That the use of palm oil is in healthy and isn't benifical
Debate Rounds (4)
Palm oil is a globally traded agricultural commodity that touches our lives in every trip we make to the supermarket. Palm oil is an edible vegetable oil derived from pulping the fruit of oil palms originally native to Africa. Palm oil is commonly used as a cooking oil in Africa, Southeast Asia and parts of Brazil and its consumption is on the rise worldwide. The recent rise in the use of palm oil in the U.S. food industry has resulted largely from changed labeling requirements that have caused a switch away from using trans fats.
I believe that this form of oil, palm oil should not be used because of its unhealthy benifits towards human consumption, the enviroment and animals.
My first point for this round it that Palm oil has deadly effects on the enviroment, socially and animals.
The establishment of vast monoculture oil plam plantations has a number of environmental impacts.
The two most serious are:
large-scale forest conversion
loss of critical habitat for endangered species
Other impacts include:
soil & water pollution
Palm oil social impacts
New plantations can also create social conflicts if the rights and livelihoods of local communities are ignored. Not only can this cause negative external impacts but it can also affect the companies involved, and hamper the ability of the companies to expand as planned.
Palm oil has also been linked with the destruction of the world's precious rainforests. Development of new oil palm plantations, coupled with smallholders expanding their farms to meet the rising demand for palm oil, has resulted in significant deforestation.
The removal of acres of rainforest threatens the rich biodiversity in these finely balanced ecosystems, along with the habitat of species such as the orangutan. In 1990 there were around 315,000 orangutans. Today it's estimated that fewer than 50,000 exist in the wild, split into small groups with little chance of long-term survival. The orangutan is only one of a number of species facing extinction as a result of deforestation. While palm oil is not the only cause of deforestation, it does play its part.
The removal of forest releases carbon into the atmosphere, speeding up global warming. In the tropics, tree roots anchor the soil. Deforestation removes this important structure, allowing heavy rains to wash away nutrient-rich soil. Crop yields begin to decline and farmers then have to use expensive fertilizers, which eat into their profits and further damage the environment.Deforestation for the establishment of palm oil plantations is responsible for habitat loss for threatened and endangered species. Priority species impacted by forest clearing are the Asian elephant, tiger, Sumatran rhinoceros and the orangutan. The Asian elephant and Bornean orangutan are endangered and the tiger, Sumatran rhinoceros and Sumatran orangutan are Critically Endangered.
Palm oil is often cultivated in an unsustainable way, particularly in Indonesia and Malaysia. The unsustainable establishment of mass palm oil plantations is harming the environment, indigenous communities and wildlife.
I would like to start with the rebuttal phase first. Jess makes a point regarding deforestation and its effects on wildlife. While the expansion of society may encroach on the natural bonds of rainforests, there are many millions of acres of rainforests that have not been touched by mankind (Sumathi, Chai, & Mohamed, 2008). Consequently, the expansion of society into rainforests is relatively minimal when one considers the vast expanse of rainforest that remains untouched by mankind. The local habitats of wildlife such as orangutans may be affected; however, according to Darwin"s theory of evolution (survival of the fittest), life forms will constantly adapt to survive. While the current populations may have declined, it is reasonably safe to say that they will expand again based on the Darwin theory.
Of deforestation operations, palm oil operations generally are better for the environment because they actually replace rainforest with palm trees. Unlike mineral prospecting and the lumber trade, palm oil plantations do not destroy the forest and leave. They actually replace the forest with other vegetation (Chuen & Yusoff, 2012). Jess raised an interesting point about erosion, saying, "Deforestation removes this important structure, allowing heavy rains to wash away nutrient-rich soil" (Hartley, Round 1). However, this issue is not a deforestation issue. This issue is an agricultural issue. Every agricultural operation must employ proper farming methods to ensure that it preserves the valuable soil that it is dependent on for success. Erosion after deforestation is an agricultural issue in the case of palm oil plantations. Consequently, palm oil operations are no different than any other agricultural operation. Palm oil farmers must be educated on how to employ sustainable farming practices.
Jess also states the following: "New plantations can also create social conflicts if the rights and livelihoods of local communities are ignored. Not only can this cause negative external impacts but it can also affect the companies involved, and hamper the ability of the companies to expand as planned" (Hartley, Round 1). Once again, this is not an issue that is limited to palm oil operations. This is a business problem. Every company that expands into a new environment must exercise social responsibility to avoid impacting the rights of local communities (Sumathi, et. al., 2008). Consequently, it is every organization"s responsibility to conduct a thorough and impartial analysis of their desired theatre of operations before moving in. After moving in, they are responsible to adapt their operations in order to avoid infringing on the natural rights of the local communities.
I have concluded the rebuttal phase of my argument for this round. I would like to thank Jess for raising some interesting and pertinent points. I shall now move on in order to present some new arguments for consideration in the next round.
While palm oil is primarily being used in Western societies such as the United States for food uses, it is also being employed for a variety of reasons in Eastern societies such as Malaysia and Indonesia to develop sustainable alternatives to fossil fuels (Sumathi, et. al., 2008, p. 2411-2412). This bio-diesel initiative has led to use of palm oil to replace many petroleum-based fuels. Research has discovered that palm oil burns cleaner and gives off emissions that are less harmful to the environment (Sumathi, et. al., 2008). After significant research, Malaysia announced an Envodiesel initiative that blended bio-diesel with petrodiesel, increasing the efficiency of both while minimizing the environmental impacts.
With the recent health craze in the United States, researches linked dietary fats to cardiovascular diseases (Edem, 2002). Consequently, food manufacturers began to look for sustainable, healthy alternatives. While palm oil contains 50% percent saturated fatty acids, it also contains a high amount of antioxidants, which do not promote common heart conditions such as atherosclerosis and arterial thrombosis (Edem, 2002). Many researchers tried to discredit the benefits of palm oil, pointing to the fact that it does induce a higher blood cholesterol level than corn, soybean, and sunflower oils. However, palm oil does cause the endogenous cholestrol level to drop (Edem, 2002). Further research proved that endogenous cholestrol is responsible for the majority of heart problems. While this is the only certain effect of palm oil, scientists also believe that it helps to protect against vitamin A defiency and certain forms of cancer (Edem, 2002).
On the strength of this information, I maintain that palm oil is beneficial to human consumption and it has a positive environmental impact through the reduction of the CO2 emissions that plague our automobiles today. I recognize the points that Jess made regarding the social impact that palm oil operations can have. However, I maintain that these are "people" problems. How palm oil companies treat local communities is not more or less of a problem than how a logging company would treat a local community. Therefore, social problems cannot be linked directly to the production of palm oil because every industry has its good and bad operations. As a society, it is our duty to praise the good and reprove the bad. I thank Jess once again for furnishing pertinent and interesting points to the debate and I look forward to hearing his second round arguments. I also would appreciate any feedback that anyone would wish to provide in the comments.
Chuen, O., & Yusoff, S. (2012). Benefits of clean development mechanism application on the life cycle assessment perspective: A case study in the palm oil industry. Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association, 62(3), 299-306. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com.ezproxy.liberty.edu...
Edem, D. (2002). Palm oil: Biochemical, physiological, nutritional, hematological, and toxicological aspects: A Review. Plant Foods For Human Nutrition, 57(3), 319-341. Retrieved from http://download.springer.com...
Sumathi, S., Chai, S., & Mohamed, A. (2008). Utilization of oil palm as a source of renewable energy in Malaysia. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 12(9), 2404-2421. Retrieved from http://www.sciencedirect.com.ezproxy.liberty.edu...
I'm going to a AIMS sports tordament this week and I'm getting ready for a cherrleadign competition now the after that leaving for AIMS of I will have to forfeit this round and maybe the next two, deeply sorry. Perhaps I can do this debate again with you :)
Jess.hartley forfeited this round.
AtkinsonCameron forfeited this round.
Jess.hartley forfeited this round.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Midnight1131 1 year ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||0||1|
Reasons for voting decision: FF
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.