
Modern life, the essay says, keeps asking people to choose quickly, so food is often the kind that can be made fast — instant and retort meals everyone already knows are not the healthiest path. A well-being current rode that worry: if the meal is to be good for the body, the crops themselves should be grown without harmful inputs, in a clean setting, and that way of growing is called organic. Park Jin-young, head of JYP Entertainment, is a recent example: wanting to be someone who can still dance at fifty, he chose to eat only organic food.
No calendar year is attached to that habit here, and none is added. Restaurants that serve only organic dishes, and farms that handle only organic crops, are mentioned as part of the same boom. Organic, the essay asks, is not simply using a little less pesticide. In the past, it says, the standard was so loose that using pesticide nine times instead of ten could still be called organic, and fraud followed because trust in the word fell.
The later standard it states is a method that does not use pesticides, including fungicides and insecticides, chemical fertilizer, growth-regulating hormones, antibiotics, or livestock-feed additives, and that also covers food not genetically modified or sterilized by radiation. Land should have gone at least three years without pesticides, synthetic organic pesticides, or chemical fertilizer. Organic produce is not made by skipping insecticide for a single year.
The essay then sorts eco-friendly produce into three kinds, mainly by how much pesticide is used. Pesticide-free produce uses no synthetic organic pesticide at all, and keeps chemical fertilizer within one-third of the recommended amount. Organic produce is grown without synthetic organic pesticide or chemical fertilizer for three years in the case of perennials and two years for other crops. Low-pesticide produce keeps chemical fertilizer at or below half the recommended amount, keeps the number of sprayings at or below half the use standard, does not use herbicides, and keeps residual pesticide at or below half the allowed standard.
Those criteria stay, in their period. A government certification system, it says, lets professional bodies select and inspect eco-friendly farm and livestock products so that the state can vouch for safety, from soil and water through growth, harvest, and shipping, with later checks against false labels and goods that drift from the rules. Labels should carry only a clear core, and avoid vague words such as “natural pollution-free” or “low-pollution.” Crops grown off soil, in facilities or media, with nutrients supplied from outside or with natural water only, are to be marked separately as nutrient-solution or hydroponic produce.
The marks it lists are organic (ORGANIC), pesticide-free (NONPESTICIDE), antibiotic-free, and organic processed food. In 1997, it places total pesticide use at about 12 percent less than in 1991, yet the amount on the same area at 11 kilograms a hectare; those figures stay with 1997 and 1991. Children, it says, react more sensitively than adults to crops grown with pesticide. Ordinary farm prices reflect only direct costs, and leave out the cost of repairing land heavy with pesticide, cleaning water, lost wild species, soil erosion — thousands of tons of soil lost each year to rain and other causes — and treating harmful substances from pesticide manufacture.
Organic food costs more, yields and variety can be hard to meet, and farmers who spray are themselves exposed; the essay still argues that the longer problems of pesticide and fertilizer mean the current should move toward organic, with practical help from the government.
Fast-made meals are easy to reach for, the essay says, and a well-being current asked for crops grown without harmful inputs. Park Jin-young is a recent example of eating only organic food in order to still dance at fifty; no year is attached to that habit, and none is added.
Organic is not simply using a little less pesticide. The later standard is a method without pesticides, chemical fertilizer, growth hormones, antibiotics, or feed additives, and without genetic modification or radiation sterilization. Land should have gone at least three years without those farm chemicals. Produce is then sorted into pesticide-free, organic, and low-pesticide, by how much pesticide and fertilizer are used. Those criteria stay.
A government certification system, the essay says, inspects from soil and water through shipping, and checks later against false labels. Marks should stay clear — organic, pesticide-free, antibiotic-free, organic processed food — and avoid vague claims; hydroponic or nutrient-solution crops are marked separately.
In 1997, total pesticide use is placed at about 12 percent less than in 1991, yet at 11 kilograms a hectare on the same area. Those figures stay with those years. Ordinary prices leave out the cost of repairing land and water, lost wild species, and soil washed away by the thousand tons. Organic food costs more, and yields can be hard to meet, but the essay still argues for moving toward organic, with practical government help, and does not add The same Korean report, at fuller length, is on CampusDown.
Last updated: 14 November 2026
Into pesticide-free, organic, and low-pesticide, mainly by how much pesticide and chemical fertilizer are used, with land for organic methods left at least three years without those inputs.
Total use about 12 percent less than in 1991, yet 11 kilograms a hectare on the same area. Those figures stay with 1997 and 1991.
Vague words such as “natural pollution-free” or “low-pollution.” Hydroponic or nutrient-solution crops are to be marked separately.
Refund policy