|
Topics:
|
|
|---|---|
Words: |
1068 |
Pages:
|
2
This essay sample was donated by a student to help the academic community. Papers provided by EduBirdie writers usually outdo students' samples.
|
Cite this essay
Download
One of the most important things to do in life is eating. Eating food is essential for humans and all other living beings. Food contains nutrients, and nutrients are required to maintain homeostasis. The humans and other living organisms require proteins, lipids, carbohydrates, vitamins, and minerals. If any of those five things are not kept balance, homeostasis will not be maintained and the human body and other organisms will be susceptible to disease, disorders, and eventually death if equilibrium does not find balance again. We would think that since food is so essential, we would want the best quality of it. However, many will argue that food grown in certain ways is worse than the other. Pesticide grown food is argued to be convenient, but damaging and organically grown food is argued to be expensive, but healthy. So, that leaves scientists with the question of what the best way to grow food is regarding health and the economy.
What is organically grown food? Organically grown food is food that is grown without the assistance of antibiotics, fertilizer, growth hormones, and pesticides. Those four are examples of chemicals used to make cropping food more sufficient for mass production. The 1940s led to the rapid use of chemicals in food cropping due to “the discovery of the effects of DDT, BHC, aldrin, dieldrin, endrin, chlordane, parathion, captan and 2,4-D” (‘History of Pesticide Use’, IUPAC). This type of farming has managed to coin the term ‘conventional farming’. Since this discovery, chemicals are used to prolong shelf life, make the product more attractive, make it taste better, and more. This causes farming companies to save more money and make more money. To add on, all of these chemicals are FDA approved, so there is nothing stopping farming companies from using them. On the other hand, anything that is not naturally altered will have negative side effects. We have to decide if these negative side effects are worth any benefits received from growing crops with pesticides.
There are multiple ways to be exposed to the usage of chemicals in food. A majority of the food we consume has been genetically modified in one way or the other. The way crops are grown (what they are grown in, how they are treated, etc.), packaged, and delivered are all ways they are exposed to chemicals that are not naturally occurring within the crop already. When exposure is consistent, it changes from acute toxicity to chronic toxicity. From acute toxicity alone, you can experience respiratory tract irritation, sore throat and/or cough, allergic sensitization, eye and skin irritation, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, headache, loss of consciousness, extreme weakness, seizures and/or death (‘Health Effects of Pesticides’, Pesticide Action Network UK). Those are reactions that can happen just 48 hours after exposure to pesticides. The long-term effects include, but are not limited to, the development of Parkinson’s disease, asthma, depression and anxiety, cancer, including leukemia and non-Hodgkin lymphoma, and attention deficit and hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) (‘Health Effects of Pesticides’, Pesticide Action Network UK). Both pieces of evidence give conventional farming a bad name, and this is just the effects to the human body. Environmental factors are another topic.
Pesticides do not only negatively affect the human body, but there is also scientific data that reports its negative effect on the environment. Runoff that is caused by chemicals used in farming is not regulated by the government or the companies that produce the crops. This leaves the environment vulnerable to the toxic waste that is left as a result of conventional farming. A chemical compound that is known as Atrazine is the second on the chart of most used pesticides. A man known as Doctor Tyrone Hayes who is from UC Berkeley was hired to discover the effects of Atrazine under the company Syngenta (marketed as Aatrex). In Doctor Hayes’ study, it was found that 10% of male tadpoles who lived in atrazine-contaminated water grew ovaries. The company, Syngenta, had refused to allow Doctor Hayes to publish his work. However, Doctor Hayes managed to find a loophole and alerted the public of his findings. If one chemical alone can change the sex of a developing amphibian, it is unimaginable what this is doing to the developing brains of human children.
Organic farming also has its setbacks. One study claims that organic farming is actually far worse than conventional farming. “The carbon footprint of the organic and conventional diets was the same – no significant difference. However, this includes the fact that the conventional diet contains 45% more meat, and meat consumption was the main driver of the carbon footprint. Therefore, if you eliminate the meat variable, organic produce has a much higher carbon footprint than conventional produce, but this higher organic carbon footprint was offset by reduced meat consumption” (‘Organic Farming Is Bad for the Environment’, NeuroLogica Blog). Research such as the mentioned above causes many questions to arise in the scientific community. People, however, will still continue to argue that organic farming is better, without considering any possible negatives.
On the other hand, there are also many types of scientific research that is pro-organic. One study stated: “Not only does organic production help reduce public health risks, mounting evidence shows that food grown organically are rich in nutrients, such as Vitamin C, iron, magnesium, and phosphorus, with less exposure to nitrates and pesticide residues in organically grown fruits, vegetables, and grains when compared to conventionally grown products” (‘Health Benefits of Organic’, ‘The Robust Organic Sector Stays on Upward Climb, Posts New Records in U.S. Sales’). This tends to be the opinion of many people that specialize in human health and nutrition. This does not stop those that argue that conventional farming does not have a real health effect and environmental effect.
There have been many conflicting arguments regarding the comparison of organically grown food and chemically grown food. Overall, it appears that organic farming is far better than conventional farming. Ultimately, the decision is left to consumers on what they think is best for them. There are benefits to both organic and conventional farming, such as lower expenses for productions and physical health. Conventional farming is better economically for farmers compared to the high maintenance of organic farming. Organic farming appears to have more positive health properties and ecological impacts. The principles underlying both types of farming will help everyone determine which type of farming is best for them personally.
Get your paper done in as fast as 3 hours, 24/7.
Fair Use Policy
EduBirdie considers academic integrity to be the essential part of the learning process and does not support any violation of the academic standards. Should you have any questions regarding our Fair Use Policy or become aware of any violations, please do not hesitate to contact us via support@edubirdie.com.
Stuck on your essay?
