A recent study from the UK suggests that all food is created equal. The recent review commissioned by the Food Standards Agency (FSA) reports that there are no significant differences between conventional and organic foods.
“There is little, if any, nutritional difference between organic and conventionally produced food and that there is no evidence of additional health benefits from eating organic food,” explained Gill Fine, FSA Director of Consumer Choice and Dietary Health.
The study, comprised of a ‘systematic review of literature’, was implemented by the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine (LSHTM) and involved the review of all papers published in the last fifty years that were related to the nutritional content and possible heath differences between organic and conventional food.
However, what was omitted from the study is any reference to the effects of trace fertilizer and pesticide on the non-organic foods and what they might cause in terms of long-term exposure for human consumption. The study also did not look at the environmental benefits of consuming an organic diet.
“A small number of differences in nutrient content were found to exist between organically and conventionally produced crops and livestock, but these are unlikely to be of any public health relevance,” explained Dr Dangour, from the LSHTM’s Nutrition and Public Health Intervention Research Unit and the principal author of the paper. The results of the research were published in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition.
Visit: http://www.food.gov.uk/news/newsarchive/2009/jul/organic
Show/Hide comment form
