Cheaper food is now available because of greater use of fertilizers and improved machinery. This improved production, however, can be harmful to individuals and the community. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this view? Discuss, including examples from your own knowledge and experience.

It is sometimes believed that

fertilisers

and other chemicals used to enlarge the capacity of production can be intimidating to both individuals and the community.

This

essay strongly disagrees with

this

suggestion for several reasons. The

first

point given to support my opinion is that it has been a marked development in agricultural science which means the chemicals used in edible

products

have been tested safe for human health.

Fertilisers

and pesticides,

for instance

, can be washed off after a period of time when

products

are ready to be delivered, thereby it is safe for consumers. The

food

products

are

also

tested again by nutrition experts when arrived at retailers to ensure that consumers are not poisoned. Another reason behind my belief is that cheaper

food

is more accessible to the lower-class population. As far as foods are safe to be eaten when using the right amount of

fertilisers

, they should be massively produced to fulfil people's basic needs. Any

products

labelled organic can be priced up to two or three times higher than the original one. As the result, people tend to be reluctant to spend money to buy more healthy

food

for their family. In my conclusion, I totally disagree that the use of

fertilisers

and improved machinery can be harmful to individuals and the community has given the aforementioned arguments. I entirely disagree with the view because of the development of science in agriculture and easier access to those

products

for those who are struggling to buy

food

.