Comments on: Does Organic Food = Better Personal Health? http://www.medminded.com/2009/04/does-organic-food-better-personal-health.html Musings on Health, Medicine, and the Art Mon, 06 Sep 2010 00:28:11 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7.1 hourly 1 By: Aaron B. Hicks http://www.medminded.com/2009/04/does-organic-food-better-personal-health.html/comment-page-1#comment-42 Aaron B. Hicks Mon, 04 May 2009 04:41:42 +0000 http://www.medminded.com/2009/04/does-organic-food-better-personal-health.html#comment-42 The sample sizes were too small on a country by country basis to make any statistically significant inferences on a country-by-country basis. However, imported products did have a slightly higher violation rate than their domestically produced counterparts. As for bacterial contamination, there could be some variance in susceptibility by produce type, but bacterial problems tend to come from secondary contamination (rat and bird feces, for example). I would almost contest that organic foods are more susceptible to bacterial infections, since they can't use anti-bacterial treatments, but I don't have any data to back that statement up. The advantage in organic foods lies in the comfort that consuming pesticide free produce brings to the buyer. Whether or not trace levels of pesticides have long term effects on health remains to be determined, but, if you have the extra money, going organic can't be worse than staying non-organic (save for salmonella outbreaks). The sample sizes were too small on a country by country basis to make any statistically significant inferences on a country-by-country basis. However, imported products did have a slightly higher violation rate than their domestically produced counterparts.

As for bacterial contamination, there could be some variance in susceptibility by produce type, but bacterial problems tend to come from secondary contamination (rat and bird feces, for example). I would almost contest that organic foods are more susceptible to bacterial infections, since they can’t use anti-bacterial treatments, but I don’t have any data to back that statement up.

The advantage in organic foods lies in the comfort that consuming pesticide free produce brings to the buyer. Whether or not trace levels of pesticides have long term effects on health remains to be determined, but, if you have the extra money, going organic can’t be worse than staying non-organic (save for salmonella outbreaks).

]]> By: Benjamin Cade http://www.medminded.com/2009/04/does-organic-food-better-personal-health.html/comment-page-1#comment-41 Benjamin Cade Mon, 04 May 2009 04:41:24 +0000 http://www.medminded.com/2009/04/does-organic-food-better-personal-health.html#comment-41 By the end of your article I am left feeling as if you think organic fruits and vegetables are nothing more than expensive versions of their non-organic brethren. (A smart marketing ploy perhaps?) Do you believe this is the case for ALL organic produce or are some products more susceptible to bacteria infestation than others? For example, you cite the outbreak of salmonella at a peanut processing plant that was organically certified, but is it possible that the conditions of the peanut industry at large (whether certified or not) is more likely to be contaminated? You provide one incident of contamination and then reflect that onto organic produce in general. What about many non- processed field crops that go straight from the field to the market? Would these be safer options than their non-organic alternatives and thus worthy of paying extra for? In this regard, it seems just as important to know where the products are coming from than whether or not they are organic. (This was the case in the pesticide study, which pointed out that some countries had a larger violation rate than others.) Overall, the data examining levels of pesticides in non-organic produce exceedingly shows that the chances of dangerous levels are slim. (Especially when taking into account washing and preparation.) By the end of your article I am left feeling as if you think organic fruits and vegetables are nothing more than expensive versions of their non-organic brethren. (A smart marketing ploy perhaps?) Do you believe this is the case for ALL organic produce or are some products more susceptible to bacteria infestation than others?

For example, you cite the outbreak of salmonella at a peanut processing plant that was organically certified, but is it possible that the conditions of the peanut industry at large (whether certified or not) is more likely to be contaminated? You provide one incident of contamination and then reflect that onto organic produce in general.

What about many non- processed field crops that go straight from the field to the market? Would these be safer options than their non-organic alternatives and thus worthy of paying extra for? In this regard, it seems just as important to know where the products are coming from than whether or not they are organic. (This was the case in the pesticide study, which pointed out that some countries had a larger violation rate than others.)

Overall, the data examining levels of pesticides in non-organic produce exceedingly shows that the chances of dangerous levels are slim. (Especially when taking into account washing and preparation.)

]]>