• binary45@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      17 days ago

      At best, organic food offers the same nutritional value as non organic food. At worst, it’s less nutritious and more expensive.

      • DrFuggles@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        17 days ago

        meh. nutritional value is about the same, yeah, but that’s not the point of organic food. people who claim that eating an all organic diet makes you better are yahoos.

        The point of organic farming is that it is just all-around better for the planet, the soil, the organisms therein and less polluting.

          • Hadriscus@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            17 days ago

            GMOs are an issue for nations’ food sovereignty, but organic food modt importantly means no phytosanitary products (such as the infamous roundup), which persist in the plants and cause all sorts of cancers

        • evasive_chimpanzee@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          17 days ago

          There is not conclusive evidence that organic food is better for the environment. Obviously there are facets of the environment impact that will be better than conventional agriculture, but there is a ~19% reduction in yield, and lower soil carbon in organic agriculture. A reduction in yield means more land must be cleared for agriculture, so the other facets of organic ag would need a to be substantially better than conventional to make up for it.

          • DrFuggles@feddit.de
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            15 days ago

            I disagree. Just following your source to its conclusion, I think it’s safe to say OA (organic agriculture) is better all around:

            7.1 Pros • Lower emissions of CO 2 , N 2 O, and CH4 • Enhanced soil and water quality • Lower energy use per land area • Higher energy efficiency per land area 7.2 Cons • Lower soil profile SOC stocks [i.e. how much carbon is in the soil] • Lower crop yields • Higher land requirement • Lower energy production per land area

            Your conclusion that we’d have to clear more land for agriculture use if we all switched to OA seems flawed; e.g. here in Germany we use about 60% of agricultural land to raise livestock feed like corn etc (https://www.landwirtschaft.de/tier-und-pflanze/pflanze/was-waechst-auf-deutschlands-feldern). Seems to me like eating less meat and growing idk lentils or beans would not immediately lead to food insecurity.

            This is also what the FAO says: yes, OA leads to yield reduction when compared to conventional methods, but not to food scarcity and instead to healthier ecosystems (https://www.fao.org/organicag/oa-faq/oa-faq6/en/).

            (sry gotta go, more.later)