The Non-organic Foods - Essay Example

Task: Omnivore’s Dilemma Introduction Food is a necessity to all living organisms; hence, farming started centuries ago to feed humanity. Initially, farming was a lifestyle practice and production processes focused on subsistence farming. However, in the era of industry and technology, the situation is completely different. High demand in the industry posed by increasing the world’s population has led to commercialization of the practice. The non-organic scheme is a profitable venture; thus, effectively challenged the organic model over the time (Lockie 316). Presently, non-organic is the prime food production method and products from the practice dominates the market. However, the subject encompassing this model is controversial. Indeed, the practice has raised concerns that demand critical examination (Duram 123). Commercialized farming has destructed and polluted surroundings the consequences that the environment has suffered out of our wicked practices, which alter genuine farming. Therefore, there is need of restructuring the trend meaning that persons need to shun consuming non-organics and adopt organics to conserve the remains and prevent further harm. (Preserve the remaining non-organics to safeguard the environment) The Non-organic foods Background Efforts to non-organic farming initiated with introduction of chemicals in the practice to fight pests and weeds. The procedure reduced crops infestations substantially and successfully addressed the challenge of weeds. However, the practice has led to introduction of toxic residuals in the crops. Subsequently, the method engaged the use of sewage sludge as a fertilizer. This idea appeared sustainable since the approach provided a method of utilizing human waste for fertilizer production. As such, cheaper fertilizers were accessible hence the productivity augmented (Harper & Aikaterini 288). However, studies have identified that residues from some of these fertilizers have detrimental effects on human health. Later advancements in the non-organic scheme led to introduction of technologies that incorporated hormones and antibiotics in farming procedures (Duram 145). The use of hormones meant hurrying crops and animals growth rate, an aspect that boosted productivity. Indeed, antibiotics provide superb food preservation schemes. However, consuming antibiotic-preserved products meant introducing agents into our systems (Lockie 318). This is detrimental since antibiotics lead to resistances hence weakening the defense system. Recently, non-organic procedures have adopted a plan of irradiating products to eliminate any agents present. However, the consequence of consuming foods that carries radiations is unbearable. Importantly, radiations have harmful effects on environment. The rationality behind shunning non-organic foods The contemporary generation presents compromised health an aspect attributable to non-organic consumptions. According to Duram (150), most of diseases challenging the society such as obesity, diabetes and hypertension initiates from consumption of non-organic products. The production procedures associated with non-organic scheme renders food harmful. Apparently, there exists no safety guarantee in a production that capitalizes on massive application of destructive chemicals and hormones (Pollan10). The greatest risk emerges with the aspect of certifying these foods. Indeed, most non-organics in supply carries certification marks to validate their safety. However, this presents a dirty trick to the consumers who guzzle such products blindly. It is piteous to realize that the society continues feeding on toxins ignorantly only to realize the effect associated with the practice when it is hard to cure. An informed consumption would at least minimize the effect. Additionally, we cannot ignore the concern of using synthetic fertilizers in our farm. As identified, such fertilizers are cheap and enhance outputs; however, effects associated with this practice outweighs its simple gain. An apparent effect arises when harmful chemicals from these fertilizers find their way to the water bodies. This presents assorted problems to the environment and humanity. Initially, the practice leads to destruction of ecosystems hence interfering with the living forms (Thompson 173). Coral reef bleaching is a living evident to such practices. Coral reefs ranks among the top habitats that holds world’s biodiversity. Non-Organic producers claim that their approaches are ideal in establishing food securities. However, this is not justifiable since the detrimental effects linked to the practice have a potential of lowering humanity foods considerably. Evidently, destruction of habitants translates to reduction of populations (Harper & Aikaterini 287). For instance, the society draws voluminous amounts of foods from fishing activities. Harmful chemicals from fertilizers may lead to deaths of live forms in waters hence reducing these food reserves (Pollan 159). Importantly, ocean creatures may feed on fertilizer residues available in the waters. Consequently, persons integrate such chemicals on their body systems when they feed on such creatures hence presents an indirect entry route. Notably, artificial fertilizers are not sustainable since their persistence usage deteriorates soil quality (El-Hage & Caroline 67). The absurdity of the matter emerges with the virtue that an alternative to these synthetic fertilizers is available. Animals produce large volumes of waste products that can act as manure. There exists nothing special with synthetic fertilizers. Indeed, local manure can comfortably substitute synthetic ones if taped effectively. Importantly, Non-organic production invites unethical animal handling procedures. The scheme undertakings manipulate animals like experimental objects using hormones and chemicals (El-Hage & Caroline 90). Evidently, the procedure fails to provide animals and crops with appropriate time to settle or mature as their growth is fasted though application of artificial hormones. Thirsty producers eye commercial gains disregarding the consequences of their activities to the society. Evidently, in a demand oriented meat production, chemically produced corn has replaced the grass as the prime livestock feed. Furthermore, industrially produced supplements are common in livestock diets (Thompson 167). Consequently, products obtained from these animals are not safe anymore. This means that the chief products that feed the society such, us the meat and milk with its products like cheese and cream are all contaminated (Pollan 51). Apparently, in such an environment one can hardly escape the wrath associated with the non-organics hence the society’s destiny is not appealing. Indeed, the risk associated with these unethical practices is evident, as studies have identified that non-organic meat causes the ‘mad cow’ syndrome. This presents a hint of what may emerge in future, if the society fails to discourage non-organics since the practice has a potential of developing further diseases (El-Hage & Caroline 56). Consuming animals realized from the non-organic productions is risky since an ideal observation would be such foods would present a similar condition to the consumers. Lastly, it is possible to calculate the effect of the practice in terms of the cost. Initially, fighting diseases arising from the route consume society’s funds. Preventing would have been a rational idea rather than treating these diseases. This asserts the rationale of avoiding non-foods instead of fighting there consequences (Pollan 45). Additionally, most non-organic procedures disregards clean air and water laws regulations hence the scheme pays considerable taxes. Engaging in contradictory practices and then paying fines and taxes to such practices is not rational. A sustainable procedure would be avoiding the ill procedures to salvage such costs for other beneficial endeavors (Thompson 169). Importantly, restoring polluted environments is costly and impossible in some cases. This apparent since cleaning polluted rivers and dumpy environment burden the society’s economy. As such, non-organic present a condition where few individuals enjoys fast gains at detriment of the society an idea, which is not a justifiable. Organic the ideal route Adopting an organic scheme would free the society from the identified consequences. Organic production invites establishing crops and livestock using economic, humane and environmental friendly procedures. The scheme hence emphasizes on the customary style of farming that utilizes manual force and discourages the use of chemicals (El-Hage & Caroline 24). Moreover, the system uses natural manure to build farm’s fertility and capitalizes on the cultural tactics in managing pests and weeds. Initially, organic farming ensures proper utilization of the soil. The procedure eliminates the use of synthetic fertilizers; instead, the scheme’s engages natural models that are healthy. Consequently, the soil can be utilized by numerous successive generations. This provides the future generations with a guarantee of safe food (Pollan 23). Additionally, elimination of chemicals and fertilizers provides a healthy environment hence enhancing the flora and fauna populations. Indeed, natural vegetations in organic farms arrests carbon dioxides hence reduce the amounts of the atmosphere. Carbon dioxide is a prime gas that promotes global warming hence system that reduces its volumes is very beneficial. Notably, organic minimizes the use of antibiotics; instead, the scheme invites natural systems like the solar energy, sunlight control on substitute disinfectant and uses open air in drying produce (Pollan 34). All these practices contribute towards a better environment. Evidently, adopting organic scheme is an ideal approach towards establishing clean environment. Consequently, this will provide healthy habitats for effective multiplication of animals and plants hence restoring world’s biodiversity. Importantly, Organic foods are nutritious and have substantial amounts of antioxidants. These properties can considerably address the concern of compromised health in the society. Initially, organic foods will lead establishment of sturdy immune systems that can counter diseases effectively. Additionally, since the practice eliminates the use of chemicals and antibiotics, society will face lesser disease risks (Pollan 5). Promoters of non-organic farming argue that their system is less costly; however, they fail to account for other factors associated with the practice. Lockie (314) observes that organic food is somewhat cheaper than non-organics. Conclusion Organics may be costly but adopting the scheme provides the society with a confidence of a healthy future. Therefore, adopting this scheme is mandatory in the contemporary society. Indeed, the society cannot bear the detriments of the non-organics any more. The change is realizable if the society embraces basic approaches like consuming simple organics such as milks and potatoes. Notably, the people who like fast food can purchases organics types like organics burgers. The constant message in the society should emphasize on consumption of organics. An important approach that can also promote organic proliferation is purchasing from local suppliers. Apparently, it is easier to monitor the activities in a local station than in a multinational center. Products in the supermarkets are mainly ill since persons who operate the stores runs for cheaper suppliers without regarding detriments of the products. Consequently, anyone obtaining the products from such outlets should be cautious. Shifting the practice will restore the condition in the society considerably. Indeed, informed individual need to reprimand the society on the detriments of non-organic constantly and the practice should be discouraged at all cost. Works Cited Duram, Leslie A. Encyclopedia of Organic, Sustainable, and Local Food. Santa Barbara, Calif: Greenwood, 2010. Print. El-Hage, Scialabba N, & Caroline Hattam. Organic Agriculture, Environment and Food Security. Rome: FAO, 2002. Print. Harper, Gemma C., & Aikaterini Makatouni. "Consumer Perception of Organic Food Production and Farm Animal Welfare." British Food Journal 104.3-5 (2002): 287-. ABI/INFORM Complete. Web. 4 June 2012. Lockie, Stewart. "Capturing the Sustainability Agenda: Organic Foods and Media Discourses on Food Scares, Environment, Genetic Engineering, and Health." Agriculture and Human Values 23.3 (2006): 313-23. ABI/INFORM Complete. Web. 4 June 2012. Pollan, Michael. The Omnivores Dilemma: The Search for a Perfect Meal in a Fast-Food World. London: Bloomsbury, 2007. Print. Pollan, Michael. The Omnivore’s Dilemma: A Natural History of Four Meals. London: Penguin, 2007. Print Thompson, Donald B. "Natural Food and the Pastoral: A Sentimental Notion?" Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 24.2 (2011): 165-94. ABI/INFORM Complete. Web. 4 June 2012. Read More