Study suggests no health benefits in organic foods
Dena Brevata, from Stanford University's Center for Health policy has argued in the study that there are no clear health benefits to be gained from eating organically produced foods.
The study considered analyses of 237 separate reports into the effects of diets, both organic and non-organic. The studies considered such things as nutrition levels and bacterial, fungal and pesticide contamination levels.
"Some people believe that organic food is always healthier and nutritious," said study author Crystal Simth-Spangler. "We were surprised we didn't find that."
Liza Oates, who is researching the connection between organic diets and health said organic consumers, generally, were not interested in what was in their food, but paid greater attention to what was not - such as pesticides residues. She said, "The fact that they failed to find strong evidence that organic food has more nutrients is relatively predictable."
She pointed out, however, that organic food did fulfil what is essentially the goal of many consumers - the reduction of pesticide residual consumption. "Substituting non-organic foods with organics for 5 days resulted in an almost complete reduction in organophosphate pesticide residue."
The UK based Soil Association also disputed the validity of the study's message. "Studies that treat crop trials as if they were clinical trials of medicines, like this one, exaggerate the variation between studies and drown out the real difference.
"A UK review paper, using the correct statistical analysis, has found that most of the difference in nutrient levels between organic and non organic fruit and vegetables seen in this study are actually highly significant."
Source: bbc.co.uk/news; sbs.com.au
