Re:Think organic food is better for you, animals, and the pl...
by JoeAltmaier on Monday May 14, 2018 @10:31AM
(#17065846)
The argument is, doing pointless things and burning through $200B could be better spend doing actual things that help us.
Science-denying is not helping us out, nationally or worldwide. Lets stop.
Re:Think organic food is better for you, animals, and the pl...
by alexandercrohde on Monday May 14, 2018 @10:49AM
(#17065997)
"Science-denying is not helping us out, nationally or worldwide. Lets stop."
That's exactly why I take my time to shut down articles like this. [Written by a climate-change skeptic, to point]
I've spent quite some time researching pesticides and if you're unaware of the sordid history (how large a proportion have been pulled for saftey reasons, and how long it takes to discover most pesticides aren't actually safe) then I encourage you do so yourself.
The absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence. The truth is we have no clue what the long-term effects are for the chemicals we're exposed to -- for all we know, the 50% drop in male sperm count over the last 30 years is related to pesticides. [1]
Additionally, there's something a little forceful about the tone of this piece that I find very suspect. If organic pesticides like copper sulfate are dangerous, doesn't this just mean we need even higher standards for organic?
> If all of the United States were to go organic, the cost would likely be around $200 billion annually from lower productivity.
This is a strange argument. Eating organic hurts the economy? The whole point of the economy is to make our lives high-quality.
[1] https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/sperm-count-dropp...