Associate
- Joined
- 20 Dec 2008
- Posts
- 1,380
Do you think there is a benefit to eating organic food over food that needs artificial preservatives and pesticides on them for them to grow?
Is there a benefit to eating organic food?
- Thread starter PsychoPigeon
- Start date
Oh so you think that organic food doesn't require pesticides and preservatives?
Interesting.
The answer, at least scientifically is mostly no, there is no clear health benefit to be gained from eating organic food.
Last edited:
Less crap / contaminants in organic and free range foods.
Whether it affects health or not I'm not entirely sure, and I'm not really bothered about organic fruits / veg, but will only eat free range meat and dairy.
And maybe this should be in the food forum
Whether it affects health or not I'm not entirely sure, and I'm not really bothered about organic fruits / veg, but will only eat free range meat and dairy.
And maybe this should be in the food forum
- Joined
- 20 Dec 2008
- Posts
- 1,380
It really depends who you buy from, if the farmer is taking care of the soil the plants will be mineral rich enough to grow without outsider help. If the soil is deficient the plant could need a helping hand.
But I'm not exactly expert on the subject, I'm just curious if anyone knows any studies that have been done showing the effects of Sodium Fluoride type pesticides versus pesticide free organic produce and if there is a long term side effect of consuming.
There also seems to be a drawn out discussion if animals pumped full of growth hormones and fed GMO cereal provide the same amount of nutrients as an animal that is allowed to free roam and grass feed. Some independent studies say 50% more, government agencies say it's nonsense and you get the same amount. Who to believe?
Last edited:
- Joined
- 20 Dec 2008
- Posts
- 1,380
Right but you were implying that I believed something when I hadn't really explained my position in detail.
It's on the contents label as well.
- Joined
- 20 Dec 2008
- Posts
- 1,380
There's an article from 2007 talking about a study done which showed more nutrients from organically grown food but then you have government agencies coming up with other studies saying the opposite, so it creates a wall of confusion.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-490255/Organic-food-really-IS-better-claims-study.html
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-490255/Organic-food-really-IS-better-claims-study.html
- Joined
- 3 May 2004
- Posts
- 17,705
- Location
- Kapitalist Republik of Surrey
This. The 'organic' certification label allows many certified pesticides and fertilisers to be used, some of which are good and others are bad. This is generally what you'll find in the supermarket. However, a lot of farmers go the whole hog and will use natural farming techniques and different crop breeds and, in my opinion, these are generally far superior. You'll have to go to specialists and the like to get them, or do what a lot of people do and grow your own. You can do some amazing speciality tomatoes, strawberries, potatoes, beans etc etc with little effort.
That said, a lot of the organic stuff in supermarkets isn't too bad. The organic white spuds I've had lasted a lot longer than the normal ones, organic garlic is better and lasts longer, price-for-price the organic wine is definitely better than the non-organic equivalent. You get a much more honest bottle.
- Joined
- 20 Dec 2008
- Posts
- 1,380
It's such a shame most of our local produce is being outsourced to other countries. I have to do more research but because there's so many conflicting agencies arguing with each other it makes it hard to understand who is right but its certainly something I want to study.
Organic meat, possibly. Organic veg, no.
And it's not even the organic that might make a difference to the meat, it's simply the higher level standards of care. Note, however, that you're more likely to get food poisoning from organic/free range chicken than you are from cruelty chicken so make sure you cook your organic meat properly! I imagine, but don't know for sure, that the same is true for organic/free range pigs.
And it's not even the organic that might make a difference to the meat, it's simply the higher level standards of care. Note, however, that you're more likely to get food poisoning from organic/free range chicken than you are from cruelty chicken so make sure you cook your organic meat properly! I imagine, but don't know for sure, that the same is true for organic/free range pigs.
- Joined
- 20 Dec 2008
- Posts
- 1,380
Well the studies already show an increase in nutrients in organic produce. The thing about Vegetables is the soil, if the soil is deficient in minerals then your Veg is going to be deficient thus your body isn't getting the maximum amount it needs to keep your immune system running efficiently.
How can a cow possibly be fully nourished when eating GMO cereal and being cooped up in a small area compared to a cow that is free roaming and grass fed? If the cow is malnourished then you're not going to receive what your body needs either?
Soldato
- Joined
- 19 Apr 2004
- Posts
- 4,793
- Location
- London
So, you believe that government agencies are covering things up, and that the daily mail and others are exposing the truth here?
As in, this daily mail, who have such a great reputation at interpreting health stories?
http://thedailymailoncologicalontologyproject.wordpress.com/
Interesting point that - To be honest if you're that worried about parasites in pigs though, just freeze the meat beforehand. It would be interesting if there was an outbreak of trichinosis in fashionable (and super tasty) free range, acorn fed Pata Negra pigs given it's usually cooked fairly rare!
There is another debate about animal welfare though, especially with regards to free range pigs. Most aspects of animal welfare standards will be far higher at a well run indoor pig unit than your average outdoor one
- Joined
- 20 Dec 2008
- Posts
- 1,380
The daily mail didn't do the research, an £18 Million EU funded group did the research.
The body of research on organic veg has found no nutritional benefit to eating organic. Particular, smaller, studies have found some difference, as always in science you are better to take the body of knowledge as correct than cherry picked results that support your preferred view.
The idea of mineral improvement is scientifically naive. The primary constituents of plants are derived from rain and the air. The major nutrients are supplied in fertilizers and what's left is only required in trace quantities, easily provided by the soil or doped through minute additions to artificial feed.
There IS a potential benefit to eating foods grown organically in parts of the country where the soil is richer in trace elements and magnesium.
The UK has a chronic dietary magnesium deficiency because of the relative lack of magnesium in most soils, and the fact that it's not supplied in fertiliser, and there are a few large cohort studies on-going looking at the long term effect of this on people's health.
The UK has a chronic dietary magnesium deficiency because of the relative lack of magnesium in most soils, and the fact that it's not supplied in fertiliser, and there are a few large cohort studies on-going looking at the long term effect of this on people's health.
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 21 Nov 2004
- Posts
- 46,315
In a word, no.