to be or not to be Organic?

I'm all for organic foods.

I'm sure many chemicals/pesticides/etc.. used in farming have various effects on the body after a hearty build up over a lifetime of minute dosages when we eat. I also believe scientisits may find a causal link in the future to all sorts of ailments. I do sometimes find that organic food does taste better but alot of the time its the same. (Unless Marks & Spencers but I suppose thats a quality issue, their organic stuff is heavenly).

HOWEVER

Your friend may be right; I can't help but be sceptical as being 'organic' is the new marketing and money making thing in this enviromentalist period of time. I read this on the Food Standards Agency (UK Government body) website a while ago:

Quote:

Consumers may choose to buy organic fruit, vegetables and meat because they believe them to be more nutritious than other food. However, the balance of current scientific evidence does not support this view.

Nutrient levels in food vary depending on many different factors. These include freshness, storage conditions, crop variety, soil conditions, weather conditions and how animals are fed. All crops and animals therefore vary in nutrient level to some extent. The available evidence shows that the nutrient levels and the degree of variation are similar in food produced by both organic and conventional agriculture. All processed food, including organic, has a nutrient content that is dependent on the nutrient content of ingoing ingredients, recipe and cooking methods. The impact of processing on nutrient levels will be the same for products made from organically and conventionally produced ingredients.

You see there are many more factors which determine the nutrition of food other than the simple farming process. So e.g poor diet of animals with non organic feed; or a longer cooking of ingredients (e.g. ready meals) or a period of longer storage in a warehouse freezer, Organic food could have less nutrients than regular produced foods which has been put on the shelf quicker for example. BUT YOU ARE NEVER TOLD THIS!

I'm also sceptical about whether the food really is organic because many farmers and companies use certain loopholes and 'interpretations' for their own needs in the regulations for marketing and crop growing. Its hard to see how DEFRA can police these farms with any real rigor to stop these theiving supermarkets. Its funny when something is labelled 'Healthy & Organic' yet when you pick up the regular version it has less salt or fat per 100g than the organic version which shows its just those bastard supermarkets again. The consumer always gets exploited.

Jam it back in, in the dark.

Originally Posted by Will

The "organic" label needs to be taken with a grain of salt. Sorry, organic oreos are not healthy. =p

Some organic foods or ingedients used in various products are part of proprietry supermarket brands labelled 'Healthy living' which you have to pay extra for. You see what they did there?

I was in the supermarket maybe a week ago and my sister showed me the packages of 2 items where the organic or health encompassed version which may have used organic ingredients had either more salt or fat per 100g.

I suppose you could say its not dissing the ingredients but the way supermarkets fiddle about with them. Like I said it may be free range but if it takes longer to get the shelf than the regular type it may have lost its better taste or nutrients by then which is damn shame. Meat generally is alot less stringy when free range for sure I must say; but I haven't noticed a difference with eggs like you have.

There's nowhere I can't reach.

I'd like to shop at more expensive places where you know the stuff is organic and the simple feel and look shows you the freshness but concurring with other posters its either too far away, too expensive, or I cannot taste the difference.

so meh..

Most amazing jew boots