Are Pesticides and Insecticides Really Necessary?

Writing about the importance of organic food and agriculture I was looking for articles and research about this on the internet. Some of the titles of articles and headlines in newspapers, reporting on the subject, seem to have very "loaded" titles. For example, "Is Organic Food any Better for you?" or "Is Organic Food any Healthier?" The implication being- why bother to pay more for something extra, why be different?

The organic market, although a minority, is rising in the UK and other countries. Why is there not research funded in our universities with the title such as my title here, or "Why bother with chemicals, pesticides and artificial fertilizers in the first place -are they really necessary or safe?"

For thousands of years our ancestors produced vegetables, fruit, grains, beans and reared animals without the use of pesticides and artificial fertilizers.They observed nature practising crop rotation, planting according to the season and even the time of day. We wouldn't be here today if they hadn't done so. Our whole modern 'civilisation' would not have existed without them doing so. Is this 'civilisation' trying to question and destroy one of the very things that created it -a source of quality food? In the 20th century the quality of top soil became depleted and this continues to this day. Soil erosion is a fact.

"Around the world soil is being swept and washed away 10-40 times faster than it is being replenished, destroying cropland the size of Indiana every year...Yet controlling soil erosion is really quite simple -the soil can be protected with cover crops when the land is not being used to grow crops." "As a result of erosion over the last 40 years, 30% of the world's arable land has become unproductive...erosion reduces the ability of soil to store water and support plant growth, thereby reducing its ability to support biodiversity...promotes critical losses of water, nutrients, soil organic matter and soil biota, harming forests rangeland and natural ecosystems......increases the amount of dust...which acts as an abrasive and air pollutant...carries about 20 human infectious disease organisms, including anthrax and tuberculosis." (Journal of the Environment Development and Sustainability, Vol.8 2006, D.Pimental, Cornell University.)

"...researchers found that the organic farm's topsoil was six inches thicker than the farm using chemical methods.The organic soil had softer crust and held more moisture. The scientists concluded that intensive tillage practices associated with continuous monoculture or short rotations of crops may make soils more susceptible to erosion...the organic farming system was more effective than the conventional farming system in reducing soil erosion and, therefore, in maintaining soil productivity," (Quote from "Let Food Be Thy Medicine," Alex Jack, on a survey by J.P. Reganold, L.F. Elliot, and Y.L.Unger, "Long-Term Effects of Organic and Conventional Farming on Soil Erosion," Source -Nature 1987.)

The lack of understanding about crop rotation and the use of monoculture became the norm in the 20th century and continues into the present.

A study at Rudgers University in 1984 stated that non-organic produce had sometimes as low as 25 % of the mineral content as organic produce. (Firman E. Baer Report, New Brunswick, N.J.: Rutgers University, 1984)

A study by Cornell University researchers which looked at over 300 scientific studies found that reducing pesticides by as much as 90% would not affect crop yields and the costs of food. Since the 1940s despite a 33 times increase in the use of pesticides and an increase in their potency 10-fold, more crops are still lost to insects today than in the 1940s. The report also highlighted the dangers of chemicals in farming such as the poisoning of 45,000 workers and an estimate of 6,000 cases of pesticide-induced cancers each year. (David Pimental, Handbook of Pest Management in Agriculture, Boca Raton, Fl.:CRC Press,1991, J.Brody, "Using Fewer Pesticides Is Seen as Beneficial," New York Times, April 2 1991.)

'Transmission of MRSA ST398 to humans is known to occur most frequently for people in direct contact with farm animals...a...recent Dutch study found that people living in livestock-dense areas who don't have direct contact with farm animals are also at increased risk of being carriers...' (Feingold B.J.et al., 2012. "Livestock density as risk factor for livestock-associated methjecillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, the Netherlands, Emerging Infections Diseases" 18: 1841-9.)

'A European study of MRSA ST398...in 17 countries found that proximity to without direct contact with pigs and veal calves may be a risk factor for acquiring the bacteria.' (van Cleef B.A.G.L. et al., 2011. "Livestock-associated Methicillin-Resistant Straphylococcus aureus in Humans.Emerging Infectious Diseases" 17: 502-5.)

'A large German study examined 7,000 people and...those living within 500m of intensive livestock farms had a significantly reduced lung function...' (Schinasi L.et al., 2011. "Air pollution, lung fungtion, and physical symptoms in communities near concentrated Swine feeding operations,Epidemiology", 22:208-15.)

Recent research in the UK has shown that pesticide levels may affect the bee population, (Bryden J., Gill, R.J., Mitton, R.A.A.,Raine, N.E.,Jansen, V.A.A. 2013 "Chronic sublethal stress causes bee colony failure". Ecology Letters. There is a European ban on neonicotinoid pesticides due to start in Dec.2013.)

At the Soil Association's (UK) annual conference recently (2013), President Monty Don said: "The biggest potential disaster that is facing us all is the degradation of our soil. That should be at the core of our thinking. If we are to feed the world, we must have good soil. As a soil scientist said to me only last week, we have reached 'peak soil' and we can't produce any more. 40% of the land mass of this earth Is now being cultivated, and because our soil is being used up - we're losing it at the rate of about 50 times the rate that it's reproducing - the companies and corporations are buying more land. We are trying to consume our way out of over consumption. It's a disaster".

Research into organic farming in Northern Ethiopa shows that an organic system of farming can provide more drought resistant, nutritionally diverse supply of food for the local people. (Araya H. Edwards S. 2006 "The Tigray Experience: A sucess story in sustainable agriculture." Third World Network, Environment and Development Series no.4.)

In the Southern hemisphere where non-organic farming is quite often low-input and low-yielding, the use of organic agricultural methods can result in quite dramatic increases in yields without financial outlay on new crops, chemicals or pesticides. Research by Parrott and Marsden (2002) on comparative yield research in Brazil showed dramatic increases in yields for maize from 20-250% and in Peru an increase in yields of 150% from a range of upland crops. (Parrott N. and Marsden T. 2002 "The Real Green Revolution: Organic and agro-economic in the South", Greenpeace: London.)

Recent studies over the last 10 years show that, contrary to some critics, organic methods of farming have the potential to produce enough food for the current population. Organic agriculture can substantially contribute to the world's food supply. (Badgley C, Moghtader J., Quintero E., Zakern E., Chappell J., Avilés-Vázquez K., Samulon A. and Perfectop I., 2007 "Organic agriculture and the Global Food Supply. Renewable agriculture and food systems". University of Michgan.)

A study by Halberg et al shows that non-organic systems are also failing in terms of environmental sustainability and the need for huge chemical inputs. (Halberg N., Alroe H.F., Knudsen M.T., and Kristensen E.S., 2006, "Global Development of Organic Agriculture": Challenges and prospects. CABI Publishng.)

In the US a long-running study by the Rodale Institute demonstrates that organic farming can produce nearly equal yields and uses less energy whilst aiding environmental sustainability. (Pimental D., Hepperly P., Hanson J., Douds D., Seidel R., 2006 "Organic and Conventional Farming Systems; Environment, energy and economic comparisons of organic and conventional farming systems."Bioscience 55, 7, pp573-582.)

Whilst some studies may show that non-organic farming can produce better yields than organic, it is important to point out that the increased yields in non-organic farms are achieved with high inputs of energy and chemicals. This is particularly the case in Europe, however, yields alone are not the only factor to consider. The damage to the environment and effects on the people working on these farms need to be taken into account. Organic farming can provide a low energy input, low cost in terms of chemicals, whilst helping the environment through its natural cycles to produce better quality food. This can be done without endangering wildlife, animals and humans.

Comments? Questions? Email Here

© HowtoAdvice.com

How to Advice .com