'Organic' May Not Mean Healthier

Food that beckons from the organic aisles of grocery stores may not be any better for you than what lines the rest of supermarket shelves.

According to a British review of studies done over the past 50 years, organic and conventionally produced foods have about the same nutrient content, suggesting that neither is better in terms of health benefits.

"We did not find any important differences in nutrient content between organically and conventionally produced foods," said study author Alan Dangour, a registered public health nutritionist with the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine.

Nonetheless, the researchers noted, organic foods continue to grow in popularity. In the United Kingdom, the market share for organic foods increased 22 percent from 2005 to 2007, they said.

Video: Study shows that buying organic food isnt healthier.
null

Likewise, the market for organic foods in the United States has grown at about a 20 percent rate each year since 1990, reaching $13.8 billion in consumer sales in 2005, according to the Organic Trade Association. That represents 2.5 percent of total food sales in the country, the trade group noted.

"As a registered dietitian, it is good to see that a systematic review of the literature supports what has long been believed -- that the nutritional content of traditionally grown foods and organic foods are comparable," said Connie Diekman, director of university nutrition at Washington University in St. Louis and past president of the American Dietetic Association. "This report provides confirmation for consumers that if they choose conventionally grown foods or organic foods they will be meeting their nutritional needs."

The review zeroed in on 162 studies that dealt with the nutrient content of foods. Only 55 were of what the researchers considered to be "satisfactory quality" -- a strong indicator that, overall, the science on the subject is not up to snuff.

They found no noted differences between conventional and organic crops with regard to vitamin C, magnesium, calcium, potassium, zinc and copper content. Organic crops did have higher levels of phosphorus, and conventionally produced crops had higher levels of nitrogen.

No differences in nutrient content were indicated in the livestock studies, according to the review.

The Oregon-based Organic Center, which promotes organic food, conducted a similar review of the literature, said Charles Benbrook, chief scientist for the Center. That study yielded results similar to those in the British study, but it also found higher levels of healthy antioxidants and polyphenols in organic foods.

"Given that some of the most significant differences favoring organic foods were for key antioxidant nutrients that most Americans do not get enough of on most days, we concluded that the consumption of organic fruits and vegetables, in particular, offered significant health benefits, roughly equivalent to an additional serving of a moderately nutrient dense fruit or vegetable on an average day," Benbrook said.

And there's another aspect to the organic vs. conventional food debate, said Sheah Rarback, director of nutrition at the Mailman Center for Child Development at the University of Miami Miller School of Medicine.

"You have to also look at what you're not getting" with organic foods, she said. "Maybe it's not a big difference nutritionally, but conventional products may have more pesticides."

And that's a particularly important issue for children, she said.

Page
  • 1
  • |
  • 2
Join the Discussion
You are using an outdated version of Internet Explorer. Please click here to upgrade your browser in order to comment.
blog comments powered by Disqus
 
You Might Also Like...