Are organics more nutritious, or aren't they? Last month the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition published a report from the UK that organics are NOT more nutritious than conventional foods. Parke Wilde of the blog U.S. Food Policy responded to this report by citing one study that found organics are more nutritious in 61% of cases analyzed. Parke calls this "notable but not overwhelming" and concludes that organic food "probably has modest nutrient advantages over conventional food." He goes on to say:
It seems to me the new UK literature review was not sufficiently powered to detect the small advantages of organic that one might realistically expect. For example, unless there is an error (in tabulation or in my reading), it shows a 10% advantage of organic over conventional in zinc, but the result was not statistically significant (for example, because the sample size was not large enough). The authors say this shows organic is no better than conventional. But, nobody ever expected a greater than 10% advantage for organic anyway. Really, the new results are essentially consistent with the older research. I think the authors err in summarizing their results as refuting the earlier claim that organic food offers slightly more nutrients, and the Reuters report is mistaken in its news summary of this research.
Today, the blog continues by discussing the complicated relationship between the ADA and organics, this time with a post by Registered Dietitian Ashley Colpaart. She notes a new "Hot Topic" posted by the ADA, saying:
The 'Hot Topic' was co-authored by Christine McCullum-Gomez, PhD, RD and Anne-Marie Scott of the Hunger and Environmental Nutrition (HEN) Dietetic Practice Group (DPG) of ADA. In their review they challenge the AJCN study for "not examining differences in contaminants (such as pesticide, herbicide or fungicide residues) or the possible environmental consequences of organic versus conventional production practices." Further, the authors claim there are benefits to organic beyond human nutrition.
When considering benefits and costs of organic versus conventional agricultural production, it is important to consider benefits and costs to consumers, farmers, communities and the environment. For example, current research in numerous areas is showing both short-and long-term benefits to our population and the planet with organic and other sustainable production systems. Documented environmental benefits of organic production systems include reduced nutrient pollution, improved soil organic matter, lower energy use, reduced pesticide residues in food and water and enhanced biodiversity.
That's all good. But... (yes, there's a but)... the ADA has a disclaimer on the Hot Topic saying that it "is a reflection of the expertise and opinion of HEN DPG members" i.e. this is not a position endorsed by the entire ADA. Ashley says this is the only Hot Topic with such a disclaimer. What gives? Is the ADA trying to have its organic cake and eat it too? |
