Organic foods study

Subject: RE: Organic foods study
From: Janie
Date: 08 Sep 12 - 03:46 PM

Listened to the the first NPR segment but was not able to listen to the subsequent broadcasts answering people's responses. For me, the issue is not so much about nutritional value. I also don't think that short-term studies focusing on USDA "safe" limits of pesticides and herbicides can say much scientifically about long term cumulative effects or effects on fetuses and very young developing children. I do think it is reasonable to have a very conscious attitude and awareness of the environmental impacts over time of organic vs. inorganic methods of food production. Also think it likely that over time, as the label "organic" is applied to foods based on what they are fertilized or treated with to control weeds and insects, consumers will need to be aware and informed about the difference between organic methods and organic philosophy. A field over-fertilized with sludge from a pig farm waste pond is going to leach as much harmful nitrogen into water resources as is a field over-fertilized products from I E Dupont.

Subject: RE: Organic foods study
From: Ed T
Date: 08 Sep 12 - 02:39 PM

I would expect the type of soil and agricultural processes would have some impact on the resulting product.

Subject: RE: Organic foods study
From: bobad
Date: 08 Sep 12 - 01:59 PM

The numbers for nutrient content as measured by the USDA are at variance with the results of this survey. They show that there has been a steady decline in the nutrient content of food since the 1950s which coincides with increased use of chemical fertilizers.

Nutrient Decline in the Food Supply

Subject: RE: Organic foods study
From: GUEST,Tunesmith
Date: 08 Sep 12 - 01:35 PM

I wouldn't have expected organic foods to have any different nutrient
values than non-organic produce, but I would expect organically produced products to have less nasty additives ( from what ever source).

Subject: RE: Organic foods study
From: Ed T
Date: 08 Sep 12 - 10:45 AM

For some rodd reason one of the links does not seem to work

The article can be found at Flesh and Stone http://www.fleshandstone.net/politics/decline-and-fall-collins/organic_food_debunker_was_tobacco_institute_researcher_in_1976.html

Subject: RE: Organic foods study
From: Ed T
Date: 08 Sep 12 - 10:26 AM

Oops, should be in BS.

--------------Fixed. MudElf----------------

Subject: Organic foods study
From: Ed T
Date: 08 Sep 12 - 10:24 AM

""Does an organic strawberry contain more vitamin C than a conventional one?""

""Stanford University scientists have weighed in on the "maybe not" side of the debate after an extensive examination of four decades of research comparing organic and conventional foods.""

""The media had heavy coverage raising doubt about organics.


Organic study

""The lead statistian for the study was a Tobacco Institute Researcher in 1976.""Organic Food Debunker -Tobacco Institute Researcher

There is strong evidence of "'the tobacco industry's participation in the public disinformation regarding the health hazards of tobacco use""

Should this information have been included in media reports as a factor to be considered in "weighing in on the study?"" Or, are researchers beyond bias, regardless of who they have worked for in the past??