Organic farming is touted as a greener alternative to conventional farming. But new research suggests that even the handful of pesticides used on organic fields can affect nearby animals in much the same way that conventional pesticides do.

Read the Story

Show Top Comments

Natural pyrethrins are worse for fish than synthetics which have been engineered to be better for fish. That’s literally the reason synthetics were created, to improve specificity.

crusoe

anyone who farms for a living will tell you that “organic” =/= better for the environment. and from what i know there’s very little peer-reviewed research stating that it’s even healthier for humans than conventional products. It’s mostly a marketing ploy to make feel better about their consumption choices. eta: organic also =/= better animal welfare. most organic milk, eggs, and meat still comes from factory farmed animals.

Waste-Comedian4998

Touted by marketing groups. In reality organic farming uses pesticides that are less efficient, and less well studied for dangers to the environment. Organic farming often requires MORE resources for lower yeild. Organic farming is not the solution the PR people would have you believe.

Batemansrabbit

I would think that just because something is Organic does not mean it is better for the environment or more healthy.

tawtaw6

Organic farming started as a philosophy believing that natural inputs are better for the earth, its living creatures and us humans. As more people started to look into this and scientific studies seemed to confirm this hypothesis, the market grew. The word “Organic” was then turned into a certification scheme, stipulating rules on what is considered “natural” and so can and what cannot be done under the organic label. These rules are even taken up by EU and US law (tiny differences exist) and so the certification scheme is one of the most protected and trustworthy certifications (as in, you know what rules were adhered too and abuse is punishable by law). Now, any excess or shortage of inputs can obviously still generate damage to the earth, its living beings and us humans, it doesn’t matter whether those inputs are natural or chemical (man-made). Think about spraying copper, which is allowed up to certain dose in organic wine production, can still harm the environment. It depends on the dose, timing, frequency etc. But chemical pesticides have this issue too, and there is a growing body if scientific literature that is indicating that such chemical products are actually more harmful in the long run as they do not break down at all, or for a very long time, or into more toxic compounds. With a Masters Degree in Organic Agriculture, I cannot say that organic is better than conventional farming per se. But I do think we underestimate the dangers of chemical compounds (like DDT is still being found even as far out as in the arctic, and how plastics have entered the oceans and is now as microplastics the fish we eat). So I support organic, despite that you cannot know for sure if the farmer is truly sustainable as he/she might over/under applied inputs. In the end, the best is to know your farmer and by directly from him/her. Esp for their income, as no farmer can take good care of his land and animals if they’re being paid bottom dollar.

MartijnR