Study finds ORGANIC FOODS are not Better

[GrillingFool]

Sky News: Organic food not better for you

A UK government study has found organic food has no greater nutritional or health benefits than ordinary food.
Greenies are outraged, but researchers from the London School of Hygiene say there's no mistake.
They reviewed every scientific paper over the past 50 years and say there's no evidence of health benefits from organic food.....

 

[Wyogal]

IMO, it's not so much the health benefits of organic food, it's the soil and environmental benefits that makes organic food desirable.

 

[mcnerd]

I don't know why people expect 'organic' to be higher quality. It just means they are grown without exposure to pesticides and sometimes that results in a lesser quality.

 

[Arky]

The whole point to buying/using organic is NOT the food/nutritional quality as much as the absence of applied chemicals through artificial fertilizers and herbicides and pesticides!!!

These idiots that performed this study are definitely looking at organic health from the wrong angle, and are probably being paid by the non-organic farmer community (UK government or not) - you know, the ones that add poisons to our food for the sake of money!

 

[Andy M.]

...These idiots that performed this study are definitely looking at organic health from the wrong angle, and are probably being paid by the non-organic farmer community (UK government or not) - you know, the ones that add poisons to our food for the sake of money!

I don't see these scientists as idiots. I see them as looking at ONE ASPECT of organic foods compared to non-organic foods, nutritional value. They didn't claim to be looking at organic health.

 

[Arky]

On the UPI (United Press International) web site, the science news dept. has TONS of stories such as:

MAYWOOD, Ill., March 3 (UPI) -- U.S. scientists discovered that researchers have been focusing on the wrong toxin in fighting the potentially deadly superbug Clostridium difficile....

Enough said about researchers.

 

[Andy M.]

On the UPI (United Press International) web site, the science news dept. has TONS of stories such as:

MAYWOOD, Ill., March 3 (UPI) -- U.S. scientists discovered that researchers have been focusing on the wrong toxin in fighting the potentially deadly superbug Clostridium difficile....

Enough said about researchers.

What? So all researchers are idiots!?!?

One thing has nothing to do with the other.

I get the impression you are attacking the researchers only because they don't agree with you.

 

[Arky]

The point I'm making is to be skeptical of so-called expert scientists (of which there are very few in this world), particularly when THEY have a motive to attempt to misdirect and discredit organic gardening through focusing on an issue that isn't relevant to the claim and purpose of organic food in the first place.

And for the record, My working career involved working on the Space Shuttle, the Hubble Space Telescope, and the laser based missile interception program, among others, so I KNOW the difference between true, high quality scientists who have a Noble Prize hanging on their wall, and jump-to-a-conclusion-want-to-bes.

 

[Andy M.]

The point I'm making is to be skeptical of so-called expert scientists (of which there are very few in this world), particularly when THEY have a motive to attempt to misdirect and discredit organic gardening through focusing on an issue that isn't relevant to the claim and purpose of organic food in the first place...

Do you know who these scientists are? Is that how you can confidently say they are "so-called" experts? Do you have evidence they are misreporting results on purpose for monetary gain? I'd sure like to see that information.

 

[Arky]

It's not worth arguing about. There are skeptics, and there are people who believe everything they read.

 

[Andy M.]

It's not worth arguing about. There are skeptics, and there are people who believe everything they read.

I never said I believed the article. I was just intrigued by your attack on the scientists.

 

[BreezyCooking]

No scientist or "expert" will EVER convince me that the fruits & vegetables I grow organically myself (or buy) that have been grown without exposure to chemical fertilizers or pesticides aren't better for me than those commercially produced WITH chemical pesticides & fertilizers.

While it's true that the BASIC nutrition of the item probably hasn't changed much (except, of course, for my own garden items which don't have to be picked early & shipped hundreds of miles during which time nutritional value drops), I - & MANY others - have absolutely NO desire to ingest chemical fertilizers & pesticides that are present in non-organic produce. Has nothing much to do with nutritional difference; a heckuva lot to do with toxicity/poison.

 

[Constance]

There is absolutely no difference between chemical fertilizers and organic ones except that the organic ones break down and improve the texture of your soil. The both have the same chemicals. Nitrogen is nitrogen, wherever it comes from.
As for pesticides...I don't like to use them unless absolutely necessary, but without them, a lot of the world would go hungry and there would be a lot more disease (malaria, etc.)
Now that scientists are developing new hybrids that are resistant to disease and certain insects (such as the corn ear worm), perhaps the need for pesticides will someday be eliminated.

 

[bigdaddy3k]

The argument of organic vs non-organic is akin to arguing religion or politics. Either side can argue until they are blue in the face and they will never convert someone over to the other side. Why bring it up here?

Sounds like someone wants a debate. True debates can only take place face to face as text can be misinterpreted by the reader. Arguments however, thrive in text form as your own anger and attitude color what you read and lend to your feelings of defensiveness.

 

[suzyQ3]

The whole point to buying/using organic is NOT the food/nutritional quality as much as the absence of applied chemicals through artificial fertilizers and herbicides and pesticides!!!

These idiots that performed this study are definitely looking at organic health from the wrong angle, and are probably being paid by the non-organic farmer community (UK government or not) - you know, the ones that add poisons to our food for the sake of money!

You stated in a later post that there are skeptics and there are those who believe anything.

Let me add another group to that false dichotomy: There are those who impugn without evidence and solely on preconceived notions.

 

[GrillingFool]

It is nice that we can afford, as a society, to have the option of "organic" produce.
If it weren't for chemical fertilizers and pesticides... we wouldn't be able to have
the choice.
IMHO of course... no biased researchers contributed to this statement of opinion.

(And I have a wife researcher, who doesn't yet have a Nobel Prize on her wall, who
probably has more morals and ethics concerning her work than...well, a rocket scientist, LOL)

 

[Scotch]

On the UPI (United Press International) web site, the science news dept. has TONS of stories such as:

MAYWOOD, Ill., March 3 (UPI) -- U.S. scientists discovered that researchers have been focusing on the wrong toxin in fighting the potentially deadly superbug Clostridium difficile....

Enough said about researchers.

I don't care what you did for a living, that is one of the most illogical conclusions I've encountered in some time.

 

[bigdaddy3k]

Kids, don't make me come up there! It will be no TV for a week!

Now enough arguing. It is not serving any purpose. Many a thing was said in haste and regretted at leasure. The "all researchers and no researchers" argument is as useless as "Always" and "Never". Nothing is EVER always and the only place "Never" applies is in this sentence... There is NEVER an "Always".

I was nicer in a previous post. Don't make me get the belt.

 

[mike in brooklyn]

I went to the link to Sky News and could not find any article
concerning organic/non-organic foods.
Can you please give us the reference?

I do not use organic foods - I think if the only food in the world was
organically produced 1/2 the worlds population would starve to death - you simply can't get the same yield using organic methods.
I think organic foods are another example of elitist and upper class
snobbery - like there are wine snobs, coffee snobs etc. etc.

 

[Hondo]

I think it's a matter of sustainable agriculture. Monoculture, as practiced by Big Agriculture, is not - soil depletion, etc. And then there's the dwindling gene pool. How many species of apples alone have been lost in the past hundred years? Think about the perfect looking but tasteless tomatoes we can buy in any grocery store. Why are they there?

This is a big issue.

And actually, organic methods can, and often do, yield as much as nonorganic methods. But they're generally not as profitable in big ventures.