[quote=“samspade, post:1, topic:36056”]
NEW YORK (Reuters Health) - Organic produce and meat typically isn’t any better for you than conventional varieties when it comes to vitamin and nutrient content, according to a new review of the evidence.
But organic options may live up to their billing of lowering exposure to pesticide residue and antibiotic-resistant bacteria, researchers from Stanford University and the Veterans Affairs Palo Alto Health Care System found
Organic food no healthier than non-organic: study - Yahoo! News Canada
I do not farm or have a garden but those who do have a benefit with the lack of chemicals used on the produce. There is a trade off in growing versus the convenience of just getting food from a store shelf.
[/quote]Sam, as you know, I grow an organic garden. I do so, to protect my neighbor’s pond from runoff. However, I can see many benefits to the organic growing style.
Yes, they are correct about nutritional equalities of both. A plant takes up the minerals etc., the same way from either source. Both will meet established norms, for nutrition.
Inorganics become hazardous when they imbalance the system. Synthetic pesticides get into groundwater, and pollute it. Organics are not as bad to pollute. Antibiotics are not Good Eats. And mostly relevant to me, steroids used on livestock, could be having an effect on obesity.
Even if my neighbor deleted his pond, I would continue to grow organically, and will still seek organic ranchers for my meat.