Do naturalistic fallacies apply, when you are talking about nature itself? When you are saying that something is artificial because something really has been c

Do naturalistic fallacies apply, when you are talking about nature itself? When you are saying that something is artificial because something really has been changed in the diet, environment, etc? Perhaps you are disputing the idea that the environment has changed - with the widespread introduction of, say, plastics, massive use of medication that is re-imbibed in the water, by the use of petroleum based fertilisers, by the application of chemicals to crops, etc? Please say if that is your argument. So, I'm not saying what is old is better. I'm saying the environment really has changed, perhaps by design. That is not fallacious.