[amadeusw]

You're right that the organic designation is about completely avoiding the usage of certain substances. The article refers to this idea towards the end:

>As the soil becomes compacted and soaked with agrichemicals, the delicate microbiome of the soil is destroyed. The whole point of growing organically is to ensure this planet stays healthy and chemical-free.

[dragonwriter]

> The whole point of growing organically is to ensure this planet stays healthy and chemical-free.

The planet is entirely made of chemicals, it can't be made chemical-free and, even if it could, that wouldn't be healthy.

[crankylinuxuser]

Then lets use some better terms.

Petrochemicals and derivatives aren't good for the land. It depletes various types of long-accrued chemicals and biological structures that make it healthy.

Neonicotinoids and similar neurotoxins are bad for myriad life in the vicinity where these chemicals are deposited or sprayed.

If it ain't EM, strong, weak, or gravity, it's chemicals. But there's a whole slew of really nasty shit we humans have created that is devastating on the ecology. Some are damn near permanent, others mess with endocrine systems, others cause cancer of everything.. Probably a good idea to keep the bulk of these away unless we reallllly know what we're doing. And considering the usual reason is "to make a buck", we're selling our future selves really short, and we ain't asking them.

[mc32]

I guess they the proponents kinda mean that (agricultural) chemicals be near their natural concentrations in arable lands. So there are going to be chemicals naturally, and harmful ones, but in normal non/not very harmful to humans concentrations. And of course earth is made of chemicals and “organic” chemicals (gotta use quotes so as to not confuse with organic chemistry) are also harmful (if they were not, they’d be of little use against pests).