Primary Care Physician
Dr. Orrange received her BA in Biology at the University of California, San Diego, and a Masters Degree in Health Sciences at the Johns Hopkins University School of Public Health. She received her MD from the USC Keck School of…
FAST FACTS
Advertisement
Cha-ching: Organic Foods are Pricier but are They Healthier or Safer?
Posted in Nutrition by Dr. Sharon Orrange on Sep 13, 2012
Organic produce, dairy, and meats often cost twice as much as conventionally grown products. They are expensive and those of us buying organic should wonder: are they more nutritious, safer, or healthier?

A large study out of Stanford released September 4th set out to address this question.

First, what is organic?
- Grown without synthetic pesticides or fertilizers

- No routine use of antibiotics or growth hormones

- Livestock are fed organically produced feed (free of pesticides and animal byproducts)

- Livestock are provided access to the outdoors, sunlight, fresh air and freedom of movement.

- Organic foods are processed without irradiation or chemical food additives.
Now that we know the rules organic produce, dairy, and meats must follow, here are the big questions:
1. Is organic more nutritional? Nutrients in organic vs. conventional produce were compared and of the nutrients evaluated only phosphorus was higher in organic foods. The authors looked at Vitamin C, iron, protein, fiber, calcium, among many others, and there were no consistent differences between organic and conventional produce and dairy.

2. What about pesticides? There is a difference here, and that is important. Conventional produce had a 30% increased risk of pesticide contamination than organic produce.

3. What about contamination with bacteria? Both conventional and organic meats were commonly contaminated with Salmonella and Campylobacter (yuck.) Here is another important finding: organic produce had a higher risk of contamination with E. coli.

4. What about antibiotic resistant bacteria? Conventional chicken and pork had a higher risk of contamination with antibiotic resistant bacteria than organic. Remember this is important because we worry these resistant bacteria will transfer to humans and cause urinary tract infections, wound infections, etc.
There are no long-term studies that suggest outcome of populations are better with organic foods. So I have to ask: are organic foods worth the cost?

- Dr. O

 RELATED FROM AROUND THE WEB



       Send to a Friend     Share This


MEMBER COMMENTS
TOTAL COMMENTS: 5 - View All Comments »

Add a Comment
Displaying comments 5-1 of 5
5
Very strange that all I am hearing is"Warnings" about GMO foods and how Monsanto is taking over. Organic is expensieve but worth the cost for my health. They need to label food so we know what were choosing. Yhey feed this garbage to chicken and beef and we end up with it in our chickens and beef on our table. Organic is safer..it has to be.
By sunnierain  Dec 02, 2012
4
I don't believe a lick of "scientific studies" that comes from Stanford. Organic foods will always be 10,000x better than the pesticide/chemical soup that these farming industries are pushing out these days. Dr. Ingram Olkin was the chairman of Stanford's Department of Statistics and he collaborated with the tobacco industry to push "science" that tobacco was good when it wasn't. Anything GMO and chemically enhanced I take with a very large grain of salt.
By Davis88  Sep 18, 2012
3
Hmmm, I'm gonna go out on a limb and say no, they are not worth the cost.
By ThePepperMan  Sep 17, 2012
2
You didn't mention that organic foods are also supposed to be GMO free. That in and of itself is worth the price we pay for organic!

Of course that probably won't last much longer because Monsanto and the big corps that are taking over all of the small organic food producers have their way, the regulations for organic food will be so weakened that it really won't matter. And we won't ever know we're already eating bioengineered genetically modified food!

Very sad state of affairs.
By MyTrueColors  Sep 17, 2012
1
I've seen some criticism of the Stanford report. There are serious questions being raised about the methodology of this study, so I would be careful about taking it as anything definitive on this controversial subject. There are other, very well qualified studies that have shown much higher nutritional value in organically grown foods.

Chemically grown produce often has such low levels of important trace elements that the usual assay methods show levels at zero.

And of course studies like these usually ignore the devastating environmental consequences of chemical agriculture.
By RichieD  Sep 14, 2012
Got a Question?
 
 
 
 
My Fans
RELATED SUPPORT GROUPS
Acne
(712 Discussion Topics)
Diabetes Type 2
(3,844 Discussion Topics)
Diets & Weight Maintenance
(8,390 Discussion Topics)
Eating Disorders
(15,483 Discussion Topics)
Environmental Allergies
(428 Discussion Topics)
Fitness Goals
(1,568 Discussion Topics)
Food Addiction
(2,664 Discussion Topics)
Food Allergies
(458 Discussion Topics)
Fructose Intolerance
(37 Discussion Topics)
Gastric Bypass Surgery
(33,425 Discussion Topics)
Healthy Eating
(821 Discussion Topics)
High Blood Pressure
(907 Discussion Topics)
High Cholesterol
(329 Discussion Topics)
Nutrition
(137 Discussion Topics)
Obesity
(4,794 Discussion Topics)