I have read various articles over the years about organic foods. Most seem to indicate that there is value in eating organic foods, mostly due to lack of pesticides and their more renewable nature. The downsides seem to be lack of regulation and cost. I fully admit that I’m not current on the subject. A good friend of mine has gotten into juicing (fruits, vegetables, and wheat grass, not performance enhancing drugs). Much of what she is reading is pointing her towards using organic foods. Some of the claims seem hard to prove. For example:
[ul]
[li]Organic foods have higher nutrient levels than foods produced by conventional farming.[/li][li]Food should be purchased locally as food will lose nutrients during shipping.[/li][/ul]
For the first, I’m sure some chemistry could answer that question, but an individual is not going to be able to test the nutrient levels on all of the produce they purchase. On the second, where do the nutrients go? Supporting your local economy is good, but do nutrients actually vanish? There were more claims, but I’m forgetting them at the moment.
I think what I’m really asking about is cost versus reward and if organic foods have been proven to be worth the cost to a consumer. I find myself skeptical of recommendations when those recommending stand to make monetary gains. Who wouldn’t sell a pound of carrots for $4 instead of $1.50? Money is tight for my friend. Is it worth it for her to seek out organic foods?
Organic food is generally no healthier than regular food
Depending on the food not having to go as far can make a difference in terms of taste. This is because many foods that have to be transported long distances are picked when not quite ripe and allowed to ripen in transit. Seafood also loses flavor the longer it is after harvesting.
Some nutrients can break down in transit but they don’t go anywhere they just form new compounds. Here is an article about how fast nutrients degrade
Probably not, but let me try to address some of the concerns.
First, purchase produce in local season. They won’t have to travel as far and will help support the local economy, require less fuel to transport thereby conserving petroleum and minimizing additions to climate change, and due to a shorter transit time will retain more of their nutrients than something shipped from halfway around the world.
Second, for out of season/non-local produce frozen selections may well retain more nutrients than “fresh” produce transported over thousands of miles. Freezing protects nutrients, and it’s not uncommon for picking and packaging to occur on the same day.
Third, “organic” is a non-regulated term in the US and guarantees little or nothing other than (usually) a higher price.
Fourth, if she really wants locally sourced organic vegetables perhaps she should consider some gardening. I will caution that a true organic garden will tend to suffer losses due to predation by various things, I typically lose 1/3 of what I plant, but the remainder are wonderful. You can allow foods to fully ripen before harvesting, and they travel in minutes from garden to kitchen thereby minimizing transit time and distance and retaining maximum nutrient levels. Hook up with other local gardeners to trade your surpluses for theirs.
And finally, it’s better to eat less than perfect fruits and vegetables than no fruits or vegetables at all.
Thanks for the replies and links! Their content echoes what I remembered, although the Stanford study was new. Some web searching does show that there are people crying foul over the study and it’s methods though. Also, isn’t there now a recognized standard in the U.S. for organic foods along with a label?
The study you linked is reliable, but both the title of the article and your statement are incomplete. The nutrition values may be equivalent, but of course the tomato that* isn’t *covered with residual fungicides and pesticides is the healthier choice.
Here is the latest USDA consumer’s guideto organic labels. It’s a hotly contested procedure thanks to industrial farm and import lobbies, whose financial interests depend on creating a loose application of the term “organic”. Chemicals = big yields and a product that is cheaper to produce.