""It seems no one bothers to go to the Stanford study and base their response on newspaper reports by reporters who are only interested in getting readers.""

Sorry, I did bother to do that very thing. When I did, I found the research so broad and with so many confounding aspects (holes) that it does not seem to come anywhere close to meeting the stated studies goal - to provide useful information to make any decision, let alone shed any "new" light on anything at all.

Based on the mediocre nature of the study, I wonder why media would give it any coverage at all, let alone the broad media coverage it seemed to have garnered? Maybe organic is a good choice for some, and not for others. But, I do not see any reasons to make any such decision based on this study.