Anti-Organic Statement so Slanted it Can Make You Sicker Than a Bag of DDT

by Vic Shayne, PhD

Every once in a while a new “report” comes out saying organic foods may be no better than non-organic. Really? So it’s better to eat pesticides and chemicals? Is this really a believable position? Personally, I’d rather not consume pesticides and other toxic chemicals from a variety of sources and let them enter my bloodstream and internal organs. This goes against any semblance of logic.

It’s also rather tedious to continually hear reports by dietitians working for medical centers speaking off the tops of their heads without any proof or substantiation. Go to the dietitian’s website and see who their financial backers are and you’ll get an idea why they are so down on organics. It’s beyond obvious. Certainly, not all dietitians subscribe to the political bias shown by the American Dietetic Association. Consider their corporate sponsors by going to their website. When dietitians like the person cited below come up with anti-organics statements, it’s more than suspicious to the logical mind.

Consider this load of nonsense (note that there are no studies cited):

“Organic foods are grown without the use of chemical fertilizer or pesticides and have not been processed using irradiation or added hormones,” says Ashley Mullins, R.D., L.D., CNSC, a registered dietitian at Baylor All Saints Medical Center. “As with any product, it’s important to check the label to determine exactly what you’re getting.” Products labeled “100 percent organic” must contain only organic ingredients with the exception of water and salt, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Products labeled “organic” must contain at least 95 percent organic ingredients. Products that are made with at least 70 percent organic ingredients are allowed to be labeled “made with organic ingredients.”

The Bottom Line While organic food can cost up to two or three times that of regular foods, it may not be any better for you, Mullins says.
“From a nutrition standpoint, there isn’t enough research to show that organic foods are more nutritious than regular foods. The levels of pesticides currently used haven’t been found to be harmful,” she says. “Of course, there may be other benefits to buying organic, such as it being more environmentally friendly and, in some cases, fresher.”

It really comes down to personal preference and budget, adds Mullins. [No, it comes down to whether you want toxins poisoning your body and your children's bodies and the planet]. Whatever you do, don’t let your choice inhibit your ability to get the nutrients you need. “The most important thing to consider is the health benefit of consuming five servings of fruits and vegetables every day—whether or not they’re organic,” says Mullins. “That’s the biggest payoff.” (Is Organic Overrated? ScienceDaily, May 23, 2009)

AND NOW FOR THE FACTS:

After £12M and four years of study, it has been announced that organic fruit, vegetables and milk are more nutritious than non-organically produced. They may also contain higher concentrations of antioxidants which ward off cancer and heart disease.Apparently, “the health benefits were so striking that moving to organic food was the equivalent of eating an extra portion of fruit and vegetables every day.”

Researchers on the European Union study grew both organic and regular fruit and vegetables side by side on a site in Northumberland and compared factors such as nutritional quality. Produce compared included cabbages, lettuces, carrots, potatoes and wheat. The early results of the study carried out by Newcastle University show that organic fruit and vegetables have up to 40 per cent more antioxidants than non-organically grown produce. Also found in greater quantities in organic produce were vitamin C, and trace elements such as iron, copper and zinc. Even greater contrasts were found for milk, with organic milk containing between 50% and 80% more antioxidants and healthy fatty acids. The Food Standards Agency has so far refused to acknowledge any benefits of eating organic, but have now said that they will review the evidence.

The Real Bottom line: If you are logical and intelligent then it doesn’t take much to come to the conclusion that manmade poisons do not belong in your body, and that food should not be irradiated or altered in any other way from its natural state.  Further, not all organic food costs two to three times more than nonorganic food. This nation has serious health problems that parallel the introduction of chemical farming. Cancer and other diseases have risen. The cumulative load of eating a diet full of chemicals toxic enough to kill bugs will certainly adversely affect your body. The last point to consider certainly shows that the above-cited dietitian is out of touch with reality. Why? Because she somehow fails to realize that if something is poisonous to the environment than it is also poisonous to us humans who are dependent on the environment. How can non organic be bad for the environment but good for you to eat?