Organically Nutritional

The news got it wrong again. The report suggests natural isn't better so you were stupid if you thought so. The Americans asked the Britishs to reviews all the studies and write a report. This has been done before by COMOS magazine in 2007 which reached the same conclusion but in a more revealing way. People eat organic food for reasons not in the report which says (though News Reporters don't report this): "This study does not mean that people should not eat organic food. What it shows is that there is little, if any, nutritional difference between organic and conventionally produced food and that there is no evidence of additional health benefits from eating organic food." The Food Standards Agency is an independent Government department set up by an Act of Parliament in 2000 to protect the public's health and consumer interests in relation to food.

"The aim of this report (PDF) is to systematically review and compare the composition of organically and conventionally produced foodstuffs, focusing only on nutrients and other nutritionally relevant substances (nutrients and other substances). This review specifically does not address contaminant content (such as herbicide, pesticide and fungicide residues) of organically and conventionally produced foodstuffs or the environmental impacts of organic and conventional agricultural practices."

The title organic should mean nothing IF the food is packaged. Like the word natural on a box of anything it doesn't make the product better for you. The report begins with stats from Bristol Soil Association Organic Market Report of 2007 about how much profit is being made by these organic businesses.

We choose organic if we don't want to get sick. When we're ill and or are recovering from some illness I want the freshest chemically free food stuff we can get. Are we willing to pay extra for less - sometimes yes. Most of the time no we aren't. Organic always means more expensive. It also means locally available (largely) with less resources used to produce and transport. Generally it means that in the long run less resources were wasted. That we will pay alittle more for to have less in the future.

The COSMOS writer wrote: "I love my local organic food store. From the moment I enter, I enjoy the aromas that greet me and the folksy look of the place... Popular or not, it's clear that organic food is not necessarily healthier, nor more sustainable or better for the environment. With the Earth's climate changing fast, and the human population heading for nine or 10 billion, we need solutions based on scientific evidence rather than faith and good intentions..." Their conclusions were that organic farming can't feed us all. Again they miss the point of organic foods. They aren't to feed us all. They are to feed each of us. We garden locally and we feed ourselves. What we have in excess we share. We use all we have. Eat all we have and waste nothing.

Your friends will point to the study to prove how stupid you are because you "drank the Kool-Aid." Just smile and let them point. They just don't get it. They're not sensitive enough to understand. Sensitive people need organic and natural products and foods not just to survive but to thrive. This report contradicts a four year study that spent 12 million pounds examining anti-oxidants that fight cancer, minerals and iron while finding significant benefits from organic foods. Here's their response to this recent report.

It's cheaper and better to grill your own hamburger but your kids will always want to go to McDonald's because they believe its better. Like your pointing friends they're wrong. Making your own is always better in the short and long run.