Taste, cost, health benefits, nutritional value, accessibility and the speed of production. These factors, in no particular order, are fueling the debate between industrially produced food and organic food.
Looking at both sides of the debate, Time Magazine asks readers to consider what the production of food means to the well-being of those who eat it and the environment in which it is produced.
The article raises many questions about the trade-offs which individuals or societies might consider when planning to go organic, but concludes:
“The answer, ultimately, is for the two sets of producers — and their two sets of customers — to find a better way to co-exist. It’s important to crack down on the industry’s most egregious and polluting practices — to say nothing of its punishing treatment of animals — but we need to make sure the food still gets to the stores. It’s important too to support the local-farming movement not only to make more fresh foods available to more consumers but also to boost a growing economic sector and perhaps bring down prices as efficiencies of scale come up.”
The article is supplemented by Dr. Mehmet Oz, who offers “The Organic Alternative,” or ways of acquiring the benefits of organic foods from commonly purchased industrial foods.
There is also a special section taste-testing different foods, allowing experts to weigh in on the taste difference between industrially produced and organic foods.
Posted by Michael Lucivero.
