For years now this argument has been rumbling on. Buy organic they say but then hike the prices up. Conventional foods are bad for you they say but its all many can afford. When it comes down to it what really is the difference between organic and conventional food? We decided to check it out thoroughly and separate the myths from the facts. After much time and effort here is our look at the current state of play in the organic v conventional food battle.
A study held back in 2012 by researchers at Stanford added even more fuel to the debate about the major differences existing between organic and conventional foods. This report showed the results of the analysis of 237 different studies. These were of organic produce, dairy and meat products and the study reached the conclusion that organic foods weren’t actually more nutritious than their conventional counterparts.
Organic foods advocates weren’t best pleased at this as you can imagine. They claimed that the study took a very narrow view of popular organic food choices and pointed out that oftentimes people bought organic for the lack of hormones, pesticides and other chemicals widely found in conventional farming methods. Today these are still the most common reasons for paying that bit extra for organic products and will continue to do so if it benefits their health.
Studies back in 2010 revealed that organic strawberries had both more antioxidants and vitamin C that a conventionally grown strawberry. When you compare an organic tomato with a conventional one it contains more of the antioxidant known as polyphenol. These were revealed when a study was published by scientists who had carried out the research at the University of Barcelona.
It also illustrated that there were other variables, such as ripeness, which also influenced nutritional content. A berry or peach which reaches its peak ripeness through the use of pesticides can actually contain a helluva lot more vitamins than an organic fruit which is less ripe. For the Stanford study decades worth of research was reviewed in order to determine whether buying organic produce. Milk and meat would generally lead to better nutrition. The conclusion was no as in by changing to all organic produce you would not experience immediate and obvious health benefits.
This argument still rumbles on today but the fact remains that those who choose to eat organic produce aren’t looking for a quick fix. They are concerned about the harm these chemicals are having on their bodies in the long term. We all know now that certain foods are known to have natural antioxidants present while others can fight off off certain cancers and other serious diseases. If this is true, and all the research certainly point to this, then by eating those foods which have been organically grown must surely be even better for you?
The fact remains that organic or conventional foods will, and always will be, very much a matter of both personal choice and budget. Many of us who want to eat organic but don’t actually trust the labeling are experimenting in organic gardening to to produce their own. Undoubtedly organic food is better for you in that there are no chemicals present and everything has been grown as nature intended. And as long as you aren’t looking for a quick health fix, as pointed out by the Stanford professors, you’ll get along just fine.
