Stanford Medical Center press office, Bravata is no longer doing interviews about the study.) In one key finding, the team reported a “risk difference” of 30% between conventional and organic produce, meaning organic produce had a 30% lower risk of pesticide contamination than conventional produce. That number was based on the difference between the percentages of conventional and organic food.
Organic Foods In 2003 organic products were available to buy in stores and since then they have become very popular in many households. With the popularity of these products it has brought up a lot of concern on whether or not the products are worth buying. Organic foods are known to be healthier but are people who eat organic foods normally healthier than people who don't? With this question asked I wanted to do more research on the benefits and the reasoning for us to consume or use organic products.There are many benefits of eating organic foods and the main reasoning for this is because of the way these foods are grown. They are all grown on smaller farms and are cared more for. The farmers use natural soils, get rid of the weeds naturally without using sprays, and they use beneficially insects and birds to get rid of pests and diseases. Using natural resources to grow foods prevents us from eating chemical and in some cases added hormones. Organic foods have more zinc, iron and other vitamins than non-organic foods. They can help reduces your risk for cancer because weed, insect, and mold killers have been linked to the cause of some cancers. The ways these foods are grown also help our environment by creating less pollution.The prices for organic foods are more expensive than non-organic. Non-organic foods are generally more affordable and there are more varieties as well. Non-organic foods do not contain E coli because most organic soil that is animal manure and it can cause E coil in organic foods. Between organic and non-organic foods there are benefits to eating each of them.There are certain foods that you should buy organic over non-organic. These foods are the ones that are more nutritious and contain fewer pesticides. Apples are generally more contaminated with pesticides so buying them organically will reduce the risk of them. Celery, strawberries.
Shopping in the grocery stores, consumers will find increasingly congested stacks of food with the labels of “organic food”. Organic food has been one of the fastest growing sectors of food industry in the past few decades as a legitimate alternative to conventional food. Organic food can be defined as the “product of a farming system which avoids the use of synthetic fertilizers, pesticides, growth promoters and additives” (Kouba 33). There is a growing market for organic food even though its price is usually significantly higher than that of conventional food. The reasons of such large demand of organic food lie in its benefits. Why do people purchase organic food over traditional food, and what makes it more and more demanding? Many research studies regard organic food as healthy food because it contains low pesticide residue. Moreover, many consumers find organic food more nutritious and better-tasting than traditional food. Also, the positive environmental impact of organic farming appeals to “green” eaters, who consider organic food environmentally friendly. Therefore, both empirical data and consumer preferences reveal that the benefits of organic food include less hazardous pesticide, more nutrition, and a farming technique that is more environmentally friendly than non-organic food.Chemical ResiduesOrganic food is based on very precise standards of production, and its non-pesticide requirements are an integral part of the identification and labeling of such products. With respect to chemicals, organic agriculture refrains from the use of “synthetic pesticides, herbicides, fertilizers, fungicides, veterinary drugs, synthetic preservatives and additives” (Shepherd et al.3). Thus, the hazardous residues in organic food are restricted to the lowest amount possible. In fact, many researches have shown the harmfulness of pesticide residues on human health, so.