Gina Klingel
Sustainability Studies student
In a sustainable society, everything we do has a consequence that affects the future, no matter how small the action or decision may be. As inhabitants of this planet and members of its intricate web of life, it should be our goal to contribute to the well-being of the earth without much unwanted disturbances. Through progressive technology, the farming industry has sought to improve both personal and environmental health with the use of various pesticides in crop production. Unfortunately, this cannot occur without subsequent consequences. Although pesticides reduce the costs of farmers by increasing crop yields and reducing crop failure, the use of pesticides also causes several health risks including cancer, birth defects, reproductive harm, and nervous system damage. With an innovation that is intended to promote the health of our nation’s consumers, these kinds of health risks are counterproductive. The extent of these risks to humanity and the environment leave several asking, are pesticides causing more harm than good? It is imperative that organic methods of crop production are employed in the farming industry so that a balance can be achieved between the potential benefits of pesticides and the detrimental effects they also cause.
Conventional pesticides have been the norm in the farming industry for several decades. In the mid-twentieth century, the use of pesticides in crop production skyrocketed as one of the simplest ways to rid crops of the pesky organisms that hinder the healthy development of farmers’ harvests. As defined by the Environmental Protection Agency, the federal government organization in charge of protecting human health and the environment, a pesticide is considered to be “any substance or mixture of substances intended for preventing, destroying, repelling, or mitigating any pest” (www.epa.gov). Insects, mice, small animals, weeds, fungi, bacteria, and even viruses are some of the common pests that plague crops and induce the need to utilize pesticides. In order to produce healthy fruits and vegetables for America’s consumers, “the nation spends $4.1 billion annually to treat crops with 320 million kg of pesticides” (BioScience 407). Such a costly practice is worthwhile when it yields numerous benefits for both the farmers and their crops’ consumers.
Americans often overlook the many benefits that are the result of proper pesticide use. We often take it for granted that the fruits we purchase from the supermarket will be free of blemishes, and that the vegetables served at a local restaurant will not contain any insects. Farmers’ constant dedication to producing pest-free crops by using various pesticides results in cleaner food that is FDA-approved and ready for consumption. Since pesticides “kill potential disease-causing organisms and control insects, weeds, and other pests,” the spread of vector borne diseases is halted before it reaches the community (www.epa.gov). Consequently, less money is wasted on food that is rotten or pest-infested. The cost of produce is also cheaper for the public when pesticides are used because farmers’ costs are reduced when crop failure is infrequent. When crops are not damaged or killed by pests, farmers’ yearly yields are increased and food production is stabilized in the economy. These positive consequences from the use of pesticides are essential and should not go unnoticed when considering the level of pest control necessary in the farming industry.
Although pesticides reap many benefits in agriculture, they also cause more harm than they originally intend. Most directly, pesticides affect the health of those who consume the chemically-treated food. Via diet and drinking water, “the average American is exposed to 10 or more pesticides every day” (Bittman). According to the International Food Information Council Foundation, pesticides have been known to cause increased risks of various types of cancer, skin irritation, birth defects, nervous system damage, and reproductive harm (www.foodinsight.org). The ingredients in baby food cause children to be the most vulnerable to these negative health effects associated with pesticides. There have been links “between pesticide exposure and cancer (specifically brain tumors and leukemia) and “adverse” neurodevelopment, including lowered I.Q., autism, and attention disorders and hyperactivity” (Bittman). Also, since many pesticides are endocrine disruptors and change gene expression patterns, pesticide exposure in pregnant women may cause their children to tend to become obese (Bittman). Today’s youth are the leaders of tomorrow, so their health and well-being are of utmost importance.
The environment and its natural inhabitants are also major aspects that are influenced by the use of pesticides. Research by BioScience Magazine in the 1990s confirms that “herbicides are currently being used on approximately 90 million hectares in the United States – greater than half of the nation’s cropland” (BioScience 402). This is a significant amount of land that is most likely inhabited by other plants and animals in the ecosystem. When pesticides are dispersed throughout so much land, wildlife that cannot tolerate the harsh chemical emissions into the soil and atmosphere is either forced to find new habitats or suffer harsh health effects. Exposure to these chemicals in the womb of mammals, or the eggs of birds, fish, and reptiles can cause the endocrine, immune, and nervous systems of embryos to not develop normally. Sometimes, when natural habitats are destroyed, the affected wildlife can no longer support themselves and their offspring and eventually die. In her 1962 novel Silent Spring, Rachel Carson directly addresses the circumstances regarding the death of innocent wildlife due to pesticide use. According to Carson, pesticides have “the power to kill every insect, the “good” and the “bad,” to still the song of birds and the leaping of fish in the streams, to coat the leaves with a deadly film, and to linger on in soil” (Carson 43). As citizens of a sustainable society, we should value the organisms that inhabit the ecosystem just as much as we value our own health.
In order to regulate the harmful extent of pesticide use, many government agencies and farmers instill risk assessment techniques. These policies help set a standard for all farmers to meet so that the quality of their food is ensured. For example, one common risk assessment technique is to perform studies on various pesticides in order to measure their toxicity and the amount a given organism is exposed to them (Bowen). Once the potential risk of a particular pesticide to the environment is ascertained, government agencies may come to the conclusion that it would be better for alternative methods of pest control to be enforced. Progressive technology in America has led to the introduction of organic agricultural practices that are not only healthier for humanity, but also better for the environment as a whole.
Organic methods of pest control still serve the same purpose as conventional methods,
but with the added benefits of being much healthier and more sustainable for society. Kathleen
Delate, a professor involved in the Long-Term Agroecological Research experiment, states that “farmers interested in transitioning to organic production will be happy to see that, with good management, yields can be the same, with potentially higher returns and better soil quality” (http://www.leopold.iastate.edu). As we have learned through our studies of sustainability, healthy soil is the foundation of a sustainable society in which the food we eat is cleaner, nutrients are more abundant, and climate change is less prevalent. According to a study published in the April issue of Crop Management, organically managed healthy soil can have up to 40 percent more biologically-active soil organic matter than conventionally managed soil, which leads to better fertility and nutrient availability (http://www.leopold.iastate.edu). As a result, crop yields are more prosperous and better suited for consumption. When the soil is managed without harsh pesticides and other damaging chemicals, we do not have to worry about the contamination of our food, water, and living organisms. Organic agriculture eliminates the need for harmful synthetic inputs that release carbon emissions into the atmosphere, thus putting sustainability system condition #3 into action by reducing our contributions to the systematic degradation of nature. It also strengthens the farms’ resiliency to droughts, floods, and other extreme effects of the climate. When both the air and soil are healthier, our environment can better deal with climate change and fuel a sustainable society.
Fred Whitford, a credited professor at Purdue University, is a supporter of organic farming methods and shares his knowledge with America in his YouTube video “What Are Pesticides? (Part 2) Organic Methods of Pest Control.” In this informative video, Professor Whiford tours Throckmorton Farm and highlights various organic methods of pest control. He focuses on insect and weed control in an apple orchard, explaining the difference between organic and conventional harvesting methods. One of the innovations that Professor Whitford shows his viewers are strips placed around apple tree trunks to protect them from mice. With the use of these harmless strips, apple trees can grow healthy and strong without the bark being eaten away by pesky rodents. Mice often carry unwanted diseases that can be passed on to humans through food consumption, so keeping mice away in an organic way is an excellent alternative to rodent repellants that can poison plants, animals, and even humans. Another organic alternative is a sticky pheromone trap which attracts insects. A plastic cone-shaped object, this trap mimics the sex smell of female insects so that much of the insect population is attracted to the trap instead of the plant. Insects that feed on fruits and vegetables are now stuck on the sticky pheromone trap and unable to harm the crop. This poses no harm to the environment, unlike chemical-based insecticides. One final organic alternative proposed in Professor Whitford’s video is the use of weed barriers that prevent weed growth. A tarp laid over the pesky weeds, these weed barriers kill unwanted herbs without using fertilizers and weed killers that can be poisonous to those exposed to it. By employing these organic methods and steering clear of harmful conventional methods of pest control, farmers can eliminate some of the damaging effects of pesticides and promote a cleaner, healthier environment for all who inhabit it.
Since the shift toward using organic pesticides is drastic, costly, and challenging, the use of conventional pesticides in the farming industry may never actually be completely eliminated. In his 2008 report “Simplifying the Pesticide Risk Equation: The Organic Option,” Charles Benbrook estimates that “organic food production would reduce our overall exposure to pesticides by 97 percent; that is, all but eliminate it.” (Bittman). Through small steps and sacrifices, we can make a significant difference in the health and sustainability of our society. Purchasing organic foods for our families instead of other produce is not only a healthy decision for ourselves, but it also promotes the organic farming industry. We can also support this movement by employing some of Professor Whitford’s methods in our own gardens. By reconsidering our values regarding human health, economics, and the environment, we realize that it is important to do all we can to refrain from using harmful conventional pesticides in the environment.
As America seeks a solution to the pesky problem that pesticides pose for humanity and the environment, the benefits and costs of their use must be weighed. Although they seem to have a justifiable purpose, conventional pesticides cause more harm to the earth than good in the quest to maintain a sustainable society. The danger of causing diseases in affected humans and destroying the habitats of the surrounding organisms is simply not worth risking. Thus, it is imperative to seek alternative methods of pest control that are organic and harmless to the ecosystem. This involves sacrificing our current ethics and shifting toward valuing health over economics. In the long-run, the cost of human life is much greater than any financial cost. We must do all we can in order to ensure the well-being of our planet’s intricate web of life. Once the movement toward organic pest control practices is complete, the farming industry can once again produce pest-free harvests that promote a healthy and sustainable society.
Works Cited
“About Pesticides.” US Environmental Protection Agency. 9 May. 2011. Web. 22 Sept. 2013. <http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/about/index.htm>.
Bittman, Mark. “Pesticides: Now More Than Ever.” Opinionator. The New York Times, 11 Dec. 2012. Web. 22 Sept. 2013. <http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/12/11/pesticides-now-more-than-ever/?_r=1>.
Bowen, Nathan. “Pesticide Regulation.” NASDA. National Association of State Departments of Agriculture, 25 Feb. 2013. Web. 22 Sept. 2013. <http://www.nasda.org/Policy/5332/4903.aspx>.
Carson, Rachel. Silent Spring. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 2002. Print.
“IFIC Review: Pesticides And Food Safety.” Food Insight: Your Nutrition and Food Safety Resource. International Food Information Council Foundation, 15 Oct. 2009. Web. 22 Sept. 2013. <http://www.foodinsight.org/Resources/Detail.aspx?topic=IFIC_Review_Pesticides_And_Food_Safety>.
Pimentel, D., L. McLaughlin, A. Zepp, B. Lakitan, T. Kraus, P. Kleinman, F. Vancini, W. Roach, E. Graap, W. Keeton, and G. Selig. “Environmental and Economic Effects of Reducing Pesticide Use.” BioScience 41.6 (1991): 402-09. Print.
“Research Shows Organic Practices Build Healthy Soil.” Leopold Center for Sustainable Agriculture. Iowa State University, 2013. Web. 22 Sept. 2013. <http://www.leopold.iastate.edu/news/leopold-letter/2013/summer/soil-health#sthash.vOy5UCA8.dpuf>.
Whitford, Fred. “What Are Pesticides? (Part 2) Organic Methods of Pest Control.” YouTube. OrganicNation, 21 May 2009. Web. 22 Sept. 2013. <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3ZB4_KnhHBE>.
Leave a Reply