Re:Eating Clean is Useless
by dragonwriter on Tuesday July 18, 2017 @02:26AM
(#14794607)
> Even if it does not have an effect on your health, three of those four (100-percent organic, locally sourced, and free of antibiotics) are at least good for the environment.
Locally sourced may be good because of avoiding transportation impacts (preference for it may lead to types of agriculture being performed in places less well suited for them which may be bad, and might even increase transportation impacts of necessities to support agriculture, so net it might not always be good; there's a reason certain crops are grown in certain places, and preference for “locally grown” without reversing the preference for cosmopolitan variety may produce perverse impacts), and free of antibiotics is probably generally a positive environmental trait.
Organic is, OTOH, not something that there is much reason to believe is good for the environment, despite its cult virtue signalling status.
Locally sourced may be good because of avoiding transportation impacts (preference for it may lead to types of agriculture being performed in places less well suited for them which may be bad, and might even increase transportation impacts of necessities to support agriculture, so net it might not always be good; there's a reason certain crops are grown in certain places, and preference for “locally grown” without reversing the preference for cosmopolitan variety may produce perverse impacts), and free of antibiotics is probably generally a positive environmental trait.
Organic is, OTOH, not something that there is much reason to believe is good for the environment, despite its cult virtue signalling status.