Tuesday, September 4, 2012

No Benefit To Organic?

I don't think so.  I was going to ignore this when I read it yesterday, but since it's all over the news this morning, I guess I'll jump in.  There's a new meta-analysis out from Stanford University that questions the value of buying organic over conventional.  Anyone telling me that because the pesticide residues in the conventional are deemed mostly "safe" means they are equal in value to the organic has got to come up with a different argument to persuade me.  You can read the coverage from the New York Times here.
Posted by at
Labels:

2 comments:

  1. Ms. A.September 4, 2012 at 1:37 PM

    Thanks for the NY Times link. An interesting counter-article can be found at:

    http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2012/09/organic-food-isnt-more-nutritious-but-that-isnt-the-point/261929/

    This article mentions concerns in terms of environment (respectful land use), public health (antibiotics, pesticides, preservatives, hormones), and health of workers in the field.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Boulder EileenSeptember 4, 2012 at 2:05 PM

    Excellent information, as ever, Ms. A. There's so much more to this discussion than whether the content of a particular vitamin might be the same. Thanks!

    ReplyDelete

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)