If You Wanted Confirmationour...
News2 mins ago
Organic Food No Healthier Than Non-Organic Food
20 Answers
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-19465692
It seems there's been another study indicating that organic food is no healthier for you than non-organic food.
One thing I find particularly interesting is that "organic food was 30% less likely to contain pesticides." 30? Is that it? Given that one of the major panic-buttons organic-defenders are always pushing is the idea that they are saving us from those evil pesticides, this is a fairly modest achievement.
It also makes a good companion to the experiment carried out by Penn & Teller at an organic food market in the 'Organic Food' episode of "Bullsh1t!" The point of the experiment was to find out whether organic food really did taste better, which is another argument commonly made in its defense. What they found was that even hardcore organic consumers consistently failed to be able to tell the difference in blind taste tests between organic and non-organic food. A particular highlight was slicing the same (non-organic) banana in half, and telling people that one was organic while the other non-organic. It's a real delight to see a woman extol the deliciousness and 'creaminess' of the same half of the same inorganic banana she had declared steroid-pumped rubbish just moments before.
How much longer before people recognise the level of utter nonsense being sold to them by the 'organic'/'health food' industry?
It seems there's been another study indicating that organic food is no healthier for you than non-organic food.
One thing I find particularly interesting is that "organic food was 30% less likely to contain pesticides." 30? Is that it? Given that one of the major panic-buttons organic-defenders are always pushing is the idea that they are saving us from those evil pesticides, this is a fairly modest achievement.
It also makes a good companion to the experiment carried out by Penn & Teller at an organic food market in the 'Organic Food' episode of "Bullsh1t!" The point of the experiment was to find out whether organic food really did taste better, which is another argument commonly made in its defense. What they found was that even hardcore organic consumers consistently failed to be able to tell the difference in blind taste tests between organic and non-organic food. A particular highlight was slicing the same (non-organic) banana in half, and telling people that one was organic while the other non-organic. It's a real delight to see a woman extol the deliciousness and 'creaminess' of the same half of the same inorganic banana she had declared steroid-pumped rubbish just moments before.
How much longer before people recognise the level of utter nonsense being sold to them by the 'organic'/'health food' industry?
Answers
1 to 20 of 20
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Kromovaracun. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
People do see what they want to see... When we lived in the UK we had a weekly delivery of 'organic' vegetables. I was never under the illusion that they tasted any different from their non 'oganic' equivalent. However because they weren't sprayed with insecticides, or fungicides many of them were picked when they were quite young and most of them were picked the morning of the day they were delivered. Some of them were funny shapes but the carrots were definitely better in flavour than any I've had in the last 30 years.
// The point of the experiment was to find out whether organic food really did taste better, which is another argument commonly made in its defense. //
Why does it have to be defended? I didn't realise it was doing anything wrong.
It's just a consumer choice some people make, for whatever reason. I personally don't buy it as it's too expensive, but I'd probably choose it over the other if it was the same price.
Like mineral water, it's been shown to be no tastier or healthier than tap water, but some people like the idea that it's been filtered though miles of volcanic rock in France over hundreds of years rather than five other peoples kidneys and a sewage farm in Basildon over the last couple of weeks.
Why does it have to be defended? I didn't realise it was doing anything wrong.
It's just a consumer choice some people make, for whatever reason. I personally don't buy it as it's too expensive, but I'd probably choose it over the other if it was the same price.
Like mineral water, it's been shown to be no tastier or healthier than tap water, but some people like the idea that it's been filtered though miles of volcanic rock in France over hundreds of years rather than five other peoples kidneys and a sewage farm in Basildon over the last couple of weeks.
Kromovaracun
I wouldn't touch non-organic eggs with a bargepole - not because of the way they taste, but by the way they're produced.
Same goes for the joint we get for Sunday lunch.
However, I couldn't give a tinker's cuss about whether my celery is organic or not. For me, it's more to do with the way the livestock is treated, not for taste.
The other benefit of organic food concerns the amount of chemicals that are pumped into the ground, and how it affects the ecosystems of the surrounding countryside. The agro-chemical industry have one set of priorities (cheaper food grown at minimal cost) which is counter to what some want from their food (welfare and sustainability).
I wouldn't touch non-organic eggs with a bargepole - not because of the way they taste, but by the way they're produced.
Same goes for the joint we get for Sunday lunch.
However, I couldn't give a tinker's cuss about whether my celery is organic or not. For me, it's more to do with the way the livestock is treated, not for taste.
The other benefit of organic food concerns the amount of chemicals that are pumped into the ground, and how it affects the ecosystems of the surrounding countryside. The agro-chemical industry have one set of priorities (cheaper food grown at minimal cost) which is counter to what some want from their food (welfare and sustainability).
" I see eating about a third less chemical pesticide as being a good healthier thing."
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm not aware of any strong evidence that artificial/non-organic fertilisers are actually significantly bad or worse for you than the alternatives used by organic farmers.
"Why does it have to be defended?"
Because there's a lot of untruth said about it. We're told that organic foods don't use pesticides - whereas 70% of organic foods are just as likely as any other food to contain pesticides. We're told it tastes better, yet the evidence suggests that this is entirely subjective. We're told it's locally-sourced, yet significant portions of organically-farmed products are imported from places like China.
"Just a pity they feel they still need to add some which sort of makes a mockery of the name 'organic'"
I'm not sure how many farmers would call it a 'pity' to keep pests off the crops...
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm not aware of any strong evidence that artificial/non-organic fertilisers are actually significantly bad or worse for you than the alternatives used by organic farmers.
"Why does it have to be defended?"
Because there's a lot of untruth said about it. We're told that organic foods don't use pesticides - whereas 70% of organic foods are just as likely as any other food to contain pesticides. We're told it tastes better, yet the evidence suggests that this is entirely subjective. We're told it's locally-sourced, yet significant portions of organically-farmed products are imported from places like China.
"Just a pity they feel they still need to add some which sort of makes a mockery of the name 'organic'"
I'm not sure how many farmers would call it a 'pity' to keep pests off the crops...
-- answer removed --
Kromovaracun
I cannot challenge you on the question of additives, because I am not a chemist, but I would support the argument that certain organic foods definitely taste better than their mass produced equivalent, but in this respect, I'm talking about the "2 for £5" chickens that you can find in most chiller cabinets, compared to the free range organic chooks that cost much more, but also have much more flavour (been grown longer, have a different musculature etc).
I cannot challenge you on the question of additives, because I am not a chemist, but I would support the argument that certain organic foods definitely taste better than their mass produced equivalent, but in this respect, I'm talking about the "2 for £5" chickens that you can find in most chiller cabinets, compared to the free range organic chooks that cost much more, but also have much more flavour (been grown longer, have a different musculature etc).
I think the organic farming market is one big money-spinner. If you stick to locally, ethically reared produce and British fruit and veg when it`s in season you wouldn`t need to buy organic. The way my grandfather and his grandfather etc etc produced veg and beef would have been called organic these days but that was just normal farming then.
Yes but you are comparing apples and pears.
eg what about free range non organic?
Organic probably tastes better in some cases because more care is taken. Fresh food is much better if you can get it, my toms are great but it will only be for a short while (They are fed fertilizer). One year I did try organic methods but the pests killed them off so the crop was awful.
eg what about free range non organic?
Organic probably tastes better in some cases because more care is taken. Fresh food is much better if you can get it, my toms are great but it will only be for a short while (They are fed fertilizer). One year I did try organic methods but the pests killed them off so the crop was awful.
-- answer removed --
-- answer removed --
1 to 20 of 20
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.