The increase in food production is mostly due to fertilisers and better machinery. Yet some think that it harms human health and communities. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

It is often said that the most significant reason for rising in

food

production is due to fertilizer and better machinery.

However

,some people opine that

this

has an adverse effect on human health and communities. From my point of ,view, I disagree with

this

idea.

Firstly

,one of the conspicuous reasons for

this

argument is the weakness of traditional methods.

For example

, nowadays in most agricultural areas around the world, conventional ways for

food

production are being eroded

such

as ,using animals for ploughing ,harvesting commodities by hand

besides

shovelling. Advanced machines and fertilizing by the most progressive methods could create a noticeable speed for producing

food

without spending energy by humans.

This

could cause health rather than diseases are created by conducting heavy works on grounds.

Therefore

,

this

makes it clear why industrialization in agriculture has staggering positive effects on human lives ,

in addition

, the society.

Secondly

,another reason is existing electrical industries.

For instance

,most developed countries construct electric tractors that do not yield pollutants.

Also

,do not have destructive effects on the environment that

food

is produced.

This

would probably generate a suitable space for producing agricultural commodities .

As a result

,it becomes apparent that fertiliser

besides

machinery does not harmful impact people

in addition

to communities healthy. To summarise ,I completely disagree with

this

idea that the detrimental effects of exploiting machinery in farming are more than other means. It is recommended that the governments draw a plan to prodecure more agriculture machines

besides

having a prominent effort to build a powerful industry for collecting crops quickly without creating danger for citizens.