eloine wrote:
I based my thinking on a couple of french scientifics called "couple bourguignon" that are specialized in "soil microbiology" and there is several documentaries about their researches, where they explains that pesticides kills all life in the soils and so this is very bad for plants and that farmers are too agressive and labour too deep and too often
Documentaries are not usually reliable sources of information, particularly on Organic agriculture, the principles of which are not based on science. Anybody can say anything in a propaganda piece, what matters is real research and scientific consensus, and I can not find any peer reviewed and published research from these people.
It sounds like the Bourguignon couple are practicing pseudoscience, not science.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pseudoscience
I found details about his book:
Claude Bourguignon, Regenerating the Soil: From Agronomy to Agrology,
Other India Press, 2005
Other India Press is a small publication house which specializes in pseudoscience and spiritual stuff. So, based on that, it is fair to assume Claude Bourguignon is not a credible scientist, if he is any kind of scientist at all.
It's kind of like if you found something published by a publishing house that mainly published Nazi or white supremacist things: it's an indication of the quality and content of the book. Guilt by association is a valid default assumption when it comes to science and publishers.
I can not find the book for sale anywhere but vedicbooks dot net (vedic, as in the system of Indian mysticism) as print on demand, and I can not find any review on the book: which also usually means it is of very poor quality, and of no academic value.
A wikipedia page on him is only available in French, and contains a number of references to pseudoscience.
Here's the criticism section:
Claude Bourguignon est critiqué par une partie du milieu scientifique et agricole pour des propos considérés comme simplistes, exagérés, catastrophistes ou dépourvus de sens. Parmi les propos critiqués se trouvent notamment des citations comme « le sol est mort » ou « Nous ne faisons plus d’agriculture en Europe. Nous essayons de maintenir vivantes des plantes qui ne demandent qu’à mourir ».9,10
Il lui est également reproché un manque de rigueur scientifique allégué, d'intervenir hors de son domaine d'expertise, ainsi que de soutenir la biodynamie, une forme d’agriculture considérée comme non-rationnelle par ses détracteurs11,12,10.
Enfin il lui est reproché d'avoir une posture « seul contre tous », qui ne tiendrai pas compte des travaux des autres spécialistes de science du sol9.
He supports biodynamic farming:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biodynamic_agriculture
You should probably read this, and search other criticisms of him in French:
http://www.pseudo-sciences.org/spip.php?article833
As far as I can find in English, the things Bourguignon says are wildly incorrect, and disagree with the consensus in agricultural science. He shouldn't be regarded as a credible source.
All of my research has shown me that "organic" food is potentially dangerous, since it is often covered in more poison which harms human beings, and it's harmful to the environment because it produces lower yield which wastes land and costs potential food.
