Are Organic Foods Really About Better Nutrition?
A few weeks ago, word got out that a review being published in September’s American Journal of Clinical Nutrition had concluded that organic foods are not healthier or more nutritious than conventional food.
Organic advocates were outraged. Mildly engaged consumers began to wonder if organics were really worth the higher price tag.
Momentarily leaving aside some the review’s conclusions, my first thought was: Is higher nutritional quality really what motivates consumers to buy organic food, anyway? Isn’t it more about what’s not in the food than what is?
Most people I know who make a point of buying organic do so to avoid ingesting antibiotics, pesticides and other toxins. Sure, if my organic tomato had a few more vitamins than a conventionally grown one, that would be a nice bonus, but it’s not the reason I’m buying it.
And according to the Organic Trade Association, there are plenty of other good reasons to buy organic food that don’t have anything to do with what goes in your body. The association provides information on how organic agriculture can improve soil fertility, prevent chemical fertilizers from polluting waterways and accommodate higher species diversity.
The environmental reach of conventionally grown food is longer than most of us can even imagine. I stopped buying non-organic bananas after a short visit to Costa Rica revealed something about the industry I never would have known about: the use of plastic bags.
During my visit, my colleague and I drove past millions of banana trees, but I never saw a single banana. Instead, I saw big, blue plastic bags covering each banana bunch on every single tree.
My colleague explained that these bags were filled with pesticides and placed over the bananas to protect them from insects that might cause brown spots on the fruit, making them aesthetically unappealing to American consumers.
According to FleetWatch, these bags are used three times before being recycled, but locals will tell you that these blue bags are everywhere, littering the forest floor and choking rivers and streams.
But back to the review.
The review of 55 studies from 1958 to 2008 found that conventionally produced crops had a higher content of nitrogen, while organically produced crops had higher phosphorous and acidity content. No differences were found between the two classes of crops for the other nutrient categories — including vitamin C, zinc, and calcium — that were analyzed.
The review, funded by the U.K. Food Standards Agency, didn’t look for differences in pesticide residues between organic and conventional growing methods.
Organic advocates had strong objections to the review for a number of reasons.
Michael Hansen, Ph.D., a senior scientist at Consumers Union, cited the use of older studies as a major flaw. He told WebMD that most studies done before 1980 probably had flawed methodologies, and newer studies show clear differences in nutrient content between the two growing methods.
Secondly, the study doesn’t look at differences in polyphenols and certain antioxidants, which chief scientist for The Organic Center Charles Benbrook, Ph.D., says are 25 percent higher in organically grown food.
So, what does this mean for your food purchases?
Benbrook actually has some really sound advice: If you want to maximize the nutrient content of your produce, choose the freshest and most colorful fruits and vegetables. And if you want to minimize pesticide residues and environmental pollution, choose organic.
For now, my habits — choosing organic and local produce when I can — aren’t changing.
(Image: Banana bags in Costa Rica. Credit: Margaret Southern/TNC.)
Posted: September 1st, 2009 under Business, Central America, Green Living.
Tags: American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, banana bag, banana bag Costa Rica, Charles Benbrook, Charles Benbrook organic, Costa Rica, Costa Rica banana, FleetWatch, FleetWatch banana bag, Margaret Southern, Michael Hansen Consumers Union, Michael Hansen organic, Organic Center, organic food, organic food healthier, organic food healthy, Organic Trade Association, U.K. Food Standards, WebMD organic
Comments
Comment from Kelly Cotten
Time September 1, 2009 at 1:15 pm
Modern, high-till, artificially-fertilized agriculture depletes a broad spectrum of nutrients from the soil, those besides NPK that are still critically important to good body function. You can grow crops that look normal, but are not nutritionally as rich as those grown organically in well-maintained, naturally-fertilized soil. I’ll be interested to read the report.
Comment from John Matel
Time September 1, 2009 at 1:27 pm
There is a long continuum from organic to artificial. Actually, it is the distinction that is artificial.
The idea should be to produce food, wood, fibers etc in ways that enhance the total ecological value chain. Often that will mean using some “artificial” fertilizers or pesticides. Is it better to cover one acre with artificially fertilized oil palms or produce the same output on ten acres “naturally?”
And what about biosolids? Is it better to apply them to soils where they can help plants grow, so should we dispose of them as toxic wastes because they contain non-organic components?
I think the author takes the sensible middle ground and I would agree. Eat what is natural when you can, but don’t make a religion of it. Organic may be better, but maybe not.
Comment from Jan Silver
Time September 1, 2009 at 6:01 pm
A couple thoughts: Are they talking about comparing big biz organics with just regular non organic food? Are they breaking down different food items, ie tomatoes, okra etc.? It is quite possible some items will be less improved nutritionally by being organic than not.
As someone else pointed out, being organic is also about what is *not* in the food we are eating. In some cases, it isn’t even about being technically organic but eating as much as possible locally (fresher), knowing that this food is fresher than the supermarket, and that his/her food is grown sustainably (soil quality etc.) in ways that may not qualify him for full fledged organic, but is certainly more fresh and sustainable than veggies arriving from thousands of miles away. (And, for many small farmers, the fees and paperwork to be certified organic can become prohibitive.)
So, I don’t necessarily look for “organic” in the supermarket, but I do weigh it in as one factor in my considerations of what to buy.
Comment from Mickey
Time September 2, 2009 at 9:49 am
on bananas, gross…plus, they’re ripe when they have spots…much sweeter!
Comment from Mario
Time September 2, 2009 at 12:08 pm
I’m a agronomical engineer, and I must say banana bags nowadays are being used in costa rica to produce corners pads for pallets that are going to be exported with boxes full of bananas. This program has been around for about 5 years, and growers are really concerned about the enviroment, they are building team on each farm dedicated to enviromental preservation and mitigation of growing practices.
Pingback from Nutrition in Organic Foods and Produce – Better for You? | The Chic Ecologist
Time September 2, 2009 at 8:04 pm
[...] Margaret Southern makes a good point when she asks: “Isn’t it more about what’s not in the food than what is?” Not only that but how does the farming technique impact the land, water and communities near it? We don’t live in the time of family farming anymore, where individual farmers and their families cared about the land and the food they grew. [...]
Pingback from Are Organic Foods Really About Better Nutrition? | Cool Green … | Fitness Tips
Time September 3, 2009 at 2:42 am
[...] here to read the rest: Are Organic Foods Really About Better Nutrition? | Cool Green … Share and Enjoy: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and [...]
Comment from Chris
Time September 8, 2009 at 11:16 pm
My biggest concern in this debate is caused by the absence of any mention of GMO foods vs. organics. It is known that big producers of fertilizers, pesticides and genetically modified seeds are bullying farmers to use their seeds, the AAEM’s warning of dangers to our own health notwithstanding (see American Academy of Environmental Medicine, May 19, 2009, http://www.aaemonline.org/gmopost.html) . There is a host of other publications and public warnings against GMO foods so my prime reason for choosing organic foods is based on my desire to protect my family from GMO’s and to strengthen organic farmers, not to mention the protection of our natural resources, etc.
Comment from Hilary Cox
Time September 1, 2009 at 11:32 am
All of the above; and I can’t wait for Prof. Gary Nabhan’s research on anti-oxidants (University of Arizona)
http://www.garynabhan.com/
His book, Coming Home to Eat, was a start…