In this set of materials, both the reading and the lecture discuss whether " Organic food is healthier and less damaging than traditional food or not" . Whereas, the reading supports this argument, the listener explains three reasons that she thinks overweight those in the article.
First, in the reading the author suggests that organic foods are produced with much less chemical than traditional food, thus they don't produce diseases on human beings. Notwithstanding, the listener disagrees and says that this idea is wrong because traditional food uses a tiny amount of chemical, so it is inocuous to people. Furthermore, fruits and vegetables are washed thoroughly and in this way the chemical is removed. In addition, there is not prove that pesticides used in agriculture poses a risks to people.
Second, the article states that organic food doesn't pollute the environment such as rivers and forests. On the other hand, the listener claims that nowadays, law limits the amount of chemicals that farmers can use, in fact if they affect environmental areas they can be punished. Also, there is not documented case of environmental harm caused by pesticides until today.
Third, the reading posits that organic produce food is environmentally friendly, thus it doesn't affect or damage animals. The listener doesn't agree, and says that because chemicals used on the production of traditional food are targeted to specific pests and trees, so they don't produce negative effects on the forests. In fact, studies have shown that pesticides are harmless to useful trees.
In this set of materials, both the
reading
and the lecture discuss whether
"
;
Organic
food
is healthier and less damaging than
traditional
food
or
not"
;
.
Whereas, the
reading
supports this argument, the
listener
explains
three reasons that she
thinks
overweight those in the article.
First
, in the
reading
the author suggests that
organic
foods
are produced
with much less
chemical
than
traditional
food
,
thus
they don't produce diseases on human beings. Notwithstanding, the
listener
disagrees and says that this
idea
is
wrong
because
traditional
food
uses
a tiny amount of
chemical
,
so
it is
inocuous
to
people
.
Furthermore
, fruits and vegetables
are washed
thoroughly
and in this way the
chemical
is removed
.
In addition
, there is not prove that pesticides
used
in agriculture poses a
risks
to
people
.
Second, the article states that
organic
food
doesn't pollute the environment such as rivers and forests.
On the other hand
, the
listener
claims that nowadays, law limits the amount of
chemicals
that farmers can
use
, in fact if they affect environmental areas they can
be punished
.
Also
, there is not documented case of environmental harm caused by pesticides until
today
.
Third, the
reading
posits that
organic
produce
food
is
environmentally
friendly,
thus
it doesn't affect or damage animals. The
listener
doesn't
agree
, and says that
because
chemicals
used
on the production of
traditional
food
are targeted
to specific pests and trees,
so
they don't produce
negative
effects on the forests. In fact, studies have shown that pesticides are harmless to useful trees.