The discussion revolves around the value and implications of purchasing organic food versus conventionally produced food. Participants explore various perspectives on the environmental impact, health considerations, and economic factors associated with organic farming and food production.
Participants generally do not reach consensus, with multiple competing views on the merits and drawbacks of organic versus conventional food production remaining unresolved.
Participants acknowledge that the discussion involves complex issues related to environmental impact, health, and economic factors, with many claims dependent on specific definitions and assumptions about agricultural practices.
Readers interested in food production, agricultural practices, environmental science, and health-related discussions may find this thread relevant.
Given the growing, rabid anti-environmentalism, fuelled by you-know-who and his acolytes on this side of the Atlantic, attacking organic farming seems dangerously perverse. If you come to the UK, you can bathe or swim in raw sewage in our rivers and round our coastline, courtesy of the out-of-control water companies.BWV said:Because you know, science. Nitrogen is nitrogen whether it comes from a factory or a bovine posterior, and ‘natural’ insectides can be every bit as toxic as ‘artificial’ ones
So a ‘whatabout Trump’ is the best argument you can come up with?PeroK said:Given the growing, rabid anti-environmentalism, fuelled by you-know-who and his acolytes on this side of the Atlantic, attacking organic farming seems dangerously perverse. If you come to the UK, you can bathe or swim in raw sewage in our rivers and round our coastline, courtesy of the out-of-control water companies.
I'm not persuaded that organic farming is an evil in our society today.
Even if you banned all organic farming, I don't see that the world would be a better place. Possibly quite the reverse.BWV said:So a ‘whatabout Trump’ is the best argument you can come up with?
Who said anything about banning organic farming?PeroK said:Even if you banned all organic farming, I don't see that the world would be a better place. Possibly quite the reverse.
If no one bought it, that would amount to the same thing.BWV said:Who said anything about banning organic farming?
So we shouldn't criticize it then? If you read the OP the whole point was 'organic' was just a lazy marketing gimmick and environmentally sustainable farming requires more careful science, but by all means lets just go with organic so we can all feel good about ourselvesPeroK said:If no one bought it, that would amount to the same thing.
Of all the environmentally distastrous things we are doing, you chose to attack organic farming, which is at worst of dubious merit. What's the motivation for choosing that, of all things?BWV said:So we shouldn't criticize it then? If you read the OP the whole point was 'organic' was just a lazy marketing gimmick and environmentally sustainable farming requires more careful science, but by all means lets just go with organic so we can all feel good about ourselves
So once again, all you can offer are political arguments, and now a bit of ad hominem, along with some pearl-clutching outrage that somehow these points might be associated with the wrong teamPeroK said:Of all the environmentally distastrous things we are doing, you chose to attack organic farming, which is at worst of dubious merit. What's the motivation for choosing that, of all things?
The basic tenet that we must face up to the fact that current human activities are unsustainable is under attack. Organic farming, however imperfect, is at least an attempt to redress the balance. By attacking that specifically, you are nailing your colors firmly to the anti-environmentalist mast. Whether you like it or not, that's how it will be interpreted.
I would say that your position is profoundly political in the first place. I was fighting fire with fire, as it were. Others have taken scientific issue with what you have said in previous posts.BWV said:So once again, all you can offer are political arguments
This is straight out of the anti-environmentalist playbook.BWV said:Back in the good old days when farming was 100% organic and Haber's miracle invention of artificial fertilizer was decades away, feeding America required Chinese slaves to harvest and load bird guano from islands off the Pacific Coast of S America
Right, so while you continue to engage in political and ad hominem responses, the point of the guano article was the much smaller population of US in the mid 1800s required massive imports of this stuff to feed its population - the much larger per-capita population of livestock was not sufficient to generate enough manure - the point being is that organic - I.e. eliminating artificial fertilizer- is not a viable global agricultural solution.PeroK said:I would say that your position is profoundly political in the first place. I was fighting fire with fire, as it were. Others have taken scientific issue with what you have said in previous posts.
I wanted to specifically address the dubious and somewhat cynical political arguments that you introduced. The following is a particularly nasty example. Equating organic farming with slavery!
This is straight out of the anti-environmentalist playbook.
That isn't true in the US, for the FDA, and I doubt it is true in the EU either (I see you are from Denmark).sbrothy said:What I also find a little strange is that products (such as chemicals in food and agriculture) are used indiscriminately and then first removed if problems occur while it's the other way around with medicine.