August 10, 2009 – “It is important for the consumer to know: there is no solid evidence on which one could base his choice of organic food on the basis of an increased nutritional value compared to the food produced in a conventional manner ”.
This is supported by nutritionist Alan Dangour, principal investigator of the study.1 UK published in the August issue ofAmerican Journal of Clinical Nutrition, and which aroused the indignation of several followers and defenders of organic food.
Joined by HealthPassport.netMr. Dangour immediately admits that there are reasons other than nutritional value for a consumer to choose to eat organic: to protect the environment, to guard against toxic residues, etc.
“Because this was not the subject of the research,” explains the researcher, “we did not take into account the possible presence of pesticides, residues of chemical fertilizers or other substances potentially toxic to humans or to the environment. “
Rather, commissioned by the Food Standards Agency (FSA), the study aimed to analyze data published to date on the comparative nutritional value of foods from organic farming and those produced conventionally.
The authors conclude that, although the results of several comparative studies indicate that foods from the organic sector are richer than their conventional equivalents in certain basic nutrients, this difference is not necessarily significant, and that at the end of the day. account, “there is no noticeable difference between the nutritional value of each other”.
Why eat organic then?
For Marion Nestle, renowned professor of nutrition and public health at New York University, “the question goes far beyond measuring the amount of a particular nutrient in a food … A method of food production that eliminates pesticides, chemical fertilizers, synthetic hormones and antibiotics contribute to the protection of public health? Personally, I am convinced of it, ”she says.
According to the president of the Organic Filière du Québec, France Gravel, “from a strictly nutritional or caloric point of view, we never claimed that organic was better, she said, but that’s it. ‘environmental aspect that we put forward with organic farming’.
Doctors like the Dr David Servan-Schreiber recommends organic products for people with cancer. Groups of nutritionists like the American Dietetic Association have taken a stand in favor of organic food.
Nutritional value: the debate is not closed
Quebec nutritionist Anne-Marie Roy says that, while it is true that protecting the environment and avoiding the various toxic residues that can be found in our food are good reasons to opt for organic, However, the nutritional superiority of organic foods is not excluded.
“The data from the UK review does not support the conclusion that organic farming does not confer any benefit to food in this regard,” she said. She notes that of some 52,471 studies identified by the researchers, only 55 were ultimately considered and that, overall, the selected studies indicated a clear trend in favor of increased nutritional value for at least 5 basic nutrients.
The only superiority they have found for conventional products is a higher nitrogen content, which is not considered good news by the World Health Organization (WHO) which attributes problems of public health at high nitrogen levels in food. She also points out that other researchers have analyzed the same studies and come to quite different conclusions.
It should be noted in particular that American researchers who carried out a similar study2 last year reported about 25% superiority of organically grown products for 11 basic nutrients.
According to Charles Benbrook, scientific director of The Organic Center and principal investigator of this team, the difference in the conclusions of the two studies is that the British researchers took into account studies carried out before 1980, a time when nutritional knowledge left to desire and where analytical techniques were less sophisticated.
He also specifies that the British researchers have not taken into account about fifteen recent studies which give positive results in favor of organic farming products. This is particularly the case of the Quality Low Input Food, a vast study funded by the European Union and completed in April 20093.
“In recent years,” Anne-Marie Roy confides, “we have better understood the role played by certain micronutrients, such as antioxidant safeners. However, studies indicate that products from organic agriculture are systematically richer in active antioxidants than those from conventional agriculture. There is already sufficient data indicating that foods from the organic sector are probably superior to those from industrial agriculture from a strictly nutritional point of view. Personally, I will not wait for reinforced concrete evidence to make my choice. “
Pierre LeFrançois – PasseportSanté.net
According to The duty, Pc, BBC, Radio Canada and The Globe and Mail
1. Dancourt AD, Dodds SKI, Hayek A, et al. Nutritional quality of organic foods: a systematic review. Amr J Clin tr. 2009 July 29.
2. Ben Brook C, Zhao X, Yañez J, Davies N, Andrews P. New Evidence Confirms the Nutritional Superiority of Plant-Based Organic Foods. State of Science Review (The Organic Center), March 2008, United States. www.organic-center.org
3. A series of studies carried out by some 31 research centers around the world since 2004. www.qlif.org