The choices you make when grocery shopping have a significant impact on both your health and the health of the planet. This statement is no exaggeration. It’s true. This is not referring to the choices between healthy food and unhealthy food, although those decisions are very important as well. In this piece, we’ll discuss how to decide between organic and non-organic foods. When faced with this decision, which do you pick?
Cost is a common reason why many people don’t select organic foods. While organic foods may cost more than their non-organic counterparts, there are reasons for this increased cost. The production of organic foods incurs more costs than that of non-organic foods, according to the Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations. 6 For example, it costs more to pay workers to plant, grow, and harvest organic crops. Furthermore, handling smaller amounts of organic foods after they have been harvested results in higher prices because organic and conventional produce must be kept separate. The inefficiency of marketing and distribution chains for organic products results in higher costs for these products. 31 more words The price of organic foods is higher due to the extra cost of environmental enhancement and protection of soil fertility, higher standards for animal welfare, and assuring a fair and sufficient income for producers.
The lower price of non-organic products may lead some people to choose them over organic products. I realize that organic food can be expensive and if you don’t have enough money to buy it, that’s okay. While it may be tempting to save a few bucks by choosing the cheapest option at the store, is it worth it if it means supporting practices that are harmful to your health and the environment? Can you save money in another way that won’t have such a bad effect?
Why spend more money on organic food? Let’s explore some of the reasons.
Organic food was born as a philosophical movement
With so much going on, it’s helpful to go back to the basics. The concepts of organic agriculture were developed around the time when intensive agriculture began to become more widespread. Rudolf Steiner, Eva Balfour, and Albert Howard thought about a system that would better emulate nature. They were trying to respond to an agriculture that seemed too industrial and harsh to them. Howard drew inspiration from the traditional, sustainable practices he saw in India, which were in contrast to the industrialised practices in Europe. Steiner’s vision was not limited to a new agricultural system; it was much more than that. He views organic agriculture as a social system that is an alternative to the over-mechanization of society.
The agricultural systems that are now the basis of our food supply chains are not sustainable, as Steiner and his colleagues correctly predicted. Now we are aware that the agriculture we currently rely on, that is based on monocultures, the overuse of synthetic pesticides and fertilizers, and increased animal farming, is greatly harming the environment and increasing global temperatures. Although the scientific community largely ignored the idea that increased efficiency and mechanization of agriculture could be harmful at the time, that is no longer the case. The term “conventional” is used to describe something that is usual or standard. At the time when the term was first used, it was considered to be at the forefront of science and technology. Cutting-edge. billion in 1950 to 7.6 billion in 2017. It was considered necessary as it would help to feed an exponentially growing population – from 6 billion in 1950 to 7.6 billion in 2017.
While there was discussion about what direction agriculture should go, some people decided to take action towards organic farming. From the 1940s, the publisher J.I. In the United States, Rodale began to disseminate the idea of “organic” through his magazines. Although the concept of organic remained unpopular, it still stayed on the sidelines of the public and political agenda. The first Organic Farming and Gardening Society opened in Australia in 1944.
When did we turn to organic?
The point where everything changes is in the 1960s, specifically 1962 during the Cold War. A time when people were anxious about the future but had faith that science would bring security and prosperity. In 1962, a scientist and naturalist named Rachel Carson published a book called Silent Spring, which talked about the devastating effects that DDT and other pesticides have on the environment.
DDT is an acronym for dichloro-diphenyl-trichloroethane. It was synthesized in the 1940s and was the first insecticide of its kind. This method was successful in fighting malaria, typhus, and other diseases caused by insects. The pesticide was also found to be effective in controlling insects in crops and livestock production. In 1972, EPA issued a cancellation order for the DDT based on its adverse environmental effects. 9
In just two short weeks, it’s being read in every home in America.” The following text is an excerpt from an American television show which claims that the book is one of the nation’s best sellers and that it is being read in every home in America. Silent Spring has been a huge success, with over 500,000 copies sold. It has been called the most controversial book of the year. The book helped lead to the US government’s decision to ban DDT and made people question if we had given up something important in our quest for efficiency and abundance. It may have made more sense to recover more traditional methods. The organic mission began to take on the features of a social movement at this point. Groups of farmers and consumers in the 1980s began pressuring governments to recognize organic farming as its own official standard. From the 1990s onward, the first regulations and certifications began to be put into place. years later, the global organic market had reached $63 billion The global market for organic products has been growing rapidly in recent years, with North America and Europe leading the way. In 2010, the global organic market was worth $63 billion.
Benefits of Going Organic
Preserving soil microbes through organic farming allows plants to more effectively extract nutrients from the ground, making the resulting plant food more nutrient-dense. Non-organic farming methods use a lot of pesticides, herbicides, and fungicides, which are all harmful chemicals. The use of these chemicals has the unfortunate consequence of harming not only the people exposed to them, but also the important microbes that nurture the soil and support plant-life’s extraction of minerals and other healthy nutrients that then yield more nutrient-rich food for us. Functional medicine expert Mark Hyman, M.D. explains that the nutritional value of plants has decreased by half in the last 50 years. This decline is largely the result of using harmful chemicals such as pesticides and fertilizers in conventional farming. Hyman states that without the use of chemicals, a small amount of soil should contain more microbes than the number of humans that have ever existed.
The practice of over-tilling the soil can lead to nutrient-deficient soil and food. According to Hyman, “if we want to heal the world and create a sustainable food system, we have to start with the soil.” Every day, we are taking the nutrients out of the ground without replenishing them, and expecting our food to be healthy. Hyman believes that in order to create a sustainable food system, we need to start by taking care of the soil. Another related point to consider is that if the soil is healthy, the chemical fertilizers typically used on conventional farms would not be necessary as the soil would be able to provide the necessary nutrients on its own.
The jury is still out on whether organic foods contain more nutrients than their conventionally grown counterparts. Some studies show that organic foods have higher levels of certain nutrients, while other studies show no difference. There is divided opinion on whether or not research supports the idea that video games can be beneficial. Some believe that there is evidence to support this, while others argue that the evidence is not strong enough to come to a definitive conclusion. A large-scale meta-analysis published in the British Journal of Nutrition in 2014 reported that there were significant differences between organic and non-organic crops/crop-based foods. For example, the meta-analysis found that organic foods had 40.5% more antioxidants on average. 1 That, indeed, is significant and meaningful. A 2017 study found that organic dairy products, and most likely organic meat, have 50% higher levels of omega-3 fatty acids than conventional alternatives.
Lower pesticide, antibiotic, and hormone exposure and no GMOs
Booky’s text: To be able to carry the “USDA Organic” label, foods must go through a process of strict standards in regards to growth, production, and distribution. This process restricted the use of pesticides, herbicides, fungicides, genetically modified organisms (GMOs), hormones, and antibiotics. While non-organic farming uses synthetic chemicals, organic agriculture relies on natural pest control and fertilizers that have been approved. Additionally, USDA Organic foods must be completely GMO-free.
This is because organic standards prohibit the use of synthetic pesticides and antibiotics. A 2017 comprehensive meta-analysis published in the journal Environmental Health concluded that those eating organic food have significantly lower exposure to pesticides than those consuming conventionally grown food. Pesticide exposure is also harmful to those who produce conventional crops, for example through work-related exposure or contamination from drift when the pesticides are being sprayed. This pesticide contact is significant because it is associated with an increased risk of developing diseases such as Parkinson’s disease, type 2 diabetes, and certain types of cancers, as well as cognitive deficits (from exposure to pesticides during pregnancy or early childhood).
Furthermore, the risk for containing bacteria that are resistant to three or more antibiotics was reportedly 33% higher in conventionally grown chicken and pork when compared to organically grown counterparts, according to authors of a 2012 study published in the Annals of Internal Medicine .
Organic farming methods are better for the planet
Organic farmers use techniques that are both environmentally friendly and healthful for consumers. Earlier, we discussed how organic farming restricts the use of pesticides that destroy healthy soil microbes. These microbes help plants extract nutrients and promote restorative periods for the farmland. Instead of using synthetic chemicals, organic farmers rely more heavily on integrated pest management practices that use a plant-positive approach. The difference between a plant-positive and pest-negative approach is that the former focuses on making plants and soil healthier through natural means, while the latter focuses on eradicate pests. Pest control methods that focus on elimintating pests themselves, rather than creating an environment that is inhospitable to them, are more effective. This can be done with synthetic chemicals. Organic farming methods also have benefits for wildlife, including encouraging biodiversity and helping to improve and maintain native ecosystems.
Organic foods have a higher salvestrol content
Plants also have immune systems that become stronger when they are challenged occasionally. Non-organic crops that are sprayed with pesticides, herbicides, and fungicides don’t need to build up their immunity because the chemicals do the work for them. However, in the case of organic crops, the immune system phytonutrient “soldiers” known as “salvestrols” fight against intruders. Since organic plants are not treated with chemicals, they contain higher levels of salvestrols than non-organic plants. Scientists have recently discovered that when we eat plants with robust immune systems, we also inherit their heightened immunity.
Salvestrols are found in lower quantities in today’s plant foods as a result of both non-organic farming methods and other factors. Despite the fact that salvestrols have a bitter taste, they are often replaced with sweeter-tasting varieties. This is because the trend nowadays is towards sweet flavors. -LOXIN® Advanced is a dietary supplement that retains these salvestrols during their patented microencapsulation process The trend of producing foods without added sugars or sweeteners has also caused many manufacturers to remove salvestrols to reduce the bitter taste. 5-LOXIN® Advanced is a dietary supplement that contains these salvestrols during their patented microencapsulation process.
There are about 20 different types of salvestrols. Salve in Latin translates to “save.” In a sense, that is what salvestrols do for organic plants. We derive benefits from plants when we consume them. If you eat mostly organic plant-based foods, you will consume about 300 points of salvestrols. If you have a strong immune system, you probably only need a small amount of salvestrols. However, if your immune system is challenged by a disease, you may need up to 2,000 points. 2 Thankfully, salvestrols are available in supplement form. Whole-plant juicing is another way to increase your salvestrol intake. It is better to consume whole plants rather than juiced plants because the pulp from the plants adds fiber, which is beneficial for good gut bacteria and also supports blood sugar balance. Some good sources of salvestrols are vegetables like artichokes, asparagus, cabbage, celery, and cucumbers. Another good source of salvestrols are fruits like berries, grapes, avocadoes, and olives.
Leave a Reply