By artarmon42 | No Comments
Last updated: Sunday, April 22, 2007

There was a recent article published in an Australian newspaper, reporting that there was no evidence that organic foods was any better than conventional produce.

Shoppers who buy more expensive organic food often believe they are getting nutritionally-superior products — but experts warn there is no evidence to support the claim. Research shows most fruit and vegetables on sale in Australia have the same levels of nutrients and no traces of pesticides, regardless of whether they are organic or not.

Jennie Brand-Miller, professor of molecular and microbiological sciences at the University of Sydney, warns many consumers are paying more because of mistaken beliefs. Organic produce is usually significantly more expensive than conventional foods — sometimes double the price.

Which made me wonder:

• Would the same hold true for US foods?
• We’ve heard for a long time about how there’s really no difference between bottled water and water coming straight from the tap. But that hasn’t decreased the popularity of bottled water. I imagine that this counter-thought about organic food will be similarly ignored by the masses.
• Pesticides and other chemicals are used in the food industry for a reason. I wonder what the consequences will be, when humans try to mass-produce foods without that support? Such as antibiotics given to chickens so that more can be kept in confined spaces without mass deaths (will we see protests about sprawling chicken farms?), pesticides to kill rodents who shit on/in our vegetables/fruits (will we see more strange diseases or even simply e.coli from those eating organic produce?), etc.

Organic foods, whether they help, hinder or do nothing… seems like they’re here (permanently) to take a chunk out of our wallets.

CommentSubscribe