Contemporary Food Issues - Literature review Example

Contemporary Food Issues Introduction Organic farming claims to have understood the direct connection between health of the consumers and the food they consume. Certain features of organic farming are that pesticides are totally restricted, artificial chemical fertilisers are prohibited, animal cruelty is controlled, use of antibiotics and wormers is discouraged, and finally, genetic modification is disallowed. The important aims of organic agriculture are pointed out by the IFOAM Basic Standards for Organic Agriculture and Food Processing. They are; to produce food that is rich in nutritional quality and that too, in sufficient quality, to ensure that natural systems and cycles are not harmed seriously, to promote biological cycles within the farming system that takes into account micro-organisms, soil, plants, and animals, to ensure long-term fertility of soil, to use renewable energy sources as far as possible, to use organic, reusable and recyclable materials, to ensure basic life conditions to all livestock, to create as less pollution as possible, to reduce the loss of biodiversity as much as possible, and to ensure long-term survival of agricultural practices and producers (Geier et al, n.d.). According to the Soil Association, there are four reasons for which people should select organic food. The first point they put forward is that in organic food, hydrogenated fats and additives like aspartame, tartrazine, and MSG are not allowed. Secondly, organic farming results in a reduction in the emission of greenhouse gases as compared to non-organic farming. In addition, selecting local, and seasonal food means reducing the carbon footprint. Another point is that organic farming promotes animal welfare as it provides them a lot of fresh air and space to enjoy a free-range life. Another significant benefit is that organic farming practices promote wildlife. For example, it is found that the presence of insects and birds in organic farms is 50% higher as compared to non-organic farms. Another point is that organic food is not genetically modified (Five reasons to choose organic, n.d.). A look into the claims of health benefits According to Heater, the best thing one can do to improve ones health is to eat organic food. According to him, the modern food is full of artificial ingredients, preservatives and chemicals. In addition, there are herbicides and pesticides. It is found that the mainstream diet contains significant amounts of refined sugar, refined and hydrogenated oils, preservatives, chemicals and additives. Undoubtedly, these items are unhealthy for people (ibid). Crinnion (2010) looks into the studies of various scholars regarding the nutritional benefits of having organic food items. He found from the analysis of various studies that organic foods contain near about 20% more iron, vitamins, and magnesium than non-organic foods do. From the studies, Crinnion concluded that organic produce contains significantly higher levels of four nutrients; 27% higher levels of ascorbic acid, 21% higher amounts of iron, 29% higher amounts of magnesium, and 13.6% higher levels of phosphorous. When one compares this information with the revelation that there is a decline in the amounts of vitamin C, phosphorous and iron in the conventional food in recent years, the benefits of consuming organic food is clear (ibid). The study also looks into the amounts of pesticides in both organic and non-organic foods. The writer points out the fact that though organically raised food items do not use pesticides they can be exposed to chemicals which are already in the soil. Evidently, the world pesticide use has exceeded 5 billion lbs. Out of this amount, only 0.1 % is used for killing pests, and the rest remains in the soil, which can travel to thousands of miles around the globe. So, the claim that organic food items do not contain chemicals certainly goes baseless. However, the writer accepts the fact that the amount of chemicals in organically raised food crops is just 30% of chemicals seen in conventionally raised crops (Crinnian, n.d.). Another significant finding in the study was that the anticancer properties of organic food items are much higher than the conventional foods. While organic vegetables suppress 33-99% of the mutagenic activities, the commercial varieties only suppress 11-65%. (ibid). However, there are people who see nothing in these differences. For example, Trewavas (1999) of the Institute of Cell and Molecular Biology at the University of Edinburgh points out that all people consume about 0.25 teaspoon of carcinogens every day of their lives. While 99.99% of these carcinogens are naturally produced in plants as a weapon against disease organisms and to deter consumption by animals, only 0.01% comes from agricultural activities and food preparation including frying and smoking. According to Trewavas, as per the governmental regulation, this 0.01% is just one in between 10,000 and 1,00,000 of the prescribed safe dose. In other words, even if one goes totally organic, the difference one is able to make will be 0.01%. It is pointed out here that while conventional foods do not contain mycotoxins (micro-organism produced poison) due to the usage of fungicide, organic food items are likely to contain mycotoxins. It is alleged that health-store nuts tend to have the most dangerous carcinogen ‘aflatoxin’ produced by the fungus aspergillus (ibid). In fact, the impact of continuous exposure to such mycotoxin carcinogens might have more serous health effects than having smaller amounts of fungicides which are well under the prescribed safety level. In fact, there are various issues associated with organic food too. For example, the cow and pig manure used by organic farmers usually contain E coli 0157 disease organisms. In fact, in the US, two E coli outbreaks occurred and the reason was found in organic strawberries and lettuce. In addition, in Aberdeen, there was an E coli outbreak from organic goat’s cheese. Regarding the amounts of carcinogen, Trewavas points out that in the absence of pesticides and insecticides, plants are more vulnerable to disease organisms, and when there is attack of disease organisms, plants are likely to respond intensively, by developing dangerous levels of carcinogens. For example, organic cider from organic apples has higher levels of patulin, and celery has higher levels of psoralen, which can cause skin burns. Similarly, Finkel (2007) of Cosmos Magazine points out that the increasing attachment towards organic food is not accompanied by adequate scientific evidence. According to her, organic farmers tend to use elements like sulphor and copper, pyrethrins and rotenone which are made by plants, and BT spray and spinosad which are produced by bacteria. It is pointed out by Finkel that these natural pesticides are not totally harmless. For example, it is seen that sulphor causes irritation to lungs and rotenone causes Parkinson’s disease. Admittedly, higher levels of manmade chemicals cause health issues. However, the carcinogens produced by plants too, when taken at higher quantities, cause serious health problems ranging from cancer and tumor. It is reminded by Frankel that in a normal diet, the amount of natural carcinogen one consumes is 10,000 times higher than the amount of manmade carcinogens. However, the ones who support organic food do so even without any scientific evidence or with the little evidence they collect. To illustrate, the Organic Facts admit that there is a significant lack of evidence to prove that organic food is better than conventional food. However, they point out the results of a few studies that conclude that organic milk and organic potatoes are better than their non-organic counterparts. The first one is that organic milk contains more anti-oxidants, omega 3, CLA, and vitamins than non-organic milk. The second finding is that organic potatoes, due to lack of nutrient supply during cultivation, tend to develop more antioxidants like quercetin and kaempferol. Despite all the shortcomings, people like to believe that organic food is better than non-organic food in terms of better health, better taste, environmental safety, and animal welfare (Finkel, 2007). In fact, this is exactly what organic food suppliers claim. To illustrate, T. H. Carson Organic Butches detail the benefits of organic food in their website. The main points are that organic foods are GM free, BSE free, artificial additives free, more nutritious, environmental friendly, tastier, and better for animals (The benefits of organic food). At this juncture, it is necessary to see the environmental side of organic food and farming. The perceived environmental benefits of organic food according to the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations are analyzed. The first benefit as put forward by the organization is ‘sustainability over long term’. It is pointed out that environmental change occurs in the long term. So, organic farming is a proactive approach to reduce the impact of agricultural interventions on the agro-ecosystem. The soil protection measures under organic farming are plenty. They include crop rotations, inter-cropping, symbiotic associations, cover crops, organic fertilisers and minimum tillage. According to the organisation, these practices result in better development of soil, plants, and animals, reduce soil erosion, improve soil formation, and improve the water and nutrient retentive abilities of soil. Thus, by increasing biodiversity and soil productivity, organic farming ensures survival of ecosystem for long. The second point is regarding water. It is pointed out that synthetic fertilisers and pesticides result in groundwater pollution. As such practices are banned in organic process, there is less water pollution. Another benefit is the control of air pollution. Firstly, due to fewer requirements of chemicals in organic farming, there is less burning of fossil fuels. The second benefit is that organic farming reduces the release of carbon and thus reduces global warming. This happens because the organic practices like minimum tillage, returning of crop residues to soil, use of cover crops, rotations, and use of nitrogen fixing legumes enhance the return of carbon to soil. Another point is biodiversity. Firstly, as organic farming prefers traditional crops which are adapted to the local climatic conditions, loss of genes is controlled to a great extent. Secondly, as organic fields tend to keep natural surrounding, organisms, plants, and animals get a natural habitat that promotes normal ecosystem (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations). The Soil Association report (2000) as sponsored by WWF-UK goes deep into the benefits of organic farming. It is pointed out in the report that in the world, there is a dramatic decline in the number of common farmland species. So, it is highly necessary to conserve the abundance of all species. According to the review, the organic farms contain significantly more plant and animal varieties than conventional farms. The study identified the fact that the percentage of plant varieties in organic farms is 57% higher and that of insects and birds is 44% higher in organic farms as compared to traditional farms. The report that assembled the results of 23 studies comparing the features of organic and non-organic food and agricultural practices found that organic farming has an inevitable role in biodiversity conservation. The study took into account wildlife including arable flora, birds, and invertebrates. Thus, the study concluded that the presence of different wild plants and animals in the organic fields is five times higher than that of conventional fields. Moreover, it was found that organic fields support 57% more plant species (ibid). Similarly, Geier et al acknowledge the fact that presently, biodiversity in the world is under threat due to agricultural practices. In Europe, according to the scholars, intensification of agriculture has resulted in the degradation of landscapes. In UK, it is estimated that 95% of the flower-rich meadows disappeared because of agricultural changes. In addition, it is stated that 30-50% of ancient woodland, 50-60% of lowland heath land, and 192,000 kilometers of hedgerows were all destroyed. Moreover, significant proportions of lowland fens, valleys, and basin mires were also affected by intensive farming. Admittedly, the world cannot stop producing food in order to protect biodiversity. So, the challenge of the time is to strike a balance between both; producing food in a sustainable way. So, according to the writers, the only viable solution is organic farming. The reality It becomes evident from the analysis that the studies on the effects of organic and non-organic food and farming are totally contradictory to each other. While many claim that organic food is in no way considerably better than non-organic food, some studies prove that they contain more nutrition than the conventional ones. While some studies prove that that the conventional ones contain more chemical residues and more manmade carcinogens, some others claim that the organic food items are not free from chemical residues. In addition, it is claimed that the organic ones too have a large amount of natural carcinogens in them, and the amount of manmade carcinogens in a regular food is negligible as compared to the amount of natural carcinogens in it. In addition, it is found that in the absence of pesticides, plants may produce more and more carcinogens to deter disease and animals, thus causing harm to human health. In fact, the study by Dangour et al (2009) of the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine reveals that the only identifiable benefit of having organic food is the higher amounts of certain nutrients in it. However, there is no dispute regarding the environmental benefits of organic farming, though it will be visible only in the long term. Conclusion In total, adopting organic food and farming is a necessity that cannot be ignored considering the long term benefits. Though the health benefits and environmental benefits of organic food may be marginal in the short term, one cannot ignore the fact that there are benefits. In addition, no one can deny the fact that there are environmental benefits of organic farming in the long term where the impact of conventional agricultural practices is not easily reversible. So, one can conclude that the organic food and farming are the need of the time, though more studies are required to understand the health benefits of organic food. References ‘The benefits of organic food’, n.d, T. H. Carson Organic Butchers, Viewed 28 July 2011, ‘The Biodiversity benefits of organic farming’, 2000, The Soil Association, WWF-UK, pp.1-34, Viewed 28 July 2011, Crinnion, WJ 2010, ‘Organic foods contain higher levels of certain nutrients, lower levels of pesticides, and may provide health benefits for the consumer’, Environmental Medicine: Alternative Medicine Review, vol.15, no.1, Viewed 28 July 2011, Dangour, A, Aikenhead, A, Hayter, A, Allen, E & Lock, K 2009, ‘Comparison of putative health effects of organically and conventionally produced foodstuffs: a systematic review’, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, pp.1-51, ‘Five reasons to choose organic’, 2011, Soil Association, Viewed 28 July 2011, Finkel, E 2007, ‘Organic food exposed’, Cosmosmagazine.com, Viewed 28 July 2011, Geier, B, McNeely, JA & Stolton, S (n.d), ‘The relationship between nature conservation, biodiversity and organic agriculture’, pp.1.5, Viewed 28 July 2011, Heater, BM (n.d), ‘The power & health benefits of organic food’, TransormingOurselves.com, Viewed 28 July 2011, Trewavas, A 1999, ‘Is organic food really safe?’, Institute of Cell and Molecular Biology: University of Edinburg, Viewed 28 July 2011, ‘What are the environmental benefits of organic agriculture?’, 2011, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Viewed 28 July 2011, Read More