Organic food may be no better for the environment than conventional produce and in some cases is contributing more to global warming than intensive agriculture, according to a government report.
The first comprehensive study of the environmental impact of food production found there was "insufficient evidence" to say organic produce has fewer ecological side-effects than other farming methods.
Monday, February 19, 2007
Organic Farming No Better for the Environment
That's right: all those lemmings who empty their wallets at Whole Foods Market are no better for the environment than me and my Wal-Mart brand 12 pound bag of frozen assorted chicken parts. Bwaa-ha-ha!! From The Independent:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comments:
Don't believe this article! It does not present all the facts, sadly this information is not the entire truth. While organic farming may use more land, energy, and time than conventional farming, that is only the short-sighted conclusion. In the long term, pesticides and other industrial chemicals used in conventional farming have a devastating effect on the environment and contaminate the earth, harming all of its inhabitants. Not to mention the fact that the reason organic milk, chickens, and eggs, (especially chickens and eggs) take up more space because in conventional farming these animals are hurt, malnourished, fed harmful artificial hormones, and confined to very small spaces, sometimes never walking outdoors or never walking in their lives. Also, do you really want to consume all those horrible poisons in everything you eat every day of your life? I surely don't. And I care about the earth. Some people just care about money! These people are obviously biased!
Organic is the only way!
Post a Comment