Organic food no healthier than conventionally-produced food

Organic food advocates aren’t going to be happy with an article that was published in the July 29 issue of the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition. Scientists from the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine conducted an extensive review of 162 studies to assess the differences in nutrient content between organically and conventionally produced foodstuffs. The studies, which extended over a 50-year period, covered 137 crop and 25 livestock products. The analyses were restricted to the most commonly reported nutrients.

Conventionally-produced crops had a significantly higher nitrogen content and organically-produced crops had a significantly higher phosphorus content and higher acidity. No difference was detected for the other nutrient categories that were analyzed. The researchers concluded that the small differences in nutrient content are biologically plausible and mostly related to differences in production methods.

The study did not look at pesticide residues, use of antibiotics or environmentally-related issues pertaining to production practices.

Laura Telford, national director of Canadian Organic Growers, told The National Post that the group didn’t dispute what the scientists found.

“We don’t make health claims based on the nutrition of organic food,” Telford said. “But we are saying they contain less of the things that might hurt, like chemicals. You can make credible claims about the benefits of organic food without saying they are nutritionally superior.”

--Dave