
Organic Food Isn't More Nutritious, but That Isn't the Point - awwstn2
http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2012/09/organic-food-isnt-more-nutritious-but-that-isnt-the-point/261929/
======
jonny_eh
A great example of moving the goal post.

Go down the list, as each on is stricken off the supporters will say "it was
never about X, it was always about Y".

I'm constantly hearing about how organic food is: Healthier, tastier, or
better for the environment. The scientific literature just doesn't hold up
with any of those claims. [1]

On top of that, if there was some aspect of organic food that actually did
make it better for the environment, then let's just use that with normal
farming. Why create an arbitrary new category of food based on a fallacy? [2]

[1] [http://theness.com/neurologicablog/index.php/organic-food-
pe...](http://theness.com/neurologicablog/index.php/organic-food-pesticides-
and-cancer/)

[2] <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_nature>

~~~
slantyyz
>> Why create an arbitrary new category of food based on a fallacy?

I thought organic food was bringing back an old category of food that just
happened to have a new name. Just like how people like to add the word
"artisanal" to foods. It's a newish word (marketing wise) to describe doing
things the old way.

~~~
r00fus
> I thought organic food was bringing back an old category of food that just
> happened to have a new name.

It's an quality standards certification [1]. Part of it is "doing things the
old fashioned way" but that's mainly a reaction to the negatives of big-
agribusiness over-use of irradiation and pesticides... as new way of meeting
organic requirements are found, as long as the quality standard is met, it's
still organic.

That's not to say the term "organic" hasn't been co-opted, much like "green",
or "hybrid" [2]

[1] <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organic_certification> [2]
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenwashing>

~~~
derleth
> over-use of irradiation

Just curious, what are the downsides of over-use of irradiation? Be as
specific as you can, please.

------
fusiongyro
What drives me nuts about the organic movement is the implicit acceptance of
the defeatist notion that if you don't like a few things about wherever
science and progress have gotten us, you should just throw it all out the
window and go retro and primitive rather than progress farther and try to fix
it. High scalability and high yield are necessary to feed billions. We have a
surplus of food in this country precisely because of major agrobusiness,
because maximizing profits means maximizing efficiency and yield.

The solution to "this food doesn't taste as good" is to make it taste better;
the solution to "this food wasn't raised ethically" is to find a way to raise
it more ethically. Throwing in the towel and lovingly nurturing your tomatoes
one-by-one is emotionally satisfying but meaningless and unhelpful without
proof, an abject waste of time and resources in the face of proof to the
contrary.

~~~
ScottBurson
I think you're mistaken to think there's not a lot of science in organic
farming. Maintaining biodiversity, keeping soils healthy, figuring out what
grows best in the various soil types, finding bugs that eat the plants and
other bugs you don't want while not harming the ones you do want, ... I think
there's probably quite a lot of science in it. (I'm not an expert on it, but
this accords with things I've read.) It's just that most of that science
doesn't involve the petrochemical industry. If that makes it "retro and
primitive", well, I don't know what to tell you except that I think you have a
screwy idea of what progress is.

~~~
derleth
> I think you're mistaken to think there's not a lot of science in organic
> farming.

The problem with organic farming is that it's associated with so much _crap
science_ , like radiation-phobia and chemophobia and various other quackery
that masquerades as science while really being unsupported by either evidence
or logic.

I'd love to be able to buy a greater variety of food without having to support
people who think GMO are The Devil based on irrational fears.

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemophobia>

------
bunderbunder
_while switching to organic foods can be good for you insofar as doing so
helps you avoid nasty things_

Not true at all. The list of chemicals and additives that the USDA has
approved for use in organic food is enormous.

And there's no reason to believe that the ones that are approved are safer,
either. Because the primary criterion for determining whether an agrichemical
is suitable for use in organic agriculture is how "natural" it is considered
to be. And "natural" is not a good proxy for "safe", on account of the two
being orthogonal characteristics.

It's not a good proxy for "green", either. Your local watershed doesn't really
care that the excess phosphorus that's being dumped into it comes from
certified organic bone meal.

~~~
evanlong
From the Atlantic article:

 _There are the more immediate health benefits of buying organic: you'll avoid
the chemicals, preservatives, and hormones that conventional farms often use
to treat their foods. In the Stanford study, just 7 percent of organic foods
were found to have traces of pesticides, compared to 38 percent of
conventionally-farmed produce. Again, that doesn't mean organic foods will
supercharge your health -- you'll just be at less risk of exposure to
potentially harmful substances, for whatever that's worth to you. Quantifying
that benefit is a contentious area and certainly worthy of more research._

Listen to what Bruce Ames (professor emeritus of biochemistry at UC Berkeley
and senior scientist at Children's Hospital of Oakland Research Institute) had
to say on this mornings Forum: <http://www.kqed.org/a/forum/R201209051000>

Basically, don't worry about those traces of pesticides. He explains it better
than me. Listen.

------
KingMob
This article is making an awfully large assumption, that the "organic" in the
supermarket is anything close to "organic" as originally envisioned. It's not.

Major agrobusiness concerns have latched onto "organic" as a way to charge
premium prices, and hence, do the absolute bare minimum whlie fighting to
water down the standard.

It's honestly so bad, I'm surprised "organic" food demonstrated any advantages
at all in the study.

Polyn covers a lot of this in Omnivore's Dilemma, in the industrial organic
section.

~~~
stinkytaco
Not to be a pedant, but if people are searching for the book it's Michael
Pollan.

<http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/62290639>

------
varelse
In my experience, locally grown farmers market produce is significantly
tastier than store-bought produce from Canada and Mexico (and in the bay area,
it's frequently cheaper too). That doesn't seem like it ought to be a surprise
given the former was likely picked a day or two before I bought it and the
latter up to several weeks beforehand. The local farmers here tend to grow
organic because that's what their market demands.

Similarly, I spent some time in Vietnam recently eating the local poultry and
the stark difference in taste and texture between it and American agro-chicken
is astounding.

And finally, what good reason exists to O.D. poultry and livestock on the same
antibiotics we depend on to avert bacterial pandemics just to increase yield?

~~~
rayiner
I lived in Bangladesh until I was 5. I grew up eating chickens that were
"local" in the sense that they were purchased live at the market down the
street. The taste and texture is completely different. When we moved to the
US, I couldn't even eat chicken for six months because it tasted so weird.

~~~
WiseWeasel
My theory is that it's the diet and lifestyle of the chicken that most
influences its taste and texture, hence why smaller-scale free-range chicken
is more tasty and tougher than industrial chicken raised on grain and confined
to a tiny cage their whole lives.

~~~
varelse
They've also been bred for yield rather than flavor for generations:

[http://usda01.library.cornell.edu/usda/nass/industry-
structu...](http://usda01.library.cornell.edu/usda/nass/industry-
structure/specpo02.pdf)

~~~
lightweb
I am growing out 50 chickens this year for meat and eggs. I got a few of the
super-hybrid Cornish Cross birds in addition to Barred Rocks, Rhode Island
Reds, and others breeds. I am growing them on locally produced organic chicken
feed and pasture grasses and weeds (free roaming on acres of land).

I have harvested a few birds so far and they taste so amazingly deep and rich
that it was almost too much on the first bird. It's all about what the animal
eats, IMO. I've had farm raised chickens from all over before we settled here
and I've never had them taste this good.

The fat layer is a deep golden/mustard/yellow color and there is LOTS of it.
None of my Cornish Crosses exhibited any leg issues or anything and one
Rooster has lived to be about 4 months old. He's in the fridge on a salt cure
waiting to be roasted this weekend!

FWIW. :-)

------
pella
Organic and conventionally grown broccoli ( 2012 Aug 30 )

<http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22936597>

 _"... In addition, organic broccoli maintained higher concentrations of
bioactive compounds (ascorbic acid and phenolics) and antioxidant potential
during storage than conventional broccoli, with higher potential health
beneficial effects."_

------
001sky
Did people not read this thing? Folks, there is no new data in this. This is a
study of studies. If anyone researched this issue 10 years ago, for example,
you would be aware of this.

The nutrutious bit is link-bait. Organic is not changing the chemistry of the
nutrient composition in food (like for like basis). That said, Organics are
not equivalent per-se either. Organic methods are typically (historically)
focuses on heterodox varietals and small batch production. Milk is not
equivalent (due to fat solubility) lack of hormones, etc. Organic meat is more
rare and again husbandry issues are not similar or comparable. There is less
pesticide residue obviously (and it matters - nb-pesticides are waterproof).
And the food is typically fresher, more local, etc. This is all non-
controversial.

The bit that has changed is that Organic has been commoditized and mass-
produced (horizon, etc). And also bought out by BigCos. That makes organic
less distinct. Frankly, less interesting/differentiated in many places. And
the prices of commodities are inflating, putting pressure on sales. And thats
on the conventionals, in particular. The reasons for that are beyond scope
(tl;dr=politics).

In any event, that is just some context.

------
stephengillie
This article actually reminded me of a couple reasons I want to buy organic
food - not contributing to superbugs, and concern for field workers.

------
tokenadult
So here is a serious question for everybody (on all the "sides" that this
issue has). What is the best evidence, gathered by statistically or
economically valid procedures, on all of the relevant differences between
"organic" food and any other kind of food? What are the claims on one aspect
of the issue or another, and who has been researching the claims? Who is an
especially thoughtful researcher who considers the meaningful contexts for a
variety of human beings in a variety of relationships to the production and
consumption of food?

(Personal background for my question: I have lived in two different countries,
eating two radically different cuisines. I have many close relatives who are
farmers in various places. I eat every day, as most of us do. I'm curious
about what information on this issue is verifiable by more than personal
anecdote. I have previously posted to HN that conducting human nutrition
studies is HARD.)

------
lightweb
In a quest to heal my wife's life-long bouts with Fibromyalgia and other
chronic pain disorders, we have had to try a number of things over the years.
Food has been our biggest change to date.

We had to switch to buying organic foods because anything artificial sets her
body off. Anything with pesticides does it too. This rules out pretty much all
conventional produce entirely.

We also had to stop shopping from the center of the food store too. We cut out
all the processed stuff and started cooking whole meals. We are extremely
picky about what type of meat and dairy products we purchase because of GMO-
containing animal feeds (not to mention anti-biotics, other things which are
like anti-biotics but not called that; really insidious stuff, growth
hormones, bad water, pathogens from neighboring operations, etc).

We started buying only pasture-raised animals and this year I'm learning to
hunt since we moved to a place conducive to that activity. We're also getting
dairy goats to help offset our $3500+ per year un-pasteurized
dairy/cheese/butter costs. I mentioned in another comment that I'm raising 50
chickens for meat and eggs and have already learned to butcher them. They
taste AMAZING!

We follow the GAPS Diet and Sally Fallon's Nourishing Traditions cookbook, and
also the Weston A Price foundation. We take lots of High-Vitamin Butter Oil
and Fermented Cod Liver Oil. We infuse a variety of herbs. We take
pharmaceutical grade Pro-biotics when necessary.

There is a shit-ton more to food than just saying "Eat Organic" or not. We
have to understand nutrition from an old-world view as well as a new-world
understanding and blend the two together. The very soil that the food is grown
in and the animals are raised on contains so much life that has a lot to do
with how nutritious the food ends up being.

I could go on and on but I'll stop. I will say it's been a huge odyssey for
us, on the quest to stop chronic illness. It is definitely working and worth
it, however.

Oh, I treat my ADHD this way too.

~~~
voodoomagicman
It is extremely unlikely that GMO animal feeds have any measurable effect on
the meat you end up eating.. i have no doubt that your diet is healthy, but it
seems like you are irrationally excluding more sustainable foods in favor of
less sustainable ones. Would you be willing to do a blind test on GMO fed vs
non GMO beef?

~~~
varelse
This is a lot like my occasional bouts with MSG sensitivity (cue MSG pedants
in 3 2 1...). I thoroughly believe the science that shows a lack of
correlation between pure MSG and the reported symptoms of said MSG
sensitivity, but so what?

Every time I get the characteristic syndrome: a splitting migraine with auras
and a general sense of fatigue it has been after eating heavily MSG-laden
food. What makes this frustrating is that it doesn't _always_ happen. But
again, so what? The easiest way to avoid this unpleasant state of being is to
avoid heavily MSG-laden food and by that I mean MSG's use as a food additive
and not the amounts naturally present in just about everything (so calm down
MSG pedants). It is one of the 20 basic amino acids after all.

I have my own theory here but no inclination to investigate because the above
rule has almost no perceptible effect on my life, and life is too short to go
on some sort of crusade to prove the existence of something I already know
exists because I have experienced it repeatedly.

I suspect there is some additive (i.e. an anti-caking agent or preservative)
put into some commercial MSGs that is the real culprit and not the MSG itself.
I further suspect the sensitivity itself is variable depending on metabolic
state.

And this relates to the person you're replying to: WTH would they want to do
your blind test on GMO versus non GMO if eating non GMO is working for them
and they can afford it? I'd hope that given recent events involving
contamination of pet and human food from China that you'd be open to the
presence of inappropriate substances in the food chain:
[http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/08/world/asia/08food.html?pag...](http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/08/world/asia/08food.html?pagewanted=all)

Is it really such a stretch to be open to the notion that there's something
real but difficult to quantify going on here?

------
billboebel
Vegetables and fruit are only as good as the soil. Big commercial organic
farms aren't able to have the quality of soil as smaller organic farms... so
if big ag is just cranking out organic vegetables at the same rate as
conventional vegetables then the quality of soil will be the same, and
therefore the nutrient qualities will be similar.

SO if you want more nutrients find a local farmer to support - typically the
smaller scale farm uses compost in their soil mix and crop rotates. Many
smaller local farmers aren't certified organic but are "organic", often times
go beyond what it means to be organic. Ask the farmer and if doesn't seem
better than big ag, keep looking.

------
laserDinosaur
I think one of the problems is there is a huge misconception that 'organic'
food does not use pesticides, letting people think they are avoiding nasty
chemicals by eating organic. It's a shock to these people to find out that
organic farms still use pesticides, they are just _natural pesticides_.
Organic or not, you don't keep bugs away by asking them nicely. The main
problem being it's very hard to enforce these natural pesticides people are
coming up with because there are so many, and the long term studies have not
been done yet. The SGU podcast mentioned a while back how there was a farm
which was using some type of flower based pesticide in massive quantities on
their farm, but over a period of a year the flowers began to rot and created a
substance they was very poisonous, causing a lot of people to get sick. I
actually stay away from organic food, I don't trust whatever they have come up
with the keep bugs away.

------
pella
<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4472008>

