Fitness Quotes

Why overpay for organic food after this?

Quote, "Organic food has no significant difference from ordinary food, according to a major study by the researchers of the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine published in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition." It's all perception ! An estimated $48 billion industry in 2007 is all based on perception ! And we might as well safely assume we can drink our tap water too.

Public Comments

1. I have always believed that and refuse to pay the extra. Our tap water is safe to drink.
2. Our tap water is safe. People like organics for other reasons, for example the pesticides used kill other organisms too, leach into ground water, etc. For the most part it is concern over farming and effects of things like pesticide use that make people choose organic.
3. There are 2 main arguments commonly used to promote organic food. 1) Because it uses (supposedly) no pesticide and artificial fertilizers, it's good for the environment. 2) Because of no pesticide, you won't eat any residual chemicals left on or absorb by the crop. I agree that there is no significant difference, just telling you why some people promote it. As for tap water, that is a different matter. The amount of chemicals in water differs from city to city, but in some places it is just plain nasty. For example, chlorine, floride, lead, and even rust are found in some tap water. Floride on your teeth prevents cavities, but in your stomach is a poison.
4. Maybe it is just my perception, but I do recall the chemistry professors telling us NOT TO EAT the experiments. I prefer FOOD that is 100% food without artificial colors and artificial flavoring. Food should look and taste like food. I'm also suspicious of the food industry refusal to accurate list all of the ingredients. MSG which is NOT natural is listed as an natural flavoring because the government allows them to do this. I also prefer beef and milk that is NOT loaded with antibiotics and growth hormones. MOREOVER organic food specifically state NO GMO (genetically modified) whereas the food industry does NOT want to tell us when we are getting genetically modified foods. If people don't want to spend the extra money that's their choice, but don't prevent me from getting my organic food.
5. This study too into account ONLY nutritional value.. not chemicals/pesticides used.
6. We believe what we want to believe!
7. This current study was a meta-analysis of past studies. It's pretty close to being absolutely worthless. It's impossible to compare nutrients in foods unless you're comparing them side-by-side. The same varieties, grown in the same climate, with one plot grown in the best conventional way and another grown in the best organic way, and with the scientists doing the nutritional analysis not knowing which was which. Such a study would take several years, at minimum. Such a study has been done and the result showed that organic is better. (See below.) The most common headline about the current study has been: "Organic not healthier." Dr Alan Dangour, who led the review, said this: "Most studies were based on the hypothesis that eating organic food is beneficial to health. Looking at all of the studies published in the last 50 years, we have concluded that there's no good evidence that consumption of organic food is beneficial to health based on the nutrient content." (Italics added.) This meta-analysis is fairly worthless because it asks the wrong questions. Meta-analyses are easy to do. You get funded, you look up other people's research and you apply a statistical analysis to it. It doesn't prove the previous research was done well. Or that the right questions were asked. If the only issue addressed was nutrient content, there is no way this study answered the question or whether or not organically grown food is beneficial to health or to soil or water. Bad study. There's this bit of information that's also available in some news reports: Quote: Carlo Leifert, a professor of ecological agriculture at Newcastle University and the co-ordinator of a major EU-funded study which recently found nutrient levels were higher in organic foods, said the conclusions of the study were selective... The EU study co-ordinated by Leifert, which ended in May this year, involved 31 research and university institutes. It found that levels of nutritionally desirable compounds, such as antioxidants and vitamins, were higher in organic crops, while levels of nutritionally undesirable compounds such as toxic chemicals, mycotoxins and metals such as cadmium and nickel, were lower in organic crops. Is the Leifert study better than the newest study? Definitely. The newest study was a statistical review of previous studies, going back 50 years, with no regard for how those studies were done. According to news stories, the Leifert study was conducted in this way: Quote: During the four-year project, Prof Leifert's team, which is based at the university's Tesco centre for organic agriculture, reared cattle and grew fruit and vegetables on adjacent organic and non-organic sites across Europe, including a 725-acre farm attached to the university. The full results of the study will be released in full over the next 12 months. Some of the Leifert findings: Quote: Early results from a £12m study showed that organic fruit and vegetables contained up to 40% more antioxidants than non-organic varieties, according to Professor Carlo Leifert at Newcastle University, who leads the EU-funded Quality Low Input Food project. Larger differences were found in milk, with organic varieties containing more than 60% more antioxidants and healthy fatty acids... Both studies were done in the UK, with the Leifert study done first. It almost appears as if the current meta-analysis was specifically commissioned do counteract the findings of the Leifert study, which was actually a real study, with more results yet to be released.
8. By eating organic food, you are supporting the land. The land is not exposed to dangerous pesticides. In addition, supporting local farmers is great for your community. But yes, there is no significant health benefits. Read more here about the ethics and value of Organic Food.
9. who funded the study? Monsanto? more true info about organic gardening and gmo at http://restore-health.info