6 Surprising Facts About Organic Foods - Page 6

Think you know organic? Find out what's behind the label.

Comments

Photo: Istock/Photo Illustration

By Brian Clark Howard

Several Studies Actually Do Suggest Organic May Be Healthier

The controversy over whether organic foods are better for You The Consumer than conventional alternatives recently got stirred up by a British Food Standards Agency report, which argued that there isn't enough evidence to make a determination. Critics have pointed out that there are many problems with that British review, however.

For one thing, the study did actually find a significant difference in three of thirteen nutrients they looked at that favored organic, and none that favored conventionally grown produce -- yet they still reported that there were no differences between the two types of food. The Brits also included studies from the 1950's, 60's, and 70's on crop varieties that are no longer grown, and -- strangely --failed to include 15 studies published since 2008 that all found important nutritional advantages for organic food.

The British study also did not look at total antioxidant content, and it made no mention of pesticides, hormones, antibiotics and other nasty stuff that can appear in conventional food, and which is one of the main reasons why people buy organic: so they will get less of this toxic stuff. (The study also made no mention of animal welfare or environmental effects, though this post is about nutrition.)

A March 2008 review of more than 100 studies in the scientific literature, conducted by "The Organic Center, confirmed the "nutritional superiority of plant-based organic foods." The review concluded that organic foods were nutritionally superior in 145 matched pairs, or in 61% of the cases, while conventional foods were more nutrient dense in 87 matched pairs, or 37%. There were no differences in 2% of the matched pairs. Further, the organic samples contained higher concentrations of important polyphenols and antioxidants in about three-quarters of the 59 matched pairs representing those four phytonutrients.

Meanwhile, a study released by the International Journal of Biological Sciences recently found that Monsanto's genetically modified corn is linked to organ damage in rats.

Clearly, we need more research on the possible health benefits of organic foods. That's not the only reason why people are buying them, but it is an important one, and we need more data. Still, we think it's fair to say that critics are clearly wrong when they try to argue that there is "no evidence whatsoever" that organics are better than conventional foods. We need more evidence, but there are some early signs that organic supporters may have been right all along.

What do you think?