Philosophy
I often thought it was a merchandising scheme. The Yuppies and nouveau riche bought it.
Organic produce no more nutritious than regular food, say researchers, but it does generally reduce exposure to pesticides
September 4th, 2012
guardian.co.uk
Organic produce and meat typically is no better for you than conventional food when it comes to vitamin and nutrient content, although it does generally reduce exposure to pesticides and antibiotic-resistant bacteria, according to a US study.
Crystal Smith-Spangler, who led a team of researchers from Stanford University and Veterans Affairs Palo Alto Health Care, reviewed more than 200 studies that compared either the health of people who ate organic or conventional foods or, more commonly, nutrient and contaminant levels in the foods themselves.
The foods included organic and non-organic fruits, vegetables, grains, meat, poultry eggs and milk.
According to US department of agriculture standards, organic farms have to avoid the use of synthetic pesticides and fertilisers, hormones and antibiotics. Organic livestock must also have access to pastures during grazing season.
However, many of the studies used did not specify their standards for what constituted "organic" food,, the researchers wrote in the Annals of Internal Medicine.
Smith-Spangler and her colleagues found there was no difference in the amount of vitamins in plant or animal products produced organically and conventionally – and the only nutrient difference was slightly more phosphorous in the organic products.
Organic milk and chicken may also contain more omega-3 fatty acids, but that was based on only a few studies.
More than one-third of conventional produce had detectable pesticide residues, compared with 7% of organic produce samples. Organic pork and chicken were 33% less likely to carry bacteria resistant to three or more antibiotics than conventionally produced meat.
Smith-Spangler said it was uncommon for either organic or conventional foods to exceed the allowable limits for pesticides, so it was not clear whether a difference in residues would have an effect on health.
But others said more research was needed to fully explore the potential health and safety differences between organic and conventional foods, and it was premature to say organic foods were no healthier than non-organic versions.
"Right now I think it's all based on anecdotal evidence," said Chensheng Lu, who is studying environmental health and exposure at the Harvard School of Public Health.
- The Meanings Of Food
Doing the dishes last night, it struck me how differently different people see food. To TheWife, for example, food is medicine. The purpose of eating is to change the body's chemistry and cooking is an apothecary's art, preparing something to...
- On Taste And Class
I had a student write a fascinating thesis this semester on taste. On the one hand, taste is a direct sensory experience, on the other hand it is mediated by a huge number of environmental and biographical factors, some of which are class related. Think...
- Drug-resistant Bacteria...pathway To Man's Demise?
The Lachuguilla cave system, where scientists discovered antibiotic-resistant bacteria, is part of Carlsbad Caverns National Park in New Mexico. Above, an explorer admires the the Selenite Chandelier display in Carlsbad Caverns."Drug-Resistant Bacteria...
- Apples...public Enemy Number One
Don't blame him; blame the growers. This problem has been known for years and it's not just pesticides but a planned effort to make the fruit last longer and look good. Pity...apples are great. "Apples top most pesticide-contaminated list" by...
- Extreme "green"
You can do things to the point of ridiculousness. "Going truly green might require detective work" by Laura Petrecca and Christine Dugas April 22nd, 2010 USA TODAY Dawn Josephson is known among her friends as a "Birkenstock-lovin', Mother Earth-huggin',...
Philosophy
Organically grown foods...big rip off?
I often thought it was a merchandising scheme. The Yuppies and nouveau riche bought it.
"Organic food no better for vitamins and nutrients, suggests US study"
Organic produce no more nutritious than regular food, say researchers, but it does generally reduce exposure to pesticides
September 4th, 2012
guardian.co.uk
Organic produce and meat typically is no better for you than conventional food when it comes to vitamin and nutrient content, although it does generally reduce exposure to pesticides and antibiotic-resistant bacteria, according to a US study.
Crystal Smith-Spangler, who led a team of researchers from Stanford University and Veterans Affairs Palo Alto Health Care, reviewed more than 200 studies that compared either the health of people who ate organic or conventional foods or, more commonly, nutrient and contaminant levels in the foods themselves.
The foods included organic and non-organic fruits, vegetables, grains, meat, poultry eggs and milk.
According to US department of agriculture standards, organic farms have to avoid the use of synthetic pesticides and fertilisers, hormones and antibiotics. Organic livestock must also have access to pastures during grazing season.
However, many of the studies used did not specify their standards for what constituted "organic" food,, the researchers wrote in the Annals of Internal Medicine.
Smith-Spangler and her colleagues found there was no difference in the amount of vitamins in plant or animal products produced organically and conventionally – and the only nutrient difference was slightly more phosphorous in the organic products.
Organic milk and chicken may also contain more omega-3 fatty acids, but that was based on only a few studies.
More than one-third of conventional produce had detectable pesticide residues, compared with 7% of organic produce samples. Organic pork and chicken were 33% less likely to carry bacteria resistant to three or more antibiotics than conventionally produced meat.
Smith-Spangler said it was uncommon for either organic or conventional foods to exceed the allowable limits for pesticides, so it was not clear whether a difference in residues would have an effect on health.
But others said more research was needed to fully explore the potential health and safety differences between organic and conventional foods, and it was premature to say organic foods were no healthier than non-organic versions.
"Right now I think it's all based on anecdotal evidence," said Chensheng Lu, who is studying environmental health and exposure at the Harvard School of Public Health.
- The Meanings Of Food
Doing the dishes last night, it struck me how differently different people see food. To TheWife, for example, food is medicine. The purpose of eating is to change the body's chemistry and cooking is an apothecary's art, preparing something to...
- On Taste And Class
I had a student write a fascinating thesis this semester on taste. On the one hand, taste is a direct sensory experience, on the other hand it is mediated by a huge number of environmental and biographical factors, some of which are class related. Think...
- Drug-resistant Bacteria...pathway To Man's Demise?
The Lachuguilla cave system, where scientists discovered antibiotic-resistant bacteria, is part of Carlsbad Caverns National Park in New Mexico. Above, an explorer admires the the Selenite Chandelier display in Carlsbad Caverns."Drug-Resistant Bacteria...
- Apples...public Enemy Number One
Don't blame him; blame the growers. This problem has been known for years and it's not just pesticides but a planned effort to make the fruit last longer and look good. Pity...apples are great. "Apples top most pesticide-contaminated list" by...
- Extreme "green"
You can do things to the point of ridiculousness. "Going truly green might require detective work" by Laura Petrecca and Christine Dugas April 22nd, 2010 USA TODAY Dawn Josephson is known among her friends as a "Birkenstock-lovin', Mother Earth-huggin',...