Organic v Inorganic

[Snadger]

Its an immotive subject and I wouldn't mind betting this thread is shut down eventually because of it!
When fields were worked by horses and oxen they had to get rid of the dung so it was added to the fields where it nourished the crop and improved the soil structure.Win/win as far as growers were concerned.
Horses and oxen aren't used so much now so growers turned to technology and use of cheap artificial fertilisers.
The question I would ask is do we turn our backs on technology and go back to living in caves and push carts with square wheels or do we embrace parts of technology that help us but still keep the soil in good heart by addition of organic matter of some sort.
Pesticides are a different matter and I think there's enough evidence to show that each pesticide has a down side and should be used only as a last resort.
Air miles also come into the whole 'Organic' sphere and we should, I believe, do what we can to be localist.

[ESBkevin]

I'm with you on the emotive bit and general sentiment of your post too.
There are other ways to enrich the soil than just animal manure. Some places in the worls there is no access to such things and animal manure or modern chemical fertilisers, so subsitance farmers have come up with thier own ways to enrich the soil with plant matter, urine, fish guts or whatever they have access to. Crops are grown here now with the specific purpose of being dropped back into the soil for fertilisation.
The animal manure and crop rotation system was proven to work well here centuries ago but the advent of two world wars and internal combustion engines changed the agricultural landscape beyond all recognition. We have all benefited from many of those changes without doubt, the question is really have we got everything right? i don't think we know that answer completely yet.

[Penellype]

As has been said this is a difficult and somewhat emotive subject. The definition of "organic" is open to considerable question - as a chemist, to me organic refers to molecules which contain carbon and hydrogen with optional extras - there is a whole branch of chemistry (organic chemistry) which deals with these compounds. Most of them are probably things you wouldn't want to put on your veg, such as the components of crude oil.

So, given that the chemical definition of organic is not the one we are looking for, what do people actually mean by it? If it means naturally occurring compounds, you are including all sorts of nasties - many poisons are naturally occurring substances. I find the whole thing full of confusion.

I think all you can do is decide for yourself at what point you draw the line. I won't use poisons to kill pests in my garden, but I don't have any qualms about my friend poisoning the rats that regularly appear in hers from the surrounding fields. I prefer to use natural feeds like bfb, but I don't have room to grow comfrey or nettles so I feed my tomatoes with tomorite or similar. I also use artificial feeds every time I buy compost, as they are added to this as part of the mix.

It is nearly impossible to avoid some interaction with "non organic" systems - seeds have been mentioned, but also, unless you are fortunate to have a sufficient supply of rain water, there will be chemicals (mainly chlorine) in your water supply, along with a very dilute cocktail of vast numbers of different drugs, antibiotics etc that have passed through the general population and are not fully removed by water treatment processes. Nobody knows what effect long term exposure to these has on people, let alone plants and soil! See https://www.newscientist.com/article...their-effects/ for more info on this.

[Potstubsdustbins]

I take an approach very similar to the above in my garden, growing in pots is difficult without the use of man made fertilisers, but I try to only use what is necessary.

As for farming in my opinion that is a totally different scenario feeding the worlds rapidly growing population is only going to get more difficult as time goes by.

As an example I believe in free range eggs and don't mind paying a little extra for the privilege of eating them, but not everyone can afford them. Do we make those people eat less eggs in order to go completely free range, I don't know the answer and I suspect not many do. If we went totally free range as is being suggested by some would we be able to produce enough eggs, we use 33million a day in the UK, again I don't know the answer but it will have to be sorted by some poor bu??er.