Topic: FSA find no nutritional benefit from organic produce

[labrat]

Organic is more expensive to buy because it is grown less intensively and yields per acre are much lower.    It also tends to be more labour intensive so no savings on mechanisation.

six of one, half a dozen of the other. It's all energy in the end whether its fuel in a tank or food for human stomachs.

As most have said it's freshness that makes all the difference to home grown produce followed by unusual non-commercial varieties.

[hippydave]

there may not be any nutritional benefits to organic veg but the stuff from my plot travels 500yrs from plot to plate on my push bike, i dont use any chemicals and my manure comes from a stable that feeds organic feed to the horses, there may be none organic chemicals from the horse muck but there is very little i can do about that. i also know my produce tastes much better than supermarket stuff, it may have holes in it and may be a funny shape and it may be small but i know whats gone into it as far as i possibly can unlike stuff from the supermarket.

[Melbourne12]

I seem to remember that about 3 years ago they tested carrots bought in Tescos asda and all the other leading supermarkets. The finds were that they contained around 400 different chemicals in them. My carrots that I`m pulling at the moment contain no chemical other that that which nature has provided. They taste mmmmmm very good unlike supermarket carrots which taste like dehydrated cardboard

I guess that you're referring to the continuing FSA toxicity monitoring programme, which is quite fascinating (if one likes that sort of thing).  http://cot.food.gov.uk/pdfs/reportindexed.pdf

The range of pesticides, which may be used in agriculture and food production, either in this country or abroad, is very wide. About 350 active substances are currently approved for use as agricultural pesticides in the UK and over 800 are approved in one or more European Union (EU) States. If account is taken of old chemicals such as DDT, which are now banned in the EU but may persist in the environment, potentially around 1,000 different chemicals might be looked for.

Of the 350, or 800, or 1,000 only 8 appear in carrots, though.

For anyone really worried, you can find out which supermarket fruit and veggies didn't contain any pesticide residues at all:

• Chinese cabbage
• Cauliflower
• Coconuts
• Olives
• Pineapple
• Sweetcorn

And other food items that were pesticide free included:

• Pasta
• Bacon
• Beef
• Burgers
• Chicken
• Cream
• Ducks
• Pate
• Pies & Pasties
• Pork
• Turkey
• Veal
• Yogurt
• Fish sticks
• Fish (white sea fish)
• Shellfish
• Mayonnaise
• Water (bottled)
• Sausages

[ACE]

my manure comes from a stable that feeds organic feed to the horses,  

I find that very hard to believe. Surely they do not know the origins of every bale of hay they buy in if the run short of their own.

[greenscrump]

For me, the point of growing organically on a large scale is the positive impact on biodiversity and sustainability. 

[amphibian]

I dare say companies like Dow and Monsanto have in no way whatsoever tried to influence the FSA, ever.

On the other hand the organic movement is not just about nutritional benefits it is also about the lack of poisonous chemicals, it's about sustainability and about trace elements.

[Borlotti]

hippdave, I don't fancy your 500 yr food even if you cycle home.  ;D ;D ;D

[Melbourne12]

I dare say companies like Dow and Monsanto have in no way whatsoever tried to influence the FSA, ever.

On the other hand the organic movement is not just about nutritional benefits it is also about the lack of poisonous chemicals, it's about sustainability and about trace elements.

And politics of course.  You forgot politics.  ;D

Anyway, back on topic.  What trace elements are those, then?

[landimad]

I can see this has brought a few soap boxes out of the closet.

My view and mine alone is that I grow to enjoy the food and not to get what can only be described as forced produce all year round.

We eat what we produce at a given time that we harvest the stuff in the ground.

If you can eat the stuff like strawberries at Christmas and melons around the same time, then I think this is imported and not fresh.

I eat what is available to me and the family not what can be imported from afar.
In the long run the only chemicals used on my land in FBB (fish, blood and bone), then there is the natures provider in the comfrey juices extracted from the plants grown on my land. Anything else is discarded from my shed as it takes up to much space. Predators are what comes into the garden and feasts on those who want to eat my crops.
I am if you like a person who has taken on board the old style of growing veg, but also using modern methods which do not entail the chemicals.
Companion planting has their benefits too.
If I cant grow it then it doesn't have a place in my plot. If the family have tried this and its not to their liking then also its given a miss.

If we all do what is required of us then we would only do what we are told instead of experimenting with what is available. If we can get something special to try then we will.

Keep the garden for what it is meant to. Growing food for the house.

[amphibian]

I dare say companies like Dow and Monsanto have in no way whatsoever tried to influence the FSA, ever.

On the other hand the organic movement is not just about nutritional benefits it is also about the lack of poisonous chemicals, it's about sustainability and about trace elements.

And politics of course.  You forgot politics.  ;D

Anyway, back on topic.  What trace elements are those, then?

Magnesium and also micro nutrients such as lycopene, carotenes, flavanoids, anthrocyanines, resveratrol, manganese...

I'm sure the EU, rigorous and peer reviewed paper found these to be higher in organic produce.

This latest study was conducted by a very strange choice of establishment.

[non-stick]

I can see this has brought a few soap boxes out of the closet.

My view and mine alone is that I grow to enjoy the food and not to get what can only be described as forced produce all year round.

We eat what we produce at a given time that we harvest the stuff in the ground.

If you can eat the stuff like strawberries at Christmas and melons around the same time, then I think this is imported and not fresh.

I eat what is available to me and the family not what can be imported from afar.
In the long run the only chemicals used on my land in FBB (fish, blood and bone), then there is the natures provider in the comfrey juices extracted from the plants grown on my land. Anything else is discarded from my shed as it takes up to much space. Predators are what comes into the garden and feasts on those who want to eat my crops.
I am if you like a person who has taken on board the old style of growing veg, but also using modern methods which do not entail the chemicals.
Companion planting has their benefits too.
If I cant grow it then it doesn't have a place in my plot. If the family have tried this and its not to their liking then also its given a miss.

If we all do what is required of us then we would only do what we are told instead of experimenting with what is available. If we can get something special to try then we will.

Keep the garden for what it is meant to. Growing food for the house.

This is very much the philosphy we are trying to adhere. Grow what we like to eat but experiment with different stuff to see how it goes. It's easy to get bogged down with Organics but we keep chemical use to a minimum. I resorted to spraying, unsuccesfully, against Blackfly on my broad beans and have given the spuds a spray of bordeaux mixture. Other than that a bit of tomato food for toms, chillis, cucumbers, courgettes and pumpkins. The thing is I know what I have put on stuff and how fresh it is, that coupled with growing for taste rather than look makes all the difference. An awful lot of my stuff never sees a chemical.

As for commercial stuff - I think i'd like to see a return to seasonal food - strawberries imported in January are a tasteless parady of a british strawberry picked in June.

I

[daxzen]

this study is a confidence trick

it is disingenuous - in my experience - fresh produce, I mean picked today. will always taste better than shop bought -whether it is organic or not.

Organic is a lifestyle choice and if you are wholly organic great!

dax

[Unwashed]

I tend to agree that the study is disingenuous.  It compares organic with conventional and finds no measurable difference, but it compares for nutritional value, and organic has little to say about nutritional value, and in all fairness to Joe Public, that detail gets lost in the headline.

As it happens organic does influence nutritional value a bit because more nutritious varieties can be grown in organic systems, but the meta study corrects for this - as a good scientific study must - because the effect is down to the variety, and not the system.

A confidence trick?  You need to ask why the FSA didn't compare for taste, but I don't think that's a legitimate concern of the FSA.

[Melbourne12]

I dare say companies like Dow and Monsanto have in no way whatsoever tried to influence the FSA, ever.

On the other hand the organic movement is not just about nutritional benefits it is also about the lack of poisonous chemicals, it's about sustainability and about trace elements.

And politics of course.  You forgot politics.  ;D

Anyway, back on topic.  What trace elements are those, then?

Magnesium and also micro nutrients such as lycopene, carotenes, flavanoids, anthrocyanines, resveratrol, manganese...

.....

You haven't read it, have you?  ;D

Magnesium? Included in FSA study, FSA find no difference
Manganese? Included in FSA study, FSA find no difference
Lycopene? Included in FSA study, FSA find no difference
Carotene? Included in FSA study, FSA find no difference
Flavonoids? Included in FSA study, FSA find no difference
Anthocyanin? Included in FSA study under flavonoids, FSA find no difference
Resveratrol? Included in FSA study, FSA find no difference

I must admit that I'd never heard of resveratrol.  When I looked it up, it seemed typical of the sort of wild claims that are made for the benefits of organic produce.

Even if the in vitro experiments on animals transfer to humans, the human ingestion studies suggest that you'd have to ingest about 50g a day to have anti-cancer properties (unless you mix the resveratrol with "chemicals" to inhibit breakdown during digestion, and perish the thought that we'd countenance that!)

So by my calculations, if you stick to red grapes, which have the highest resveratrol content of edible plants, you'd need to eat over 6400kg of grapes a day.

QED as far as I'm concerned.

[amphibian]

I dare say companies like Dow and Monsanto have in no way whatsoever tried to influence the FSA, ever.

On the other hand the organic movement is not just about nutritional benefits it is also about the lack of poisonous chemicals, it's about sustainability and about trace elements.

And politics of course.  You forgot politics.  ;D

Anyway, back on topic.  What trace elements are those, then?

Magnesium and also micro nutrients such as lycopene, carotenes, flavanoids, anthrocyanines, resveratrol, manganese...

.....

You haven't read it, have you?  ;D

Magnesium? Included in FSA study, FSA find no difference
Manganese? Included in FSA study, FSA find no difference
Lycopene? Included in FSA study, FSA find no difference
Carotene? Included in FSA study, FSA find no difference
Flavonoids? Included in FSA study, FSA find no difference
Anthocyanin? Included in FSA study under flavonoids, FSA find no difference
Resveratrol? Included in FSA study, FSA find no difference

I must admit that I'd never heard of resveratrol.  When I looked it up, it seemed typical of the sort of wild claims that are made for the benefits of organic produce.

Even if the in vitro experiments on animals transfer to humans, the human ingestion studies suggest that you'd have to ingest about 50g a day to have anti-cancer properties (unless you mix the resveratrol with "chemicals" to inhibit breakdown during digestion, and perish the thought that we'd countenance that!)

So by my calculations, if you stick to red grapes, which have the highest resveratrol content of edible plants, you'd need to eat over 6400kg of grapes a day.

QED as far as I'm concerned.

I know perfectly well that the FSA found no differences in the micronutrients, but the EU commissioned peer reviewed study did, and so have others. I see no reason to give this FSA study any more weight that the EU study.

[Melbourne12]

....

I know perfectly well that the FSA found no differences in the micronutrients, but the EU commissioned peer reviewed study did, and so have others. I see no reason to give this FSA study any more weight that the EU study.

There may be peer reviewed studies published within the EU Conference Papers, but that doesn't make the whole collection peer reviewed!

I'll let one of my favourite journalists speak for me as to why the FSA study is due more weight than the EU conference papers ....  http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/aug/01/bad-science-organic-food

[Robert_Brenchley]

I think the presence or absence of pesticides is relevant, but air miles should also be factored in. Organic food imported from Australia is probably less good for the planet than chemically-nurtured food from down the road. Then there are factors like the amount of oil used in producing an acre of a crop. We need to look at the full picture, not just parts of it.

[Flighty]

I noticed this in today's Guardian -

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/blog/2009/aug/07/organic-food-standards-agency

[Rhubarb Thrasher]

I think the presence or absence of pesticides is relevant, but air miles should also be factored in. Organic food imported from Australia is probably less good for the planet than chemically-nurtured food from down the road. Then there are factors like the amount of oil used in producing an acre of a crop. We need to look at the full picture, not just parts of it.

the food miles thing is wrong, mostly. Apparently in terms of carbon footprint or however you measure these things, British lamb uses 4 times as much energy to produce as lamb imported from New Zealand. The same principle applies for greenhouse crops produced here as opposed to imported from somewhere hot and sunny.

[pippy]

This article provides a lot of food for thought ....

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/environment/5990854/Organic-is-more-than-small-potatoes.html


and cover a lot of my beliefs about organic.  Personally I think the varieties of food we all grow and the freshness all contribite to a healthier lifestyle for us and the creatures around us.