Industrial Agriculture vs. Sustainable Agriculture

Industrial agriculture is defined as “a form of modern farming that refers to the industrialized production of livestock, poultry, fish, and crops.” (Wikipedia). Industrial agriculture provides a quick solution to producing large amounts of crops in a short amount of time. The purpose of industrial agriculture is to eliminate the human labour aspect of farming, and to use machines and genetic technology to produce the products. The problem with industrial agriculture is that it is extremely harmful to the environment. The toxins that are being used to fertilize the crops are being washed into our water systems and in addition the use of these machines has begun to lead to degredation of the soil. In addition, the machines being used have begun to shorten water supply and use up enormous amounts of energy. One benefit that industrial agriculture has is that it produces a lot of crops in a short amount of time for a low budget, maximizing profits for farmers by reducing labour costs and increasing productivity. Sustainable agriculture is defined as “the ability of a farm to produce food indefinitely, without causing irreversible damage to ecosystem health.” (Newpaltz) Generally speaking, sustainable agriculture is a more humane way of raising crops and animals. It does not involve any genetic mutations and harmful pesticides, and whatever waste is generated from the farms is dealt with on the farms and does not end up back in our ecosystem. Sustainable agriculture produces more jobs for farmers, and provides treatment that is fair to both animals and workers. Sustainable agriculture sees that animals are treated properly and are not put in overcrowded cages and produced at mass amounts. Another benefit of sustainable agriculture is that it maintains the biodiversity that has begun to be depleted by industrial agriculture. Sustainable agriculture not only provides benefits for the environment and workers, but it provides a place for animals to continue their normal habits, such as grazing.  
In conclusion, it is clear to me that industrial agriculture is a unacceptable and antiquated. Even though industrial agriculture produces large quantities of food in shorter amounts of time, it is contributing to the depletion of the diversity of animal species on the planet as certain breeds are becoming extinct. Industrial agriculture has led to soil degradation, and water depletion and contamination. Sustainable agriculture offers a solution to this problem by providing a safe way to produce the same products. Although sustainable agriculture produces at a slower speed, it is worth taking the extra time, because that way we can make sure we do not deplete our resources and we don’t allow less productive breeds to become extinct. Contrary to popular belief a farmer can make the same amount of money whether he/she works in industrial or sustainable agriculture, there is no added benefit for farmers, and there is only negative aspects for the environment. 
Sourceshttp://www.newdream.org/food/glossary.php
Wikipedia- en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Industrial_agriculture
Newpaltz- www.newpaltz.edu/green/definitions.html
http://www.economywatch.com/agriculture/types/industrial.html
http://www.sustainabletable.org/intro/whatis/
http://eap.mcgill.ca/sustain.htm
Blogs Commented On:http://natashasbioblog.blogspot.com/2011/01/dirty-little-secrets-of-food-industry.htmlhttp://bioblogstuff.blogspot.com/2010/12/sustainable-agriculture-right-choice.html

Designer Babies: Medical or Cosmetic Epidemic?

Designer babies are definitely a very controversial topic. Depending on who you talk to, you could get different opinions ranging from people who totally support it, to people who are dead set against it. Some people think that it is not okay at all for people to get to choose what qualities their babies will possess, and some people say that if it is beneficial for the parents, or for the child, that it is ok. 

The cost alone of designer babies would be enough to make people think twice about it. Cost ranges from $18,000 and higher in order to receive your “perfect child.” The reasons that people are against designer babies range from more than the cost. For example, some people believe that having a designer baby goes against religious values. They believe that it takes away from God’s authority to create your baby. Also, some people believe that creating designer babies would create more controversy in the world then there already is. An example of controversy that would be created is that it would take away the diversity of our world. There would be more blondes then red heads, and more brunettes then people with black hair, or the opposites of both. Regardless of what hair colour, or eye colour, or body shape, or personality is most requested, there is always going to be a dominance of said characteristics, because people can chose what they want. Also, since designer babies are so expensive, it would create a divide between the rich and poor. The divide would be created because the richer kids would have been able to receive such expensive treatment to make them look a certain way, whereas, the poorer people of the nation would not have been able to afford that and it would result in them having flaws that the richer people don’t have.

On the other hand, there are people who support the creation of designer babies, and provide valid points as to why they have chosen to support this new epidemic. Some people believe that designer babies could be a huge asset to medical enhancement. For example, if there is a child with cancer, and their parents aren’t a match to a transplant they need, a designer baby could be created so that you know the newborn will be a match to the child with cancer. Other cases that designer babies would be beneficial for medical reasons would be to prevent a baby from contracting a disease such as cystic fibrosis, through karymapping. If cystic fibrosis runs in the genes of a family, and the parents know how likely it is that their child will struggle with this disease, they might opt for having a designer baby, so that they know their child will not contract the disease that has been so widespread in their family.

Overall, I think that having a designer baby is really a personal choice, and depends more on the situation than anything else. If parents want to have a designer baby so that it’ll look a certain way, or so that it’ll possess a certain characteristic (i.e. want their children to have height, so they can play a certain sport etc.) then I do not believe it is ok. I do believe that if someone wants a designer baby for medical reasons, then it is ok, depending on the extremes to which they are going to make the child go. Regardless, I do believe that there will always be controversy over designer babies, but it is definitely a personal choice.

http://science.discovery.com/videos/brink-news-designer-babies.html This video demonstrates the divide between babies who have been genetically engineered, and babies who have not.

                                          

SOURCES

http://www.buzzle.com/articles/pros-and-cons-of-designer-babies.html

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/955644.stm

http://articles.cnn.com/2008-10-30/tech/designer.babies_1_genetic-screening-designer-babies-animal-embryos?_s=PM:TECH

Blogs Commented On
Vilma Lopez: http://www.vilmabioblog.blogspot.com/
Melissa Quinn: http://melissasbioblog.blogspot.com/

The International Small Group & Tree Planting Program

Around the world, media focuses on the negative affects that humans have on the worlds biodiversity. They say that we build to many sky scrapers and condos, that we create too much pollution with our cars and that we have ruined the ocean by dumping toxic waste and having accidental oil spills. What no one is informed of is the small, or large, groups all around the world that contribute immensely to build up the biodiversity on our wonderful planet. 
More specifically, I found a group that is referenced by the acronym TIST. This group helps out countries such as Kenya and India in many different ways. For example, the farmers in said countries have to resort to cutting down trees in order to obtain more farm land. When they cut down the trees it leads to more damage then it does successful crop production. When the trees are cut down, it exposes the ground to harsher conditions, such as strong winds and immense heat and drastic rainfalls; all of which will eventually lead to some type of erosion of the top layer of soil. This is where TIST comes in. TIST helps out the countries listed above and many others by going into the countries and planting trees. The planting of these trees provides shade and protection for the soil which ultimately leads to more plentiful crop life. Along with helping the biodiversity in these countries TIST tries to help out as much as they can with diseases such as aids. This may not have to do directly with biodiversity but if TIST can help sustain the lives of people, then it will most definitely lead to more biodiversity. 




These people are using agricultural practices that are safe on the land, by using natural fertilizers and available tools. 
                                              
A group of women working together to plant trees in their community. Their small contribution will be a big change in the biodiversity in their country. 


SOURCES
http://www.tist.org/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TIST_Reforestation_Project
http://www.tist.org/tist/projects.php


Comments
http://waynebioblog.blogspot.com/
http://caitlincosgrovebioblog.blogspot.com/