It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by adraves
For the readers:
Most of the foreign insects (Foreign invasive species) that are introduced end up being major issues later. It is a major problem to think otherwise.
Originally posted by Skyfloating
reply to post by camouflaged
Yes, the upside is that its produced without pesticides (critics say that the downside is that it takes up more space to produce organic foods, thus destroying ecosystems), but the majority of organic food eaters I know eat it with the assumption / idea that they are eating more healthy foods. Its pretty astonishing to me that evidence indicates otherwise...
Because I was under the assumption that most people bought organic food not to "protect the environment from pesticides" but rather to display a healthy lifestyle...?
In 2004, Donald Davis, PhD, a former researcher with the Biochemical Institute at the University of Texas, Austin, led a team that analyzed 43 fruits and vegetables from 1950 to 1999 and reported reductions in vitamins, minerals, and protein. Using USDA data, he found that broccoli, for example, had 130 mg of calcium in 1950. Today, that number is only 48 mg. What's going on? Davis believes it's due to the farming industry's desire to grow bigger vegetables faster. The very things that speed growth — selective breeding and synthetic fertilizers — decrease produce's ability to synthesize nutrients or absorb them from the soil.