Are Organic Foods More Nutritious than Conventional Foods

Document Sample
Are Organic Foods More Nutritious than Conventional Foods Powered By Docstoc
					  Are Organic Foods More
Nutritious than Conventional
            Foods?
          Created by Kasey Mixon
           Georgia Agriculture
        Education Curriculum Office
                July, 2003
                Objectives

   Define “organic foods”
   Introduce the issue
   Look at research
   Answer: Why isn’t there
    sufficient research?
   Conclude
                Organic Food

   USDA:
   emphasize use of renewable resources
   conservation of soil and water
   no conventional pesticides, fertilizers with
    synthetic ingredients or sewage sludge
   no bioengineering
   no ionizing radiation
            Organic Farming

   been around for decades
   during past decade
    *became fastest growing sector in ag.
    *annual increase = 20% or more
            Organic Agriculture
   controversial claims

   one such claim: organic is more
    nutritious than conventional

   is this true? is there proof?
                 Is This True?
   The Soil Association says so:
        *Vitamin C
        *minerals
        *phytonutrients
        *less water
   That sounds good, doesn’t
    it?
               Is There Proof?
   Alex Avery & Dennis Avery (Hudson
    Institute) say:
        *the organic industry is attempting
    to promote their products by degrading
    the foods that “made Americans taller,
    stronger, and longer-lived than any
    people in history” & there just isn’t
    enough evidence to prove their claims.
What Does Research Conclude?

   Virginia Worthington, M.S., Sc.D., C.N.S.,
    examined all of the 41 research studies on
    this issue
   compiled data
   calculated % difference between organic
    and conventional values for 35 vitamins
    and minerals
         Worthington’s Study
 Formula used:
organic value – conventional value
       conventional value            X 100
              Worthington’s Results
   Organic crops were:
       Higher in:
            Vitamin C
            Iron
            Magnesium
            Phosphorus
       Lower in:
            Nitrates
Nutrient Content of Organic Versus Conventional
Crops: Mean % Difference (Worthington, 2001)

      Nutrient            Mean % Difference
      Vitamin C                  +27.0
        Iron                     +21.1
     Magnesium                   +29.3
     Phosphorus                  +13.6
       Nitrates                  -15.1
       Worthington’s Comments
   no extensive research conducted to
    determine what health effects may result
    from the difference in nutrient contents:
        “if people stayed well on an organic
    diet but got violently ill as a result of
    consuming food grown with chemical
    fertilizers, then the difference would be
    perfectly obvious; however, that is not the
    case”
         Worthington’s Comments


   more research needed

   great amount of variability in agricultural
    measurements
       fertilizing methods, sunlight, temperature,
        rainfall, shipping and storage handling
                 More Research
   Consumer Reports – researchers cannot
    give the nutritional edge to either group
       variability in crop or cropping system?
       report included quote from Willie Lockeretz,
        professor at Tufts University School of
        Nutrition and Science Policy: “the growing
        system you use probably does affect nutrition,
        but it does it in a way so complex you might
        be studying the problem forever”
          Organic Farming Research
                 Foundation
   the definitive study has not been
    done
   why? too many variables to
    control
   like what?
       crop variety
       time after harvest
       post-harvest handling
       soil type
       climate
             The Soil Association
   Organic foods have higher levels of:
       Vitamin C, minerals, phytonutrients
   less water
   makes a real difference to people’s and
    animal’s health
   good results for alternative cancer
    therapies
   no proof of research for these claims
      United States Department of
           Agriculture (USDA)
   non committal on the issue
   “USDA makes no claims that organically
    produced food is safer or more nutritious
    than conventionally produced food”
   why? not enough research, most likely
        Other Journal and Magazine
                  Articles
   Tufts University Health & Nutrition Letter
    on this issue:
       “no one knows”
       “We just don’t have enough data” Kate
        Clancey, PhD of the Henry Wallace Institute
        for Alternative Agriculture
               Other Articles

   Andrea Chernus, MD, RN, CDN: “there is
    no scientific proof that someone eating a
    well-balanced organic diet is healthier
    than a person eating a well-balanced
    conventional diet”
              Other Articles

   Sir John Krebs, Chair of the United
    Kingdom’s Foods Standards Agency: “the
    current scientific evidence does not show
    that organic food is any safer or more
    nutritious than conventionally produced
    food”
               Other Articles

   Journal of Agricultural and Environmental
    Ethics: “under the basic standards of
    organic farming, there is no sufficient
    evidence for a system-related effect on
    product quality due to the production
    method” (Lotter, 2003)
                         Other Articles

   Journal of Sustainable Agriculture:
    “many of the health claims for organic
    products remain unresolved” (Ding, Wang,
    Xie, & Yang, 2003)
        Why Such Little Research?
   several parts to this answer
   organic farming just
    recently experiencing
    significant growth
       Sales:
            1990 - $1 billion
            1996 - $3.3 billion
            2000 - $7.8 billion
                       Growth
   Acreage:
       more than doubled between 1992-
        1997
       more than doubled again between
        1997-2001

    The following table shows the
      changes by individual years
    US Certified Organic Farmland in
      1,000 of acres (Green & Kremen, 2002)
                                                        %        %        %
                                                        change   change
                                                                          change


 Item      1992 1993 1994 1995     1997   2000   2001    92-      97-      00-
                                                         97       01       01

Pasture    532   491   435   279   496    810    1040     7       109      28


Cropland   403   465   557   639   850    1219   1305    111      53        7


Total      935   956   991   918   1357   2029   2344    44       74       16
      Why Such Little Research?

   Increased demand = recognition of a need
    for more research
   What do you need in order to conduct
    research?
   FUNDS!
         U.S. Research Funding
   1999 = $1.4 million
   2000 = $3.6 million

   Funding is growing,
    so answers should
    come
      U.S. Research Funding

 4
3.5
 3
2.5
 2                        $ (millions)
1.5
 1
0.5
 0
       1999      2000
      Why Such Little Research?

   Such a complex issue with many different
    parts needing to be researched

   Hard to perform a fair comparison and
    analysis between the two systems
                       SO….
   Organic is most likely
    here to stay
   We need answers to
    the many questions
    about it, so….
   MORE RESEARCH
    NEEDS TO BE
    CONDUCTED!
What Have You Learned –
      Hopefully?
            What an organic food
             product is
            The issue = organic vs.
             conventional, is there a
             nutritional difference?
            What research says & why
             there is so little
Any Questions?

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Categories:
Tags:
Stats:
views:23
posted:7/27/2011
language:English
pages:33