Does anyone here support organic agriculture? If so, could you

>>1056921
Seems like you don't know what you are talking about. Industrialized farming practices are about equal when it comes to organic or not organic. Both can use pesticides and fertilizers.

>>1056930

Organic can only use non industrial fertilizers that are far from the productivity of them.

>>1056921
I don't support "organic" farming per se, but I do support local farms. I imagine the difference in emissions between shipping tomatoes from across the country vs shipping them in from just outside of town is negligible. Most local farms tend to be "organic" so I end up supporting it tacitly I suppose.

>>1056930
In yurop using pesticides and chemical fertilizers is forbidden in biological and biodynamic farming

>>1056933
>>1056958
You should probably read up on what is and isn't allowed in "organic certified" farming,

https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?c=ecfr&SID=9874504b6f1025eb0e6b67cadf9d3b40&rgn=div6&view=text&node=7:3.1.1.9.32.7&idno=7

>>1056960
Didja know that organic farming allows for spraying heavy metals like copper and iron as pesticides on food?

Didja know that those are absolutely toxic to the human body when ingested?

Organic food is just darwinism for those who want to feel good about their food without knowing where it came from.

>>1057118
I take it you didn't even read that link.

File: Quatre-temps-permaculture-3.jpg (179KB, 750x545px) Image search: [Google]

179KB, 750x545px

>>1056921
>more land to produce the same amount of food
ok

>>1057121
Not him, but that link does list copper sulfide and iron sulfate as something sprayed on organic food
I also know that organic apples and pears can have synthetic antibiotics sprayed on them

The organic food industry is self regulating
The FDA doesn't go to all these farms and certify them, the farms pay a private contractor to certify them
And most of the organic food sold in the US is not grown in the US
Do you trust China or Mexico to make sure your organic food is really organic?

I want organic foods to label their crops exposed to radiation and mutated, as well as what non synthetic fertilizers they use and how much.

>>1057121
IIRC it takes three times the amount of non synthetic pesticides to do what normal pesticides can do. As >>1057118 said, spraying crops with copper while is organic, wreaks havoc on the environment.

Organic Crops aren't safe, they don't taste better, they wreak havoc on the environment, and they are not healthier for you.

>>1057143
>synthetic antibiotics
...

>not buying local and seasonal produce, meat, honey, eggs, milk, etc whenever possible
Come on, /out/, you're better than that. Fuck the whole organic thing but at least buy from small businesses.

>>1057161
Yes, antibiotics that are not extracted from living organisms, but synthesized via a series of chemical reactions performed outside of living organisms
Was my first post hard to understand?

>>1057118
>heavy metals like copper and iron as pesticides on food?
>Didja know that those are absolutely toxic to the human body when ingested?
you got that backwards.
copper and iron aren't heavy metals and they're required by the human body for survival.

>>1056921
The only real advantage to organic is that it produces more nutritious food per pound. So yes, it makes less food, but that food feeds more people. This is because fertilizing plants speeds up their growth but doesn't put more micronutrients in the soil. So they grow faster and absorb less nutrients. This is called nutrient dilution. Industrial farming produces much more food, but it's much less nutritious.

otherwise organic is just a meme to get hipsters to pay dollars for veggies that cost pennies to produce.

>>1057258
>copper and iron aren't heavy metals
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heavy_metals
>The earliest known metals—common metals such as iron, copper, and tin, and precious metals such as silver, gold, and platinum—are heavy metals.

File: hahaha.jpg (11KB, 381x358px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 381x358px

>>1057258
>copper and iron aren't heavy metals
>Industrial farming produces much more food, but it's much less nutritious.
Keep going
This is good comedy

>>1057143
>>1057152
No one said it was safe. I was just pointing out that the link posted already states what he was saying so posting it again means he didn't read the link.

The only straight up chemical I use on my farm is dihydrogen monoxide. The fertilizer is just compost made from from every day farm, yard, and house sources as well as directly placed manure via the animals that walk around that area.

>>1057258
Dude, just put down the keyboard and back away from the computer.

>>1057258

nutrient dilution is more about vitamines and stuff than about plain old kcal.

calories is what feeds people.

>>1057152
Some do, but more because they were heirlooms bred for flavor and not taste. Also, they tend to only be sold locally so they're harvested when they should be, not before they're fully ripe. Even GMO/standard breeds of things taste so much better when picked at the actual peak.

>>1057816
You have never heard of it before so you googled it and got results for nutrient dilution in diets with added sugar. This doesn't reduce calories.

I am talking about nutrient dilution in agriculture which reduces calories/gram. Plants fertilized with ammonium nitrate contain far more water per unit mass than those that are unfertilized or fertilized with less effective nitrogen sources.

I didn't intend to make you feel stupid, but it would help a lot of you stopped saying stupid things.

File: 1482630055744.png (10KB, 220x210px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 220x210px

>>1057838
>bred for flavor and not taste.
What did he mean by this?

>Even GMO/standard breeds of things taste so much better when picked at the actual peak.
Thats because GMO aims to remove some of the natural BT from plants. Ever taste a berry or a veggie like a potato and it was bitter? That was BT. Natural plant pesticide. There was a case shortly after the potato famine in Ireland where it was thought that if we just pumped potatoes full of BT, they would be resistant to disease. This was the case, but the plant was also toxic and not edible.

>>1057887
>BT
What are you talking about?
Do you mean Bacillus thuringiensis?
That is a bacterium, not a natural plant pesticide
>potato famine in Ireland
You mean the one in the 19th century?
So you are saying that, in the 19th century, people added bacteria to potatoes?
Do you have a newsletter or website?
I need a good laugh

Why are so many people against fucking organics? I only buy them because I don't want to eat food that is infested with agrotoxics, is it so wrong of me to do that? Is it so wrong that people have to practically call everyone that buys organics, dumb and inferiors in every thread?

>>1057887
>What did he mean by this?

Probably meant "bred for flavor not for nutrition" which is sadly a thing that's been happening (except for red delicious apples which were bred for looks and actually increased in nutrition but everyone dislikes the taste of them now because of that). Irony.

>>1057996
I've been trying to grow and raise all my own foods. I don't use anything on my stuff "organic" or not. Its really the only way to control your own health. If I can't look the person in the eye you grew and cooked the food I eat, I'll not eat it.

>>1057996
>I don't want to eat food that is infested with agrotoxics
You mean
>I don't want to eat food that is infested with one kind of agrotoxics, but I will eat other kinds of "agrotoxics"
Or
>I blindly trust that my "organic" food from China is only grown with water, sunshine, love, and unicorn dung

>>1057996
>is it so wrong of me to do that?
There's nothing wrong with it at all. I personally enjoy grass-fed beef for the flavor and I don't mind paying $80 for my scotch even though there's $10 whiskey for sale.

If you like it, buy it. I think most people that rip on organics object to the claims that it's:
A. Healthier
and
II. environmentally friendly/more sustainable.

the first is unproven and the second is demonstrably false.

>>1058198
Can you even prove those claim?

>>1058239
Different guy here.

What in that post is even debatable? What are you looking for him to prove?

File: ggggg.jpg (815KB, 1632x916px) Image search: [Google]

815KB, 1632x916px

>>1056921
How much money can I take for these Thuja logs?

>>1058298
That most organic food comes from China.
That most organic food has "other kind" of agrotoxics
That those "other kind" of agrotoxics are as bad as the "traditional" ones

>>1058378
Wot? Not around here.
Edible and made in China means no-buy.
Luckily there are plenty of local organic in the shops.

File: PaullHennig2016WorldMap.OAha.CC-BY-4.0.jpg (291KB, 3800x1814px) Image search: [Google]

291KB, 3800x1814px

>>1058378
>That most organic food comes from China.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organic_farming_by_country

Holy shit, Australia.

So what is the general consensus, guys? Should I buy only organics or they're as bad as normal fruits/vegetables? Do you use agrotoxics when planting your own food?

>>1058388
Only buy local foods that are organic. Don't support distant assholes you've never seen before.

>>1058388
I buy organic when I can and avoid anything made in China. (Garlic often is from there for some reason)

GM stuff I avoid because I don't want to pay rent for my food in the future since that is where it ends up at.

Main reason for organic: I don't want to ingest insecticides and pollutants. Also it's better for /out if the stuff comes from max. 200 km away

>>1058390
And where can I buy local organic food? Farmer's Market?


>>1058391
What does "GM" stands for?

>>1058395
Where I live (north EU) it's in grocery stores, farmer's markets, direct from farms.

GM=genetically modified

>>1058397
>direct from farms
How you do that? You just go to the farm and buy them? It's probably impossible to do that if you live in the urban area, right?

>>1058402
Many sell directly, call them or visit. Usually the producers are listed somewhere, you can find brochures from the farmer's markets or their website.

I live in a city (probably just a village by some standards) with over a million people within 100 km. Plenty of farms here. Some of the producers sell direct from farms, e.g. meat farms. Stuff like steaks (vacuum packed in a cool cabinet) can be very nice quality.

It ia very common to buy all kinds of berries like strawberries, raspberries, etc., basically everyone does that. Blueberries and lingonberries are not farmed, they come from the forests (or buy from someone who did the job already).

>>1058378
>That most organic food comes from China.
>That most organic food has "other kind" of agrotoxics
No one but you said "most" in either of these cases. But yes, it's clear that much organic produce is grown using practices which are, at best, sketchy in terms of adhering to organic practices. You can help to avoid this by buying only from farms which you know personally. And I think it should be obvious that organic pesticides are used a great deal, and they're still toxic, and in many cases, carcinogenic.

>>1058402
Google '(city name) farmers market'

Ask relevant questions about the produce, like if you're worried about pesticides ask them if/what kind they use. 'organic' is just a meme label for simpletons.

>>1058451
This. If you're okay with only eating what grows locally and seasonally instead of having shit brought halfway around the world just because you like bananas, you can get the best, freshest food for pretty cheap and actually meet the people that grew it. Most of them welcome you to come visit the actual farm, which is fun now and then.

>>1058456
>only eating what grows locally and seasonally
there is no commercial farming where I live.

I'm probably not the only person to live somewhere where agriculture doesn't pay.

>>1058463
Anon where are you?

>>1058472
Right here.

>>1058378
>That most organic food comes from China.
No one said this
>That most organic food has "other kind" of agrotoxics
Was already posted here
>>1056960
>That those "other kind" of agrotoxics are as bad as the "traditional" ones
No one said this

>>1058480
Yeah but what is a place without any agriculture... Svalbard?

File: Monsanto_Shill.png (47KB, 832x1199px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 832x1199px

Big Agro shill thread spotted.

File: 1498227225438.png (105KB, 542x800px) Image search: [Google]

105KB, 542x800px

>>1056921
>when you have to use more land (at the expense of forests or at the expense of regenerating old croplands) to produce the same amount of food?
Industrial agriculture is the most labour/space effective, because driving in a row of gigantic monocultures is fast and cheap.
This however does not have to do with the max output of space where both can achive the same. Just not with the same amount of labour invested in it.

Also who says that you can't be in favor of organic farm methods while at the same time wanting to cut aid for africa and let the populations shrink to their natural numbers again?

>>1057996
I want to protect the environment and reduce my global warming footprint. Organic food wreaks havoc on environments and produces a lot more CO2 Emmisions than GMO crops do.

File: 1494277400208.png (265KB, 460x300px) Image search: [Google]

265KB, 460x300px

>Not growing as much as you can yourself
I bet you plebs don't even have a window shelf full of herbs

>>1058583
>Big Agro shill thread spotted.
Been waiting months for my paycheck to clear. I really shouldn't have voluntarily decided to defend a company using facts and evidence without getting payment details locked down first.

File: cointelpro.gif (139KB, 1169x993px) Image search: [Google]

139KB, 1169x993px

>>1058657
>>1057271
>>1058384
No one has use facts ITT except >>1056960 which no one read. In each instance it was to correct something lied about or to bolster with extra information. Everything else ITT is worthless shilling and consensus cracking.

>>1058668
These:
>>1057271
>>1058384
>>1056960

were the facts. I messed up in quoting is all.

>>1058669
>facts that disagree with me don't count

>>1058583
>posts pic saying pro-gmo people use ad hominem attacks
>calls people shills
consistency is hard

>>1058668
A lot of these things are easily googled.

>>1058678
>>1058704
No one but the aforementioned posters actually posted facts. Opinions and blanket statements are not facts.

>>1058744
I posted the fact that organic food is more nutritious per wet weight. This fact is born out by numerous scientific studies.

I also stated the fact that iron and copper are essential nutrients in the human diet.

but you don't count THOSE facts because you don't like them. I'm not going to read the entire thread, but I'd bet you've overlooked dozens of facts you don't like.

>>1058748
>This fact is born out by numerous scientific studies.
You can cherry pick all you want, but there are several conflicting meta-analyses published regarding this issue
For example, there was a limey one funded by an organic friendly group that agreed with you
There was one from Stanford that did not
So, no, you do not have a fact here

>>1058764
>there are several conflicting meta-analyses published regarding this issue
there are not.

nutrient dilution in crops fertilized with ammonium is well proven fact. You could cherry pick CERTAIN NUTRIENTS perhaps, but the total effect has never been refuted.

it is fact.

>>1058768
>it is fact.
Prove it.

>>1058768
Post the pubs

>>1058768
Plants grow faster due to both synthetic fertilizer and because they have been bred to grow faster. If a plant grows faster, it adds more carbohydrates, fats, and protein, but not necessarily more “nutirents.” So your nutrient dillution is because the plant grows larger, more quickly. You have increased the volume, and therefore lowered the concentration. Evil ammonium nitrate has not gotten inside the plant and robbed it of its “nutrients.”
And what values of dillution are we talking about? A quick look at the literature says 5-40%. I’m not paying 100% more for something that is 5% better, whether it is food or gear.

>>1058906
>Evil ammonium nitrate has not gotten inside the plant and robbed it of its “nutrients.”
I never said it did.
You seem to think I have some position in this argument. I don't. I don't give a fuck about organics, I don't eat them.

I merely stated that they are more nutritious per wet gram, a fact well known in science and agriculture. This slightly offsets OP's fact that they take more land to grow less edible mass.

I see the two as unrelated because both have problems and advantages, but organic is incapable of feeding world populations. So whatever advantages it has come at the cost of starving Africans and Asians. Which isn't really a concern to 4chan, but doesn't change facts.

>>1058937
Facts are: food overproduction, inefficient food distribution.

>>1058649
> havoc on environment
Untrue
> more emissions
Untrue

>>1056933
You'd be surprised how beneficial a bunch of fish shit is for plants.

>>1059113
inb4 Aquaponics

>>1056921
If you take care of your soil you don't need to add fertilizer because you're munching in homemade compost.

But I'll buy soil or fertilizer/amendments to get it established.

>>1058988
>Facts are: food overproduction, inefficient food distribution
yes. those are also facts.

even with perfect distribution and no waste organic won't feed the world though. And even if it magically did, the soil would be destroyed in less than a decade.

File: IMG_4127.png (100KB, 400x470px) Image search: [Google]

100KB, 400x470px

I oppose industrialized farming in all its forms.

>>1059620
ted would happily kill you for using the internets.

>>1056921

Good to see Monsanto perusing the chans
>also
>kill yourself you pleb fuck

>>1058937

>be anon concerned about feeding the world
>meanwhile in America 1 in 5 kids are going hungry

Yea keep up the good fight tho. Gotta make sure poor ppl 4000 miles away have the energy to reproduce. Fuckin bunch of poorfucks on this board. Dad worked for Monsanto few yrs back
>slowly noticed entire fridge became certified organic
>he won't touch most processed anything anymore

Enjoy your RBST milk and glysophate riddled corn. I'm sure the 6 month case studies surely proved their worth.

>>1058991
>Havoc on the environment
True
>More emissions
True.

Sounds like you aren't versed in the literature at all.

>>1059937
Which company do you work for?

>>1059937
> CO2 emissions per hectare of organic agriculture systems are 48 to 66 percent lower than in conventional systems

Sauce:
http://www.fao.org/docrep/005/y4137e/y4137e02b.htm

Try harder, Monsanto man.

>>1059961
NEET Corp. I'm just not a whack job science denier.

>>1059962
>links an article with no citations
7/10, good bait. Especially so in thinking that the UN isn't the least bit an ideologically driven feel good think tank. Someone will believe you.

>>1059974
> article has 20+ citations on the linked page alone
> fails to see "Burdick, 1994; Stolze et al., 2000; Haas and Köpke, 1994."

Troll harder, Monsanto man.

> UN is teh devil
> rather believes corporate-political propaganda outlets disguised as NGOs

I know now which country you hail from.