Organic Food Is No Healthier, Study Finds

[MattusMaximus]

Linky.

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. ...

I posted this on my FB page, and a couple of pro-organic food people are saying that better nutritional value is not the reason why people eat organic foods. They say the real reason is fear of "chemicals" and a concern for promoting better sustainability with farming.

This smacks slightly of moving the goalposts to me, but only a wee bit. I have asked the individuals in question for studies & research that supports their points, but have yet to hear back.

Anyone here got anything to add?

 

[tesscaline]

Linky.



I posted this on my FB page, and a couple of pro-organic food people are saying that better nutritional value is not the reason why people eat organic foods. They say the real reason is fear of "chemicals" and a concern for promoting better sustainability with farming.

This smacks slightly of moving the goalposts to me, but only a wee bit. I have asked the individuals in question for studies & research that supports their points, but have yet to hear back.

Anyone here got anything to add?

Indeed, most of the people I know who buy organic items do so not because of any nutritional difference, but because organic items are "more healthy" -- i.e. you're not eating chemical pesticides or fertilizers, and they seem to think that organic farming is more "healthy for the environment" than non-organic farming.

You are correct that there doesn't actually seem to be any evidence supporting those positions though -- I keep asking for it, and all anyone can give me is opinion pieces that neglect the actual science, if not out and out contradict it. It's just one big giant appeal to emotion, really.

 

[~enigma~]

Indeed, most of the people I know who buy organic items do so not because of any nutritional difference, but because organic items are "more healthy" -- i.e. you're not eating chemical pesticides or fertilizers, and they seem to think that organic farming is more "healthy for the environment" than non-organic farming.

You are correct that there doesn't actually seem to be any evidence supporting those positions though -- I keep asking for it, and all anyone can give me is opinion pieces that neglect the actual science, if not out and out contradict it. It's just one big giant appeal to emotion, really.

Agreed. Never heard it was healthier.

 

[godless dave]

I posted this on my FB page, and a couple of pro-organic food people are saying that better nutritional value is not the reason why people eat organic foods. They say the real reason is fear of "chemicals" and a concern for promoting better sustainability with farming.

They're right. I've never heard an organic food proponent claim it was healthier. The goal posts haven't moved, it was always about environmental impact and taste, not health.

 

[Ziggurat]

They're right. I've never heard an organic food proponent claim it was healthier. The goal posts haven't moved, it was always about environmental impact and taste, not health.

On the taste front, I suspect it's possible to get the same results with non-organic methods, if you spend more money. As or environmental impact, I've seen no real evidence of that. And I have good reason to think it's simply not true. Because it is less efficient, organic farming requires more land, which has obvious negative environmental consequences.

 

[sol invictus]

Just because it's not more nutritious doesn't mean it's not healthier. If eating pesticide residues is harmful, and organic food is identical to conventional apart from the lack of pesticides, then it's healthier. It's not clear this study addressed that, although the article does leap to that conclusion.

Regardless, I agree that personal health is only one of several reasons people have for buying organic food. But for me personally, buying food produced locally and by small farms is much more important than buying organic. It's hard to argue that organic produce that's harvested by machine, packed in plastic in an inert gas and flown in a jet across a continent is more environmentally friendly than vegetables grown 20 miles away with a small quantity of pesticides.

And I strongly suspect that the nutritional content of local produce IS generally better than average simply because it can be harvested when it's closer to being ready, and because small farmers tend to grow a larger variety of crops than huge conglomerates. For example, the celery one can find at farmer's markets is darker green (and much tastier) than the standard supermarket stuff, and I'd be willing to bet it's more nutritious.

 

[ben m]

I posted this on my FB page, and a couple of pro-organic food people are saying that better nutritional value is not the reason why people eat organic foods. They say the real reason is fear of "chemicals" and a concern for promoting better sustainability with farming.

This smacks slightly of moving the goalposts to me, but only a wee bit. I have asked the individuals in question for studies & research that supports their points, but have yet to hear back.

I never expected organic food to be *healthier* in a nutritional sense; a carrot is a carrot is a carrot.

My main concerns with industrial farms are:

1. Pesticide residue, which I'm worried about because we have no idea what the long-term effects are.
2. Fertilizer runoff, a well-documented problem for rivers and estuaries
3. Land stewardship; an intensively-farmed plot of nothing but cabbage---well, it supports cabbages and cabbage pests and that's about it, because you hose the weeds with RoundUp and plow the hell out of it every season and lose half the soil to the wind and rain. Organic farms, especially small ones, are more likely to interplant various crops, which is really good for insect and bird life; to use cover crops carefully; to support local bee populations; etc.

Quite frankly, if I could find a small farm which (a) minimizes pesticides, (b) aims for zero-runoff, and (c) maintains soil and biodiversity---well, after that I don't give a hoot whether they fertilize with inorganic ammonium nitrate versus, I dunno, bone meal. It so happens that our local super-sustainable farm is an organic one, and I really like their practices, so that's where we go.

One more thing: I buy organic milk, because I've found that (very reproducibly) it has a shelf life about twice as long as the store brand. No idea why.

ETA: adding to what Sol said, my local farm is more nutritious in the sense that their produce is delicious. Holy cow. I thought I didn't like fresh tomatoes until we started getting the heirlooms; now I love them and I'm healthier for it.

 

[Jorghnassen]

One more thing: I buy organic milk, because I've found that (very reproducibly) it has a shelf life about twice as long as the store brand. No idea why.

My guess would be that the organic milk you buy has traveled less than the store brand (which is probably whichever milk can be obtained at lowest cost), thus is fresher at time of purchase. Last year I was surprised how local garlic stayed fresh for months compared to the usual supermarket garlic which comes from China most of the time and has already spent months in a container by the time you buy it, and sprouts in a matter of weeks.

ETA: adding to what Sol said, my local farm is more nutritious in the sense that their produce is delicious. Holy cow. I thought I didn't like fresh tomatoes until we started getting the heirlooms; now I love them and I'm healthier for it.

Similar idea as above. The regular stuff is chosen because it can endure long travel/mass storage, not for taste. ETA: Another example: my uncle grows raspberries in his garden, and picked a particular variety that is sweeter than anything you'll buy commercially (even from farmer's markets) because the berries are fragile. Essentially, there's always a trade-off.

 

[Rocko]

There was, IIRC, some research a while back that suggested rats who ate non-organic had a higher incidence of cancer. And was seized on out of all proportion to the findings.

But yeah, as other has observed - I don't buy organic because I think it's healthier for me personally. I do think it's tastier, although I imagine that's because the breeds grown aren't the same as the ones farmed for "normal" produce.

But my main reason is that I think we're better off riding a system that's evolved over a long period of time and works than trying to tinker with it.

 

[Rocko]

One more thing: I buy organic milk, because I've found that (very reproducibly) it has a shelf life about twice as long as the store brand. No idea why.

ISTR this was discussed on a Skeptic's Guide episode. They said that because it's Organic, it has a less predictable shelf-life, so it's heat treated to some degree to take that into account.

 

[Michael Redman]

My main concerns with industrial farms are:

I don't think you should equate organic with small farm (or with locally grown). These are entirely separate issues.

 

[ravdin]

I don't know what the term "organic" means for the purpose of this study. My best understanding of "organic" when I see the label in the supermarket is that it's produced under arbitrary standards defined by the government. Color me not surprised if the label isn't particularly useful.

 

[roger]

They're right. I've never heard an organic food proponent claim it was healthier. The goal posts haven't moved, it was always about environmental impact and taste, not health.

Well, here you go. Whole Foods, no less:
http://www.whfoods.com/genpage.php?tname=faq&dbid=17#Health

organically grown foods have been shown to contain substantially higher levels of nutrients

Or how about the Maine Organic Farmers and Gardeners Association?
http://www.mofga.org/tabid/166/Default.aspx

simply stated, an organically cultivated pepper will be healthier and more nutritious than a conventionally cultivated pepper

Listen to Organic Food Info:

Organic food is known to contain 50% more nutrients, minerals and vitamins than produce that has been intensively farmed.

http://www.organicfoodinfo.net/




Google will provide endless quotes along the same lines.

 

[ben m]

Because it is less efficient, organic farming requires more land, which has obvious negative environmental consequences.

That's probably true, and I am very conflicted about it. I hope (but have no evidence for) that on the balance, the better stewardship of non-monoculture organic farmland outweighs the fact that they're displacing some otherwise-wild land.

Also true: the world would be better off (healthwise and environmentally) if people ate less meat. The existence of inexpensive market vegetables is part of that, so I don't pretend that my locavore habits are leading towards some sort of anti-big-farm revolution. However, it's a shame that the US subsidizes corn and soy so much and artificially distorts the cost of cattle feed. We should subsidize the broccoli and tax the meat.

 

[Dragon]

I don't know what the term "organic" means for the purpose of this study. My best understanding of "organic" when I see the label in the supermarket is that it's produced under arbitrary standards defined by the government. Color me not surprised if the label isn't particularly useful.

Could you provide a link to these "standards defined by the government" ?

 

[ravdin]

Could you provide a link to these "standards defined by the government" ?

Sure, if you're looking for a cure for insomnia.

http://www.usda.gov/wps/portal/!ut/...RATIVES&navid=ORGANIC_CERTIFICATIO&navtype=RT

ETA: This is the US government's "organic" certification requirements, and I would imagine the standards are different in the UK.

 

[Jorghnassen]

Could you provide a link to these "standards defined by the government" ?

I'm guessing you're looking for this.

EDIT: D'oh! Beaten, but it is a different page.

 

[roger]

Could you provide a link to these "standards defined by the government" ?

Look at the whole foods link I provided above. The FDA defines what is acceptable to be labeled "organic".

edit: Jorghnassen's link is better.

 

[pgwenthold]

Just because it's not more nutritious doesn't mean it's not healthier.

I agree. But then again, from the OP

Organic food has no nutritional or health benefits

The claim is not only that it is not more nutritious, but that it is also not healthier.

 

[ben m]

I don't think you should equate organic with small farm (or with locally grown). These are entirely separate issues.

I know. I suspect that most of the Whole Foods stuff is extremely industrially-produced, and (other than the pesticide issue) it doesn't appeal to me enough to justify the price.

There's no official label for the aspects of food I actually care about; I don't need one, though, because (and I feel very lucky in this) I know my local farmer personally; I've seen his land and his practices.