Welcome to your healthy eating resource


Why eat organic food?

Within the food industry, defining theare claimed to be reasons for higher
benefits of organic food is largely leftnutrient density of organic foods. In
to word of mouth, media coverage, andsome cases, this has happened, generally
the promotional efforts of organicdue to conventionally grown produce
advocates. Major food and beveragebeing higher in water.
corporations, like Kraft Foods, Heinz,Organically grown potatoes, oranges, and
Coca-Cola, Pepsi, Cargill, Unilever,leafy vegetables have more vitamin C
General Mills, and Campbell Soup, havethan conventionally grown products.
rapidly moved to acquire significantPhenolic compounds are also found in
stake in both fresh and processedsignificantly higher concentrations in
organic products. Still, the specificorganic foods, and these may provide
sales points of "organics" go largelyantioxidant protection against heart
unmentioned on product packaging and indisease and cancer.
mainstream media advertising. Claims ofStill isolated bits of research suggest
improved food quality are regularly usedthat conventional agricultural practices
in conventional food marketing, withare degrading food quality. A study in
"low fat", "low sodium", "whole grain",the Journal of the American College of
"high fiber", "vitamin enriched", "noNutrition in 2004, entitled Changes in
trans-fat" and other commonly advertisedUSDA Food Composition Data for 43 Garden
benefits. By contrast, "certifiedCrops, 1950 to 1999, compared vegetables
organic" is generally left to stand onanalysed in 1950 and in 1999, and found
its own as self-explanatory, assistednoticeable decreases in six of 13
only by general terms like "natural".nutrients examined (the six were:
Meanwhile, consumer surveys haveprotein, calcium, phosphorus, iron,
consistently identified food quality asriboflavin and ascorbic acid).
the main reason for purchasing organicPercentage reductions ranged from 6% for
food. Higher nutritional value, no toxicprotein to 38% of riboflavin, although
residues from pesticides, and betterwhen evaluated on a per-food or
taste are often cited, as is theper-nutrient level, usually no
positive impact of organic production ondistinguishable changes were found.
the environment. Whether organic foodReductions in calcium, phosphorus, iron
actually delivers on these desires andand ascorbic acid were also found. The
beliefs is controversial and the subjectauthors suggested that the differences
of scientifically inconclusive debate.probably reflect changes in cultivated
The debate centers on a variety ofvarieties between 1950 and 1999, in
specific and supposedly demonstrablewhich there may have been trade-offs
characteristics which proponents claimbetween yield and nutrient content.
make organic food superior to theHowever, whether organic foodstuffs have
product of conventional farming anda higher nutrient content is still
processing.debatable. Studies have shown no clear,
Food safety Organic food proponentsconsistent results, and those that have
express concern over the potentialsuffer from significant experimental
negative effects of various chemicaldesign flaws, according to the United
cultivation methods and geneticNation’s Food and Agriculture
modification techniques used in modernOrganization (FAO). Further, the FAO
conventional agriculture. The effect offound that in some crops, such as wheat,
pesticide residues from crop spraying,there appears to be a trade-off: in
the presence of veterinary drugs in meatconventionally farmed wheat the levels
products, and the entirely unknownof protein are higher, but the lower
impact of genetically modified varietieslevels in organic materials are offset
and breeds are all encompassed.by gains in alpha-amylase and sugar
Organic food is seen as avoidingcontents.
relieving these concerns by prohibitingTaste Many claim that organic food
such practices. At present, there are notastes better. This is primarily
definitive scientific conclusions on anyreferred to regarding fresh food.
of these matters; individual studies areIt is possible that organic food taste
cited on both sides of the debate.better simply because it is fresher.
Chemical contamination Organic foodBecause organic farms tend to be
proponents cite the existence of reducedsmaller, they often sell their products
levels of pesticides and herbicides as acloser to the point of harvest. Thus,
way to reduce the long term risk oforganic fruits and vegetables taste more
chemical consumption. A study published"farm fresh" than comparable
by the National Research Council in 1993conventional produce.
determined that for infants andHowever, organic foods might also have
children, the major source of exposuremore flavor because organic farmers
to pesticides is through diet.often breed with taste instead of
A recent study in 2006 measured themarketability as the primary factor.
levels of organophosphorus pesticideConventional tomatoes, for example, are
exposure in 23 school children beforeoften bred to be perfectly red and
and after replacing their diet withround, to match the ideal appearance of
organic food. In this study it was founda tomato. They are also bred to resist
that levels of organophosphorusdamage in transport and storage, for a
pesticide exposure dropped dramaticallylonger shelf-life. This means that taste
and immediately when the childrenis an attribute that has a lower
switched to an organic diet.priority. In addition to crop diversity
The degree of risk posed by pesticideand selection practices, organic farming
residues remains uncertain. Pesticideemphasizes soil nutrition, which can
use in conventional food products ispositively influence the taste of the
heavily regulated, with established,food. Tests by the United Nations FAO
research-based maximum residue levelsdemonstrated that some apples,
(MRLs) below which residues arespecifically the "Golden Delicious"
considered safe for human consumption.variety, have higher flavonoid counts
Also, many pesticides are not cumulativewhen grown organically. This suggests
in the body, and are regularlythat they do have more flavour.
eliminated. Notable exceptions includeSome foods, such as bananas, are picked
heavy metals such as lead or mercurywhen unripe, then artificially induced
which are sometimes found in foodstuffsto ripen using a chemical (such as
in countries which have lax foodpropylene or ethylene) while in transit,
production standards. The U.S. and mostpossibly producing a different taste.
of Europe prohibit the use of inorganicThe issue of ethylene use in organic
compounds containing heavy metals in anyfood production is contentious;
type of agriculture includingopponents claiming that its use only
conventional.benefits large companies, and opens the
One area where organically produced fooddoor to weaker organic standards.
is demonstrably different is in theEnvironmental impact Every food purchase
reduction of nitrates, which aresupports the system that delivers it,
commonly used to stimulate production ofand if large-scale chemical production
conventionally farmed agriculturalmethods are damaging to the environment,
products. Nitrates reduce thethen purchasing these foods supports
transmission of oxygen in thethis damage. A main goal of organic
bloodstream or may under certainfarming is minimizing impact to the
situations become nitrosamines, whichenvironment.
are carcinogens.Sustainability Proponents of organic
Organic foods do not use nitrates as afarming say that "conventional" farming
fertilizer, and so present a reducedis unsustainable, because it relies on
nitrosamines risk, although the use ofartificial inputs(synthetic fertilizers
nitrates and the nitrate content of theand other chemicals, machinery, etc.)
final product in conventional foods isthat ultimately requires energy in the
regulated by region. [citation needed]form of fossil fuels, and because the
Organic methods of fertilization are notland is degraded through soil erosion,
necessarily free from risk. Criticssalinization, and other processes that
claim that using manure to fertilizeeventually render the soil infertile.
organic crops might increase the risk ofMany claim that without cheap fossil
contamination by dangerous microbes likefuels and government subsidies,
E. coli.[citation needed] However,conventional agriculture would not be
organic animal manure, typically that ofpossible, and that despite technological
cattle, is manure from animals that eatadvancements, there will eventually be
mainly hay and other organic, primarilyan agricultural crisis as a result of
non-grain materials. This is seen as adepleted soil[citation needed]. The
way to reduce the amount of E. Colicultivation of monocultures, many acres
bacteria present, and the feces ofplanted with the same crop year after
organically-raised cattle have only 1%year, increases susceptibility to pests
of the E. Coli present in non-organicand diseases and depletes the soil,
manure. Still, when using primarilywhile eliminating most native flora and
manure to grow organic crops, the riskfauna.
for mycotoxin contamination isIn contrast, organic farming often
significantly increased. Mycotoxins areutilizes intercropping, crop rotation,
the result of molds found in somefallow periods, and integrated pest
varieties of cow feed, and even in verymanagement to promote biodiversity and
small amounts they can induce liverpreserve the health of the soil while
cancer if consumed over a long period ofminimizing the risk of diseases. The
time. It is important to note thatmain goal of organic farming is
conventional farms also use manure assustainability, so organic farms seek to
fertilizer but in much smallerminimize dependance on outside resources
quantities.[5] It should also be notedand be self-sufficient.
that many organic farmers consider usingPollution Modern agricultural practices
manure directly as fertilizer to be anoften result in large amounts of
unsound practice, and instead the manurenitrogen runoff from the heavy use of
should be composted first.fertilizer, which pollutes watersheds.
Hormonal contamination OrganicIn addition to posing a threat to human
proponents cite evidence that somehealth and disrupting aquatic
chemicals used in conventional farming,ecosystems, this sometimes results in
including pesticides and herbicides,algal blooms which deplete the water of
mimic hormones - usually estrogen - whenoxygen resulting in fishkills. Pesticide
inside a person. They claim that this isrunoff also causes many problems.
significant even at the minute levelsTransportation Claims that eating
that the average person is exposed to.organic food is better for the
The US government states that theseenvironment are, however, frustrated by
chemicals are safe when used correctly,the fact that most of the organic food
but proponents claim such tests are onlysold today travels the same great
done on healthy adults - and thatdistances as conventional food. A UK
children and fetuses might be at risk tostudy published in 2005 in the Journal
even small amounts of these chemicals.of Food Policy found that maximum
In Australia, the Government sponsoredenvironmental benefit would result from
Australian Total Diet Survey measurespurchasing food produced within a
pesticide residues found in typical12-mile radius. Therefore, buying local
Australian diets. The 2004 survey foundfood that is not organic could be
all estimated dietary exposures toenvironmentally "better" than buying
pesticide residues were below 16% of theorganic food that has travelled hundreds
respective Acceptable daily intakes andor thousands of miles. Many small
therefore all exposures are well withinorganic farms, however, sell much or all
the applicable health standards.of their produce locally.
Transgenic contamination CertifiedEfficiency Studies have show organic
organic foods are not substantiallyfarms to be more energy efficient than
genetically modified. The health riskstheir conventional counterparts. One of
surrounding genetically modified foodsthese studies as done with apple farms
remain highly contentious.in the state of Washington. In that
In the USA, a small admixture of a GMstudy, the organic farms were found to
variety is compatible with organicbe at least 7% more energy efficient.
certification, as long as it isAnd although some critics of organic
unintentional. The USDA regulates thefarms cite evidence that organic farms
organic production process, and does notproduce less yield than conventional
verify the actual composition of thefarms, they also found a much more
final product. So as long as the farmersubstantial decrease in resources used.
complies with the rules of organicCritics of organic farms cite evidence
farming, he cannot lose his organicthat organic farms produce less yield
certificate solely because of randomthan conventional farms; one prominent
presence of transgenic variety. In most21-year Swiss study found an average 20%
European countries, certification ruleslower organic yields over conventional
are much stricter. Basically, anymethods. However, that came with
confirmed detection of transgenic plant,consumption of 50% less fertilizer, and
seed or feed can result in a loss of97% less pesticide.
organic status and cosenquentIn comparing yields, a US survey
substantial economic losses for thepublished in 2001 analyzed 150 growing
farmer.seasons of data on various crops and
Other issues surrounding GMOs may alsoconcluded that organic yields were
concern consumers, such as the ownership95-100% of conventional yields. Because
of biological intellectual property byorganic farms don't use toxic pesticides
corporations, and reduction in cropand herbicides, there is more
varieties.biodiversity in the soil. Besides higher
With estimates that pollen of some cropssoil quality - more life in the soil
(eg. canola) can travel more than 5allows for higher water retention. This
kilometers per year, we can be certainhelps increase yields for organic farms
that the technology and marketing ofin drought years where there is less
organic foods will clash with therain. During drought years, organic
technology and marketing of GMO foods.farms have been found to have yields
In many countries, however, public20-40% higher than conventional farms.
awareness is limited and the battlesLarge scale organic farms Many advocates
seem to take place with a small elite inof organic farming view large scale,
the GMO industry and the NGOs thatcorporate owned "organic farms" as being
oppose them.against the spirit of organic farming,
Nutritional value Some organic advocatessince they tend to use unsustainable
claim that organic food is morepractices similar to conventional farms.
nutritious. It is important to note thatSummary Without exception, the
the main objective of organicfundamental claims of benefit are
agriculture is to produce food that doescontentious and well-contended by
not degrade soil and the surroundingvarious supporters of conventional
environment over long periods of timeagriculture, regardless of the fact that
(known as sustainability). The goal hasthe food industry establishment also has
never been to produce food that isa significant stake in organic food. The
higher in specific nutrients, buthot button issue seems to be the effect
producing more wholesome food in generalof pesticides on people, animals, and
is often cited as one reason for farmingthe environment. This is still being
organically. Increased soil quality,debated by experts in toxicology. There
greater attention to quality, andare research reports, expert opinions,
selection of crop varieties forand anecdotal evidence both supporting
nutrition and taste instead of size,and rebutting them. The same holds true
appearance, and shipping characteristicsfor the other claimed advantages.



1 A B C D E 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128