Organic food no healthier than normal produce?
A large independent review commissioned by the Food Standards Agency has concluded that Organic food is no healthier than ordinary food. Researchers concluded that there was little difference in nutritional value and no evidence of any extra health benefits from eating organic produce, which lead the Soil Association to criticise the study and call for "better research".
The report, published in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, found no differences in most nutrients in organically or conventionally grown crops, including in vitamin C, calcium, and iron.
Gill Fine, FSA director of consumer choice and dietary health, said: "Ensuring people have accurate information is absolutely essential in allowing us all to make informed choices about the food we eat.
"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."
Peter Melchett, policy director at the Soil Association responded by saying they were disappointed with the conclusions.
"The review rejected almost all of the existing studies of comparisons between organic and non-organic nutritional differences, and, although the researchers say that the differences between organic and non-organic food are not 'important', they report in their analysis that there are higher levels of beneficial nutrients in organic compared to non-organic foods."