Friday, 31 July 2009

Organic Food is not healthier????

Overheard from the radio just now that according to one study released, it was found that the organic food does not pose any health benefits compare to conventional food. As usual, I checked it out in Google and found the following:

Organic food not healthier, UK study finds
A major study for the United Kingdom’s Food Standards Agency, which analysed 50 years of research, found organic food had no more nutrients or health benefits than conventional food.

Organic food producers dismiss flawed British study
Some of New Zealand's finest food producers have lashed out at a British study claiming organic food is no better for you than conventionally-produced food. The British study didn't take pesticides or fertilisers into account - its conclusion was drawn simply from nutritional content.

Oh heck... of course, if you take the pesticides/fertilisers into account, I'd definitely say organic food is better! But then, if you don't have to use chemical at all, why does it costs so much more compared to the conventional foods?

1 comment:

Mark said...

Haha, that's just what I was thinking. It's not a question of the nutritional content, it's whether there's all the pesticides and chemicals inside.

It's probably more expensive because it's harder to produce. i.e. no pesticides = pests, and no "make you grow really big really fast" chemicals = no grow really big really fast :)



Related Posts with Thumbnails

I'm a full-time mummy Copyright 2009 All Rights Reserved Baby Blog Designed by Ipiet | All Image Presented by Tadpole's Notez | Distributed by Deluxe Templates