Is Organic Food Provably Better?

[Guest guest]

Is Organic Food Provably Better?

New York Times

July 16, 2003

 

Is Organic Food Provably Better?

By Marian Burros

 

 

 

IN the debate over whether organic food is better than conventionally raised

food, advocates for organic produce say it contains fewer harmful chemicals and

is better for the earth, and some claim that it is more nutritious.

 

And recent preliminary evidence suggests that the levels of certain nutrients,

especially vitamin C, some minerals and some polyphenols - naturally occurring

antioxidants that may help bolster the immune system - are higher in organically

grown crops.

 

As a result of this preliminary evidence and the Agriculture Department's

adoption in 2000 of standards for organic foods, the Organic Trade Association

has created the nonprofit Center for Organic Education and Promotion to finance

research that could verify what small-scale research may suggest: organic food

may provide greater health benefits than conventional food.

 

" We want to take the knowledge to the next level until there is a solid body of

research that we can stand behind, " said Katherine DiMatteo, executive director

of the association. " There needs to be more rigor. "

 

A study in the January 2003 Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry found 52

percent more ascorbic acid, or vitamin C, in frozen organic corn than in

conventional corn, and 67 percent more in corn raised by sustainable methods - a

combination of organic and conventional farming. Polyphenols were significantly

higher in organic and sustainable marionberries compared to conventionally

farmed ones.

A three-year study in Italy, reported in the August 2002 issue of the same

journal, found higher levels of polyphenols in organic peaches and pears, and

about 8 percent more ascorbic acid in organic peaches.

 

And a study in the February 2002 European Journal of Nutrition found more

salicylic acid in organic vegetable soup than in nonorganic soup. Salicylic acid

is responsible for the anti-inflammatory properties of aspirin, and bolsters the

immune system.

 

Critics say these studies were poorly done, are biased and dealt with tiny

differences in nutrients.

 

Alex Avery, director of research and education at the Center for Global Food

Issues at the Hudson Institute, who frequently disputes claims for the positive

health benefits of organic farming, said the marionberry and corn study did not

involve proper statistical analysis and that the data came from a single year

and a single farm.

 

" This is a very, very shaky basis, given the differences that can occur, " Mr.

Avery said.

 

Dr. Diane Barrett of the University of California at Davis, a researcher on the

study, said: " We acknowledge it's very preliminary data. " She added: " It was a

real-life look at what happens in a grower's field. We did not expect such

differences among organic, sustainable and conventional farming. We see it as an

open door to doing more controlled studies at the university. "

 

Charles Benbrook, former executive director of the Board on Agriculture at the

National Academy of Sciences, who is a consultant on the impact of agricultural

systems and technology on food safety and the environment, said the study's

conclusions were not surprising.

 

" This study extends and reinforces findings in earlier research, " he said,

referring to reports indicating that when plants are not treated with pesticides

and are attacked by insects their levels of antioxidants rise to limit damage.

" But it is new because it uses different crops under different circumstances.

The study may have flaws, but it is a legitimate study. "

 

Mr. Avery said the Italian study showed very little difference in nutrient

levels. " I don't think you are going to find any health differences, " he said.

 

And while scientists emphasize the importance of polyphenols and other

antioxidants, particularly because they might help fight cancer, Mr. Avery said:

" No one has a clue how much phenolics anyone needs to consume. Anyone who claims

nutritional benefits from higher or lower phenolics doesn't understand. "

 

Dr. John Reganold, a professor of soil science at Washington State University,

who has conducted research with organic farming systems systems, described the

Italian study as good, and said the results were valid. The higher levels of

vitamin C, Mr. Reganold said, are " biologically significant. "

 

In 2001, the Soil Association of England, which sets organic standards, asked

Shane Heaton, a nutritionist, to analyze available studies on nutrient

differences between organically and conventionally grown food.

 

He looked at 99 studies and discarded 70 because, he said, they examined growers

who did not use certified organic practices, did not make relevant comparisons

or were of insufficient duration.

 

He found that in 14 studies of minerals, 7 showed a " trend toward mineral

contents " in organic foods, while 6 showed inconclusive or inconsistent results

and 1 showed a higher mineral content for nonorganics. For vitamin C, 7 of 13

studies showed significantly higher levels in organics; they ranged from 6

percent to 100 percent. Six of the studies showed inconsistent or insignificant

differences.

 

Mr. Avery said Mr. Heaton's study was tainted because of the Soil Association's

interests.

 

" A number of research trials time and time again have not found any significant

differences, " he said. " You need very large, carefully designed and carefully

controlled studies to prove that there is a difference because of large natural

variability. "

 

Pressed to be more specific, Mr. Avery whose organization has received financing

from Monsanto, DowElanco and the Ag-Chem Equipment Company, which are involved

in conventional agriculture and biotechnology, did not offer further criticism.

 

Mr. Heaton said other researchers had reviewed his work and said it demonstrated

" important differences between organic and nonorganic produce. "

 

Dr. Joseph Rosen, a professor of food science at Rutgers, said the conclusions

of the studies Mr. Heaton had focused on were less consistent than Mr. Heaton

had claimed.

 

Dr. Rosen said there were only two studies on phytonutrients - naturally

occurring antioxidants - and only one showed higher levels in organic food.

 

Actually, there are five studies in Mr. Heaton's report; four of them showed

significant difference in phytonutrients.

 

Dr. Marion Nestle, chairwoman of the department of nutrition, food studies and

public health at New York University, said that because there is so much

variation in the soil, the amount of sun and rainfall, " It is difficult to

compare findings of different studies. "

 

But she said of Mr. Heaton's study: " The investigators have gone to a lot of

trouble, and there is no reason to disbelieve it. " His findings, she said, " are

consistent with studies coming out now on nutrients, phytochemicals and

pesticides. "

 

The debate is far from resolved.

 

Organic foods, Mr. Avery said, " are clearly no safer, no more nutritious, no

more healthful - there are zero advantages for consumers. "

 

Dr. Nestle said, " I don't think there is any question that as more research is

done, it is going to become increasingly apparent that organic food is

healthier. "

 

 

 

Copyright 2003 The New York Times Company

 

 

http://www.ota.com/index.html

 

 

 

 

 

 

The complete " Whole Body " Health line consists of the " AIM GARDEN TRIO "

Ask About Health Professional Support Series: AIM Barleygreen

 

" Wisdom of the Past, Food of the Future "

 

http://www.geocities.com/mrsjoguest/AIM.html