People who buy organic usually cite these reasons for their
decision:
- They’re
safer. Fruits and vegetables labeled as organic are generally grown
without chemical fertilizers and pesticides. Livestock raised under
organic practices aren’t fed antibiotics or growth hormones.
- They’re
kinder to the environment. Organic farming practices are designed to be
more sustainable, emphasizing conservation and reducing pollutants.
- They’re
healthier. A few studies have suggested organic foods might be higher in
nutrients than their traditional counterparts.
Of these three reasons, the health claims for organic foods have
been the most tenuous. To investigate these claims, researchers at Stanford
University evaluated nearly 250 studies comparing the nutrients in organic vs.
traditional foods (fruits, vegetables, grains, poultry, meat, and eggs), and
the health outcomes of eating these foods.
The researchers discovered very little difference in nutritional
content, aside from slightly higher phosphorous levels in many organic foods,
and a higher omega-3 fatty acid content in organic milk and chicken.
Organic produce did have the slight edge in food safety, with
30% lower pesticide residues than conventional foods. In general, pesticide
levels in both organic and non-organic foods were within allowable safety
limits. It’s still not clear, though, just what that means to consumers’
health. “Just because these foods aren’t going over what they call an ‘acceptable
limit’ doesn’t mean they’re safe for everyone,” Dr. Hauser says. There haven’t
been enough studies evaluating pesticide exposure to confirm the health
effects, particularly in children and pregnant women, she adds.
