Organic Foods, Healthier?
UK Study Finds Organic Foods No Healthier Than Conventional Foods
An independent review commissioned by the United Kingdom's Food Standards Agency (FSA) shows that there are no important differences in the nutrition content, or any additional health benefits, of organic food when compared with conventionally produced food.
The study was carried out by the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine (LSHTM). The team of researchers reviewed all papers published over the past 50 years that related to the nutrient content and health differences between organic and conventional food. This systematic review is the most comprehensive study in this area that has been carried out to date. The research was split into two seperate parts, one of which looked at differences in nutrient levels and their significance, while the other looked at the health benefits of eating organic food. A paper reporting the results of the review of nutritional differences has been peer-reviewed and published by the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition.
Dr. Dangour, the principal author of the paper, said, "A small number of differences in nutrient content were found to exist between organically and conventionally produced crops and livestock, but these are unlikely to be any public health relevance. Our review indicates that there is currently no evidence to support the selection of organically over conventionally produced foods on the basis of nutritional superiority."
The Food Standards Agency is an independent U.K Goverment department set up by an Act of Parliament in 2000 to protect the public's health and consumer interests in relation to food. The FSA commissioned this research as part of its commitment to giving consumers accurate information about their food, based on the most up-to-date science.