Answer

Comparison of Organic and Non-Organic Farming/Food

            There is a growing consumer concern over the safety and quality of non-organic or conventional food. As such there has been a shift in demand for organic foods since they are perceived as safer and healthier (Magkos et al. 23). The purpose of this essay is to compare organic and non-organic foods in terms of the production processes, nutritional content/value, cost, durability of organic/non-organic, and environmental factors. Organic system of production is associated with relatively lower pesticide content compared to convention food produce but conventional foods may be superior in terms of longer shelf-life. 

            There is a commonly held perception that the production process for organic food is safer and healthy than that of non-organic foods. Organic vegetables and fruits are expected to have fewer agrochemical residues compared to the conventionally grown alternatives (Magkos et al. 23). Besides, organic system of chicken farming is perceived as providing safer and healthier chicken than conventional system (Küçükyilmaz, K., et al.  360). These perceptions have led to expansion of organic farming in the United States and Europe so as to meet the market demands. Similarly, organic food farming is gaining ground in other parts of the world. Organic farming is a production system that avoids the use of growth regulators, synthetic fertilizers, pesticides, and/or livestock feed additives as used in conventional agriculture. These practices contribute to positive attitudes on organic food safety (Magkos et al. 24). Alternatively, organic farming systems utilizes animal manures, crop rotations, crop residues, legumes, off-farm organic wastes, green manures, and biological pest control to maintain soil productivity, control pests and weeds, and supply plant nutrients (Magkos et al. 24). However, organic food are not completely free from pesticides but in low concentrations compared with non-organic food (Magkos et al. 26). 

            Both organically and non-organically grown foods are exposed to the similar environmental risks or factors. For example, both food types are exposed to environmental contaminants such as such as zinc, mercury, copper, arsenic, lead, radioactive nuclides, dioxins, polychlorinated biphenyls, and cadmium (Magkos et al. 29). In addition, food hazards such as biological pesticides, endogenous plant toxins, and pathogenic microorganisms are likely to be present in both food types (Magkos et al. 23). In addition, both organic and non-organic foods can be adulterated with artificial sweeteners, dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane (DDT), textile colors, urea, heavy metals and carbide. Hence, none can be said to be completely free from contaminants that can pose health hazards. Chemical presence in food can lead to adverse effects on vital organs such as the liver and the kidneys and may as well cause cancers. In worst case scenarios, chemical presence in food can ultimately lead to the loss of life (Ashraf et al. 105). Organic foods are much less contaminated with pesticides compared to conventional foods. However, there are no significant differences in terms of the bacterial, heavy metals and mycotoxin contamination in both organic and conventional foods (Gomiero 714).

            The nutrient content/value of organic foods is far less appreciated as opposed to the value placed on food safety (Magkos et al. 24). In a study by Küçükyilmaz, K., et al. it was established that organic rearing procedure for the broiler chicken does not provide any added nutritional benefit to the broiler meat but it only promotes the yellowness of the meat (360). Another study by Suciu and colleagues established that there are non-significant differences in terms of the carbon footprints and nutrient properties between organic and non-organic foods (49). There is lack of scientific evidence to indicate that organic food products are more nutritious and of higher quality than conventional food products (Suciu et al. 49). However, in their review Vigar and colleagues (1) established that increased consumption of organic foods is associated with health benefits such as reduced incidence of birth defects, infertility, allergic sensitization, pre-eclampsia, otitis media, high body mass index, metabolic syndrome, and non-Hodgkin lymphoma.

            Due to the common belief that organic foods are safer and healthier compared to non-organic foods, organic foods tend to be more costly while non-organic foods are pocket friendly. However, consumers are almost always willing to pay premium prices to get access to organic foods (Küçükyilmaz, K., et al.  361). Compared to conventionally produced foods that are cheap and readily available, organic foods are overpriced and consumers do experience poorer availability to organic foods most of the time (Suciu et al. 49). The common man and the poor, in most cases, are not able to afford to purchase organic foods due to high prices compared to conventional foods. This is a barrier that can negatively affect societal well-being and health (Ashraf et al. 106).

            Conventional foods are likely to be more durable than organic foods. The rationale lies on the reliance and use of chemical preservatives and pesticides; particularly use of storage pesticides. Use of post-harvest pesticides in convention crop produce tends to increase their durability and shelf-life but chemical preservatives or pesticides may pose health hazards (Magkos et al. 23-4). Conventional tropical crops may have longer shelf-life compared to their organic counterparts (Calderón 393). The conventional farming system is superior in providing functional food products that can be stored for a longer period of time compared to organic system of production (Calderón 394).

            Organic food farming is considered as more environmental-friendly compared with non-organic food farming or conventional agriculture (Magkos et al. 23). Similarly, Suciu et al. add that organic system of farming and food production is more environmental friendly compared to the conventional farming systems (49). Organic farming system is environmentally-friendly since it used renewable energy sources in food production to conserve water and the soil as well as to preserve health as well as environmental quality for the future human generations (Ashraf et al. 105). Some of the pesticides used in conventional farming systems tend to persist in the environment and find their way into food. Most of the chemicals used in conventional farming are carcinogenic to rodents. Others have demonstrated to have a disruptive effect on the endocrine, immune, and reproductive systems (Magkos et al. 25). Pesticides can contaminate ground water, soils, and other water sources thus posing health risks to humans and animals (Magkos et al. 26). Contaminants such as industrial and agricultural chemicals and pesticide residues can find their way into animal feeds resulting in safety hazards in food of animal origin (Magkos et al. 29).

            In conclusion, organic food may be characterized by lower pesticide content compared with conventional food; however, conventional foods are more durable and have longer shelf-life. Both organic and non-organic foods are equally exposed to environmental chemical and biological contaminants that can pose health hazards. There is lack of evidence indicating that organic foods are more nutritious than non-organic foods but the perception that organic foods are safer increases demand for organic foods and drives their prices up. Last, but not the least, there is a general agreement in literature that organic system of farming is more environmentally-friendly as opposed to conventional agriculture.

.