Organic food is no healthier?

jfh · ï¿½ #1 ï¿½ 07-29-2009, 10:16 AM

I hope they did not pay too much for this study. They totally disregarded pesticides and herbicides.

Quote:

LONDON (Reuters) ï¿½ Organic food has no nutritional or health benefits over ordinary food, according to a major study published Wednesday.
Researchers from the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine said consumers were paying higher prices for organic food because of its perceived health benefits, creating a global organic market worth an estimated $48 billion in 2007.
A systematic review of 162 scientific papers published in the scientific literature over the last 50 years, however, found there was no significant difference.
"A small number of differences in nutrient content were found to exist between organically and conventionally produced foodstuffs, but these are unlikely to be of any public health relevance," said Alan Dangour, one of the report's authors.
"Our review indicates that there is currently no evidence to support the selection of organically over conventionally produced foods on the basis of nutritional superiority."
The results of research, which was commissioned by the British government's Food Standards Agency, were published in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition.
Sales of organic food have fallen in some markets, including Britain, as recession has led consumers to cut back on purchases.
The Soil Association said in April that growth in sales of organic products in Britain slowed to just 1.7 percent in 2008, well below the average annual growth rate of 26 percent over the last decade, following a plunge in demand at the end of the year.
(Reporting by Ben Hirschler; editing by Simon Jessop)

bbmartin · ï¿½ #2 ï¿½ 07-29-2009, 11:43 AM

Quote:

I hope they did not pay too much for this study. They totally disregarded pesticides and herbicides.

I agree, and this kind of "research" is always suspect to me... One, because a statement such as "organic food has no significant nutritional value" is a broad generality and two, it insinuates that consumers who choose to consume organic food are being duped...

I'd love to know who really benefits/profits from such "research." If it were only that organic food tastes a hell of a lot better, I'd still buy it!

Cheers,
BB

saved1986 · ï¿½ #3 ï¿½ 08-08-2009, 10:55 AM

Organic food (especially the chicken and grass fed beef) tastes like food, not like cardboard. As for organic food not being better, I just did not read or watch anything on that. Saying that is like saying the sun will rise 2 hrs late tomorrow. No real evidence at all

Spirit Raintree · ï¿½ #4 ï¿½ 01-26-2010, 01:48 PM

Hello everybody,

Food grown in organic soil is obviously going to be richer in nutrients than food grown in chemical-laden soil. All we have to do is consider natural law, the only law that really matters. Natural law grows food completely free of man made chemicals. I feel kinda' silly even typing that, it's so obvious.

Even if science cannot detect a difference, which I don't believe for a moment, it would still be a good idea to eat food that hasn't been sprayed with poison. I have been eating primarily organic fruits and vegetables for over 13 years and find the taste, texture, and overall energy of organic food to be far superior to conventional Agri-corp foods.

I would really like to see more people growing their own food. Even a four square foot garden can produce a tremendous amount of food. In that small a space, you can easily grow from 4-12 different crops and have excellent yield. For more info. on this grooviness, check out this link:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Square_foot_gardening

For the record, I admire Michelle Obama for planting a White House garden and encouraging others to plant gardens. Mrs. Eisenhower did it first, with the "Victory Garden" and the food lobbyists freaked out. I find that humorous so I liked it when Mrs. Obama did the same.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Victory_garden

Thanks to everybody for sharing their thoughts on this subject matter. Supporting natural methods of growing is supporting the planet we live on. It's not a political thing or a money thing, it's a common sense thing. We live here, folks, let's take care of it.

Have a good one, everybody!

bbmartin · ï¿½ #5 ï¿½ 01-26-2010, 03:15 PM

Thank you Spirit Raintree - I love reading refreshingly simple and common-sense posts like yours!

Sincerely,
BB

saved1986 · ï¿½ #6 ï¿½ 01-27-2010, 05:20 AM

TO THE NATMEDTALK HOMIES: Spirit raintree made a great post. I would like to add my 2 cents worth. Even if science cannot detect a difference between some organic foods and non organic ones, that means the deectionmethods are not sensitive enough and/or it depends on what they are detecting. Look at a sugar pill vs. a homeopathic one. Science cannot detect a difference because chemically there is no difference. None. However, double blind studies prove homeopathic meds do work. Organic is definiteley the way to go. (Growing it yourself if possible) may even be better. A chiroprachter who practices nutrition told me yrs ago (around 2001) that even organic foods anymore are deficient in minerals du eto the soil being depleted.

ï¿½ï¿½Useful Links

Site Navigation