# Reasons for eating organic food **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [February 18, 2011, 1:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reasons-for-eating-organic-food/571760 "2011-02-18T01:16:20Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 3\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Wogglebug](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/c77e96/32.png) [@Wogglebug](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Wogglebug)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2011, 11:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reasons-for-eating-organic-food/571760/41 "2011-02-25T11:41:27Z")
> [@TimeWinder](#): > > Modern medicine uses radical, untested techniques involving chemicals (!) whose import may not be understood for decades. We’ve been doing human testing on viruses for thousands of years. Humans whose immune systems can’t kill viruses disappear. > > i.e. letting illnesses run their course, up to and including death is safe. Taking medicine for them is a crap shoot. > > More succinctly, you’ve selected some weird anti-creationist stance: the assumption that only humans evolve, and nature stands still during the process. Us vs. nature is an arms race, and both sides are working to improve their effectiveness. Nature is, by and large, trying to protect it’s foods from being eaten; “synthetics” are designed from the very beginning to be eaten, and tested for safety in ways natural foods never are. > > Even more succinctly:The “argument from antiquity” (i.e. that older things are better by virtue of being old) is a recognized logical fallacy: consider astrology, trepanning, exorcism, chinese medicine, herbal remedies, etc. all of which are usually ineffective and often dangerous, but nevertheless haven’t “disappeared”–quite the opposite. What amazes me (slightly, but it will pass) is that you actually imagine that you are making sense. Your thinking is so … contrived and aimless … good grief. Astrology and the other etcetera PBS rants you pulled out of your hat are not about basic life and death survival. Get exorcised by someone? It doesn’t make any difference one way or the other. Where in the WORLD did you come up with the notion that nature doesn’t “want its plants eaten?” Huh? Did you ever actually, you know, take a biology class? (I mean, take one and pass it.) I assume you also don’t read history? Trepanning is a sometimes legitimate medical procedure. (Read the Wikipedia article. Or something. Fer God’s sake.) Next time … take a pass on the hype? “recognized logical fallacy”?? What does that mean. It’s opposed to unrecognized ones? And finally, learn the difference between “its” and “it’s”. ---
**Author:** ![Wogglebug](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/c77e96/32.png) [@Wogglebug](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Wogglebug)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2011, 12:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reasons-for-eating-organic-food/571760/42 "2011-02-25T12:17:16Z")
Even having 10,000 of edits in Wikipedia, it’s difficult to understand in what measure you are correct, or wrong, or acting in bad faith. In Wikipedia, it’s customary to present your sources when you disagree with someone. You state that “Such an event never happened.” This implies you are an expert in the field, or a liar. How could you know that something never happened? And claiming that Greenpeace “made up something out of whole cloth”. Gee, that sounds like a legally actionable statement. Do you have proof? I didn’t say that organic farming excludes all radical, untested techniques. But that’s how you interpreted it, and observed that the royal “we” had already established something. Why would I believe that organic farming was not a “massive business”? And why do you feel it necessary to bolster your position by a) Stating that I claimed something I did not, and b) using the phrase “cute” to describe a position that I actually didn’t have. I would pick through some of the rest of your statements, but it appears to me that you liberally misrepresent any subject you think you can get away with. Come over to Wikipedia, and try that bullying without giving references. Or … wait … let me guess … you edit Wikipedia, and are proud of the many warnings you’ve received for bad faith edits. ---
**Author:** ![TimeWinder](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bcef8e/32.png) [@TimeWinder](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TimeWinder)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2011, 2:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reasons-for-eating-organic-food/571760/43 "2011-02-25T14:37:43Z")
> [@Wogglebug](#): > > What amazes me (slightly, but it will pass) is that you actually imagine that you are making sense. Your thinking is so … contrived and aimless … good grief. > > Astrology and the other etcetera PBS rants you pulled out of your hat are not about basic life and death survival. Get exorcised by someone? It doesn’t make any difference one way or the other. > > Where in the WORLD did you come up with the notion that nature doesn’t “want its plants eaten?” Huh? Did you ever actually, you know, take a biology class? (I mean, take one and pass it.) > > I assume you also don’t read history? Trepanning is a sometimes legitimate medical procedure. (Read the Wikipedia article. Or something. Fer God’s sake.) > > Next time … take a pass on the hype? “recognized logical fallacy”?? What does that mean. It’s opposed to unrecognized ones? > > And finally, learn the difference between “its” and “it’s”. Your excellent debating and reasoning skills have thoroughly changed my mind on this important topic. I am particularly awed by your defense of trepanning as a legitimate medical procedure, and your paradigm-changing re-evaluation of basic evolution as “those things which reproduce less pass on more of their genes.” Thank you for challenging my boring preconceptions. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reasons-for-eating-organic-food/571760.md?page=2)