Organic Food: No Better Than Conventional?

Categories

News flash: Organic food is no better for you than non-organic food. See it here for this “amazing” revelation.

Well, if you’re like me, you find this claim very dubious, at the least. Let’s look at some of this article before we hear Tedd Koren’s comments on this subject.

LONDON (Reuters) – 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.

Alright, so that’s the article reporting that organic food has no nutritional benefit at all over non-organic foods. Think about that thesis: do you agree? What do you think?

Check back later this afternoon for a blog post where Tedd will respond to this claim.


bckoren

3 Comments

  1. […] Eating, Organic food, Tedd Koren DC Here’s my response to the article by Reuters (see here and here) reporting that organic food has no nutritional benefit of conventional food:In a word […]

  2. Dr Jacques Veilleux D.C on August 6, 2009 at 3:22 am

    Well, my first thought is that even if one buy the idea of organic food with less nutritive elements than previously claimed, one must also consider that, at least, those organic foods are not loaded with chemical fertilizers and spraying. This is plenty for me to keep my preference regarding the organic foods.

  3. Seth Allen MA, DC, DACBN on August 18, 2009 at 2:56 pm

    The article did not mention the fact that certified organic foods are guaranteed to be pesticide, hormone, and antibiotic free. If you like those compounds in your food, and feel that the pandemic-like proliferation of the nastiest cancers you’ve ever heard about is unrelated to the presence of these chemicals, then munch away at the cheapest stuff you can get your hands on.

Leave a Comment





Chiropractic: Bringing Out The Best In You! 10th Edition

$75.00

Increase retention and referrals by educating your patients – they’ll value your care, stay in care and refer others! We’ve…

More Info

Myth Busting Reports – Value Pricing Set

$120.00 $100.00

We do the research. You teach your patients. When you are asked about these hot topics, you’ll have ready answers…

More Info