Log In

Discussion Organic Or Conventional Does It Matter

Discuss the video on farming systems in the US and give support for which system you think is more sustainable in view of world hunger.

Give examples from the video to support your position.

Reply to 

1. Based on the information provided in the video Farming Systems Compared, I believe that organic is more sustainable as a means of solving world hunger. I think that conventional seems to be very appealing at first glance, and the idea of higher numbers of production sounds like it has to be the answer, but as the video explained, that really isn’t the case. The conventional farms that are housing thousands and thousands of animals are creating disease. These diseases are then needed to be treated by huge doses of antibiotics and hormones and pesticides. This is breeding things like ecoli and mad cow disease. In addition, they are creating a huge sanitation problem and waste and manure that cannot be used back on the land because of all of the hormones and pesticides that it is filled with. The video gave the example of the farmer who was stabbed in the leg by a boar and his leg became infected. The infection was unusually difficult to treat with standard antibiotics. As he explained in the video, the huge amounts of antibiotics that are being given to the animals are creating essentially very resistant antibodies that could not be killed by our antibiotics. There is real danger in this because we really don’t know what we might end up creating this way and what diseases might end up coming about and how they might effect the human body. The video also explains that, in reality, organic farms are more productive than conventional. They are able to create healthy soil and land and because of this they are able to produce much more diversity and they end up being more profitable than the conventional farms that are only farming animals because they are destroying the land. The problem with organic is that it is expensive and not everyone is able to afford it. So, while it has the potential to be more beneficial in the view of world hunger, it really can only do so if changes are made to make it more accessible to people.

2. In the video, there have been many types of farming systems that people do. One farmer that stood out to me the most was the one in Frankenstein, Missouri (23:59), and he is a natural hog farmer. At first, he was just feeding his pigs whatever and doing anything he can to have them grow faster and fatter to sell for more money. Then an incident happened to him where it was affecting his life. After that he then decided to start all over with new 300 pigs and started doing it all naturally without any chemicals or antibiotics. Compared to other farmers, they may have about 20,000 pigs but those pigs are filled with chemicals and antibiotics. For example, Andrew Kimbrell; an executive director of the Center for Food Safety stated that although the farm with 300 pigs maybe healthy, the farm with 20,000 pigs are the ones that are going to be selling out faster and those farmers will be making more money. But realistically, the world should be buying and consuming the pigs from the farms that are not putting chemicals into these pigs. Because industrial agriculture is a huge forefront for our farming systems, we are now losing soil losing at 13 tons (30:50). This is important because in the view of world hunger, that fastest way to cure this issue would be to have a farming system of industrial agriculture. This will be the fastest way to feed the people that are hungry in the world. World hunger can be a solvable issue once they have access to indultrail agriculture of farming systems. Yet, in the long run once world hunger is fixed, the world is going to have a hard time going back to a healthy farming system since it has been used to the system that they have been using for a long time.

× How can I help?