Filed under: Science & Research
Scientific Reports from The Organic Center
The Organic Center, a national nonprofit organization, is the leading clearinghouse for peer-reviewed scientific research behind the health and environmental benefits of organic foods and organic farming. The following reports are
available for free download at www.organic-center.org.
That First Step: Organic Food and a Healthier Future
C. McCullum-Gomez, C Benbrook, R. Theuer, The Organic Center Critical Issue Report, March 2009.
http://www.organic-center.org/science.healthy.php?action=view&report_id=149
Simplifying the Pesticide Risk Equation: the Organic Option
C. Benbrook, The Organic Center State of Science Review, March 2008.
http://www.organic-center.org/science.pest.php?action=view&report_id=125
New Evidence Supports the Nutritional Superiority of Organic Plant-based Foods
C. Benbrook, et. al., The Organic Center State of Science Review, March 2008.
http://www.organic-center.org/science.nutri.php?action=view&report_id=126
Still No Free Lunch: Nutrient Levels in U.S. Food Supply Eroded by Pursuit of High Yields
September 2007; Author: Brian Halweil, Senior Researcher, Worldwatch Institute
http://organic-center.org/science.latest.php?action=view&report_id=115
Unfinished Business: Preventing E. coli 0157 Outbreaks in Leafy Green
June 2007; Author: Charles Benbrook, Ph.D., Chief Scientist, The Organic Center
http://organic-center.org/science.safety.php?action=view&report_id=97
Is the FDA’s Cloning Proposal Ready for Prime Time?
April 2007; Author: James Riddle Organic Outreach Coordinator University of Minnesota
http://organic-center.org/science.safety.php?action=view&report_id=90
Do Organic Fruits and Vegetables Taste Better than Conventional Fruits and Vegetables?
December 2006; Author: Dr. Richard C. Theuer, Raleigh, North Carolina
http://organic-center.org/science.nutri.php?action=view&report_id=78
Assessing Soil Quality in Organic Agriculture
October 2006; Author: Alan J. Franzluebbers, USDA-Agricultural Research Service, Watkinsville, Georgia Richard L. Haney, USDA-Agricultural Research Service, Temple, Texas
http://organic-center.org/science.environment.php?action=view&report_id=71
Impacts of Organic Farming on the Efficiency of Energy Use in Agriculture
August 2006; Author: David Pimentel, Professor of Entomology, Ecology & Evolutionary Biology Dept., Cornell University
http://organic-center.org/science.environment.php?action=view&report_id=59
Successes and Lost Opportunities to Reduce Children’s Exposure to Pesticides Since the Mid-1990s
August 2006; Author: Dr. Alan Greene, Dr. Chensheng (Alex) Lu, Dr. Charles Benbrook, Dr. Philip J. Landrigan
http://organic-center.org/science.pest.php?action=view&report_id=55
Elevating Antioxidant Levels in Food Through Organic Farming and Food Processing
January 2005; Author: Charles M. Benbrook Ph.D. Chief Scientist
http://organic-center.org/science.antiox.php?action=view&report_id=3
Information Resources Available
• Download all of our scientific studies at no cost at www.organic-center.org.
• Subscribe to our free e-newsletter, The Scoop, a monthly digest of the latest global organic research, news and trends.
• Read Core Truths, a fully illustrated book and compendium of research conducted by the Center; donate $100 and get a free copy.
• Download a free Pocket Guide, Organic Essentials, to reduce dietary exposure to toxic pesticides at www.organic-center.orgNutrient_Content_Cover_2008.
• View our new educational video, Serious Science, Serious Benefits, at www.youtube.com/theorganiccenter and other educational video shorts at www.organicsolution.org.
• Visit our new blog at www.organic-center.org/blog.
Filed under: Commentary
An advance copy of a study appeared on July 29 that will be published in the September edition of the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition. The published paper, “Nutritional quality of organic foods: a systematic review,” was written by a team led by Alan Dangour at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine. The study, commissioned by the U.K. Food Standards Agency (FSA), claims that there are no differences in nutritional quality between conventional and organic foods.
The Organic Center’s chief scientist, Dr. Chuck Benbrook, along with Dr. Don Davis and Dr. Preston Andrews, have written a strong response questioning the methodology and challenging the findings of this controversial study. Click here to see their full response: http://www.organic-center.org/science.nutri.php?action=view&report_id=157.
According to Dr. Benbrook, the U.K. research team reported finding statistically significant differences between organically and conventionally grown crops in only three of thirteen categories of nutrients. Significant differences cited by the team included nitrogen, which was higher in conventional crops, and phosphorus and titratable acids, both of which were higher in the organic crops. As most scientists regard elevated levels of nitrogen in food as a potential cancer-causing agent, this finding of higher nitrogen in conventional food favors organic crops, as do the other two differences.
Despite the fact that these three categories of nutrients favored organic foods, and none favored conventionally grown foods, the London-based team concluded that there are no nutritional differences between organically and conventionally grown crops.
However, a team of scientists convened by The Organic Center (TOC) carried out a similar, but more rigorous, review of the same literature. The TOC team analyzed published research just on plant-based foods. Results differ significantly from the more narrow FSA review and are reported in the study “New Evidence Confirms the Nutritional Superiority of Plant-Based Organic Foods,” which is freely accessible on the TOC website (http://www.organic-center.org/science.nutri.php?action=view&report_id=126).
The TOC findings are similar for some of the nutrients analyzed by the FSA team, but differ significantly for two critical classes of nutrients of great importance in promoting human health – total polyphenols, and total antioxidant content. The FSA team did not include total antioxidant capacity among the nutrients studied, and it found no differences in the phenolic content in 80 comparisons across 13 studies.
For more information, visit http://www.organic-center.org/science.nutri.php?action=view&report_id=157.
Filed under: Commentary
There is an alarming body of evidence pointing to significant health and environmental risks associated with genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in food and agriculture. The Organic Center has compiled the following Top 10 latest findings regarding GMO risks, from published, peer-reviewed research in the U.S. and respected institutions around the world. For more information, visit www.organic-center.org, info@organic-center.org.
DID YOU KNOW?
Boulder County, Colorado, is currently considering allowing the farming of genetically engineered (GMO) sugar beets on publicly owned Open Space land. Already, the county allows GMO corn to be grown on open space. There is an alarming body of evidence pointing to significant health and environmental risks associated with genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in food and agriculture.
Just say No to GMOs in Boulder County. Let your voice be heard. Contact Tina Nielsen at tnielsen@bouldercounty.org.
Top Ten Reasons to Say NO to GMOs
- The American Academy of Environmental Medicine has called for a moratorium on genetically modified (GM) foods, stating: “Avoid GM foods when possible… Several animal studies indicate serious health (and disease) risks associated with GM food… There is more than a casual association between GM foods and adverse health effects.”
- Consumption of genetically modified corn may lead to lowered fertility, body weight and immunity, and impaired gene expression, and may be associated with asthma and food allergies in children.
- GMO sugar beets are actually more prone to plant diseases, and pollen from genetically engineered sugar beets can drift into other related crops including edible beets and chard.
- After only one year since its introduction, GMO sugar beets now account for 90% of the U.S. sugar beet crop.
- Exposure to genetically modified corn can alter the learning behavior of honeybees, making it difficult for them to associate odors with nectar sources, and may be linked to Colony Collapse Disorder.
- Rather than reduce the usage of herbicides in farming, as GMO proponents claim, use of GMO crops has actually increased herbicide use in agriculture.
- Roundup Ready GMO soybeans have proven more vulnerable to a range of plant pathogens and soil borne diseases, and field trials have shown that they lag in yield, too.
- Researchers in Mexico found that pollen drifted from genetically modified corn has contaminated the genetics of traditional varieties of maize in Mexico.
- GMOs are now found in more than 80% of non-organic foods sold in conventional grocery stores in the U.S., as well as the majority of animal feed in the E.U. GMO crop production now dominates 90% of conventional soybeans, 70% of conventional cotton, more than 60% of conventional corn, and soon, if GMO wheat is approved, a significant percentage of U.S. wheat production—all of our major grains and fiber products!
- Researchers in July 2009 concluded that E.U. Food Safety officials and the U.S. FDA have used unreliable tests to assess the safety of food and products containing genetically modified organisms (GMOs).
How Do I Avoid GMO Foods? – Since the FDA does not require GMO labeling on food products, be sure to eat and buy Organic. It is the only way to ensure a diet with minimum exposure to GMOs and toxic synthetic pesticides, which are prohibited under federally enforced certified organic standards.
Source: The Organic Center, Boulder, CO, info@organic-center.org; www.organic-center.org
Filed under: Science & Research
The Organic Center, an independent nonprofit research and education organization based in Boulder, CO, conducts primary, peer-reviewed research on the health and environmental benefits of organic food and farming, and also compiles published research from around the world. Here is a brief summary of key findings we’ve compiled regarding the benefits of organic, as well as the risks associated with the widespread commercial use of toxic synthetic pesticides, genetically modified crops (GMOs), and biotechnology and cloning in agriculture.
Compiled by The Organic Center, June 2009, www.organic-center.org
Organic Food and Nutrition
- Average levels of 11 nutrients are 25% higher in organic foods compared to conventional foods, based on 236 scientifically valid comparisons. Source: New Evidence Supports the Nutritional Superiority of Organic Plant-based Foods, C. Benbrook, et. al., The Organic Center State of Science Review, March 2008.
- Organic fruits and vegetables are approximately 30% higher in antioxidants than conventional. Source: Elevating Antioxidant Levels in Food through Organic Farming and Food Processing, C Benbrook, The Organic Center State of Science Review, January, 2005.
- Increasing crop yields and animal production levels has often been achieved at the expense of food nutritional quality, the environment, and in some cases, food safety and animal health. Source: Still No Free Lunch: Nutrient Levels in U.S. Food Supply Eroded by Pursuit of High Yields, The Organic Center Critical Issue Report, September 2007.
Organic Food and Taste
- Organic produce is often judged tastier…than conventional produce. Organic apples store better and are tastier than conventional apples. Better taste is likely the result of reduced nitrogen levels and higher antioxidant levels. Source: Do Organic Fruits and Vegetables Taste Better than Conventional Fruits and Vegetables, R. Theuer, The Organic Center State of Science Review, December 2006.
Organic Food and Children’s Nutrition
- Organic milk and meat enhances the nutritional quality of breast milk—up to 36% higher levels of the heart-healthy essential fatty acid CLA (conjugated linoleic acid), due to greater reliance on pasture and forage grasses in organic dairy and meat production, Source: Influence of organic diet on the amount of conjugated linoleic acids in breast milk of lactating women in the Netherlands, L. Rist, et. al., British Journal of Nutrition, April 2007.
- Children consuming predominantly organic dairy products (> 90% organic) in the first two years of life had more than a 30% lower risk of eczema. Source: Consumption of organic foods and risk of atopic disease during the first 2 years of life in the Netherlands, I. Kummeling, et. al., British Journal of Nutrition, August 2007.
Can Organic Agriculture Feed the World?
- In developed countries, organic systems produce 92% of the yield produced by conventional agriculture. However, in developing countries organic systems produce 80% more than conventional farms and could increase food security. Source: Organic Agriculture and the Global Food Supply, Ivette Perfecto, et. al., University of Michigan, Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems, July 2007.
- Organic agriculture has the potential to secure a global food supply, just as conventional agriculture today, but with reduced environmental impacts.” Source: Organic Agriculture and Food Security, United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization, May 2007.
- Organic agriculture can be more conducive to food security in Africa than most conventional production systems, and it is more likely to be sustainable in the long term. Furthermore, evidence shows that organic agriculture can build up natural resources, strengthen communities and improve human capacity, thus improving food security by addressing many different causal factors simultaneously. Source: Organic Agriculture and Food Security in Africa, United Nations Conference on Trade and Development and United Nations Environment Programme, Capacity Building Task Force on Trade, Environment and Development, October 2008.
Pesticides and Children’s Health
- The average child in America is exposed to 10 to 13 pesticides daily in their food and drinking water. Switching to an organic diet for just five days virtually eliminates any sign of exposure to organophosphate insecticides among school-age children. Source: Successes and Lost Opportunities to Reduce Children’s Exposure to Pesticides Since the Mid-1990s, A. Greene, et. al., The Organic Center Critical Issue Report, August 2006; Dr. Charles Benbrook updated data, 2009.
- Scientists from Spain report that children born to mothers with higher levels of the pesticide hexachlorobenzene (HCB) in cord blood were significantly more likely to be overweight and obese by the age of six. These results add to growing evidence that fetal exposure to contaminants can interfere with hormonal mechanisms that control weight later in life, thereby contributing to the worldwide epidemic of metabolic disorder. Source: Smink A, Ribas-Fito N, Garcia R, Torrent M, Mendez MA, Grimalt JO, Sunyer J., Exposure to hexachlorobenzene during pregnancy increases the risk of overweight in children aged 6 years, Acta Paediatrica, October 2008.
- Researchers at two major laboratories found an average of 200 industrial chemicals and pollutants in umbilical cord blood from 10 babies born in August and September of 2004 in U.S. hospitals. The umbilical cord blood of these 10 children harbored pesticides, consumer product ingredients, and wastes from burning coal, gasoline and garbage. Source: Body Burden – the Pollution in Newborns, The Environmental Working Group, July 14, 2005.
- Mercer Island Children’s Study: The urine and saliva of 21 school-age children, ages 3-11, tested positive for residues of organophosphate insecticides, including malathion and chlorpyrifos. Within 8 to 36 hours of switching to an organic diet, no residues were detected. A distinct peak was noted in winter months due to imported fruits and vegetables. Source: Dietary Intake and Its Contribution to Longitudinal Organophosphorus Pesticide Exposure in Urban/Suburban Children, C. Lu, et. al., Environmental Health Perspectives, Vol. 116, No. 4, April 2008.
- “The transformation is extremely rapid…Once you switch from conventional food to organic, the pesticides…in the urine disappear. The level returns immediately when you go back to the conventional diets.” – Mercer Island Children’s Study lead author Dr. Alex (Chengsheng) Lu. Source: Seattle Post Intelligencer, January 30, 2008.
- Children born to mothers who lived near fields treated with pesticides are six-fold more likely to be inflicted with autism. Source: Maternal Residence Near Agricultural Pesticide Applications and Autism Spectrum Disorders among Children in the California Central Valley, E. Roberts, et. al., Environmental Health Perspectives, October 2007.
- A nationwide study found elevated risk for several types of childhood cancer for children living near fields treated with pesticides.” Source: Risk of Childhood Cancers Associated with Residence in Agriculturally Intense Areas in the United States, S. Carozza, et. al., Environmental Health Perspectives, April 2008.
- The World Health Organization reported that the impacts of prenatal and early-life exposure to pesticides are among the most significant factors for cancer, birth defects and neurological problems. Source: World Health Organization, 2006.
- A team of researchers in Korea have shown that chronic, low-level exposures to atrazine—the second most heavily used herbicide in the U.S.—in rats can lead to insulin resistance, obesity and heightened risk of diabetes. Source: Chronic Exposure to the Herbicide Atrazine Causes Mitochondrial Dysfunction and Insulin Resistance, Soo Lim, et. al., Plos One Journal, April 2009.
- Organic food and farming can help slow and potentially reverse the rising incidence of overweight, obesity and diabetes through mechanisms that include promoting healthy patterns of cell division and differentiation and laying the groundwork for healthy endocrine, immune system and other metabolic development; by establishing taste-based preferences in children for nutrient-dense, flavorful foods; and by largely eliminating exposure to approximately 180 pesticides known to disrupt the development or functioning of the endocrine system. Source: That First Step, The Organic Center Critical Issue Report, C. McCullum-Gomez, C. Benbrook, R. Theuer, March 2009.
Pesticides and Animal Health
- According to the NOAA Fisheries Service, the pesticides malathion, diazinon and chlorpyrifos jeopardize the survival of all 28 species of Pacific salmon listed as threatened or endangered in the West. The chemicals, found by the U.S. Geological Survey to contaminate rivers throughout the West, interfere with salmon’s sense of smell, and at higher concentrations kill the fish outright. Source: National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration National Fisheries Service, November 2008.
- Researchers at the University of Pittsburgh discovered that when 10 of the world’s most commonly used pesticides combine, as they regularly do in the environment, the chemicals caused a 99% mortality in leopard frogs. The study concluded that wetland communities could be dramatically impacted by low concentrations of pesticides (both separate and combined). Source: R. Relyea, A cocktail of contaminants: How mixtures of pesticides at low concentrations affect aquatic communities, Oecologia, November 2008.
GMOs in Food and Agriculture
- A team of scientists has found that exposure to the Cry 1 Ab endotoxin in Bt corn can alter the learning behavior of bees, as they associate odors with nectar sources. Researchers are speculating that Bt toxins in GM-corn are having some subtle effect on Colony Collapse Disorder, perhaps in conjunction with the nicotinyl insecticides used as corn seed treatments. Source: R. Ramirez-Romeo, et. al., Does Cry 1 Ab protein affect learning performance of the honeybee Apis mellifera L., Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety, Vol. 70: 327-333.
- Research by a team of scientists in Mexico has again found transgenes from Bt corn in local varieties of maize in Mexico. The first paper reporting the presence of transgenes in traditional varieties of Mexican corn was published in Nature in 2001. Source: Modified Genes Spread to Local Maize, NatureNews, November 12, 2008.
- According to results from a long-term feeding study with mice, researchers in Austria concluded that consumption of a genetically modified corn developed by Monsanto (NK603 x MON810) may lead to lower fertility and body weight and impaired gene expression. The study has not yet been peer-reviewed but was released on Nov. 11, 2008, by the Austrian Ministry of Health, Family and Youth. Source: Austrian Ministry of Health, Family and Youth.
- Italian researchers found significant disturbances in the immune system of young and old mice fed GM maize (MON810), and elevated levels of a cell type known to be associated with asthma and food allergies in children. Source: Finamore A., et. al., “Intestinal and peripheral immune response to MON810 maize ingestion in weaning and old mice,” Journal of Food and Agricultural Chemistry, November 16, 2008.
- The American Academy of Environmental Medicine, an international physicians organization, in May 2009 called for a moratorium on genetically modified (GM) foods, stating: “Avoid GM foods when possible… Several animal studies indicate serious health risks associated with GM food… There is more than a casual association between GM foods and adverse health effects. There is causation… The strength of association and consistency between GM foods and disease is confirmed in several animal studies.” Source: Genetically Modified Foods, American Academy of Environmental Medicine Position Paper, May 8, 2009.
Animal Cloning in Food and Agriculture
- Animals involved in cloning may suffer pain and ill health linked to miscarriages, organ defects and gigantism. …It is clear there are significant animal health and welfare issues for surrogate mothers and clones that can be more frequent and severe than for conventionally bred animals. …It should be investigated whether consumption of meat and milk derived from clones or their offspring may lead to increased exposure to transmissible agents. Source: European Food Safety Authority Report to the European Union, July 2008.
- Milk and meat from the offspring of cloned livestock are entering the U.S. food supply. The number of clones is on the rise… Source: Wall Street Journal, Sept. 1, 2008.
- Animal cloning is not allowed in organic production under the National Organic Program (NOP) because cloning uses cell fusion, a genetic engineering technique that is considered to “narrow the gene base,” while organic production relies on maintenance of a broad and diverse gene pool to better resist disease and adapt to environmental changes. Also, artificial hormones, prohibited in organic production, are used to induce labor in surrogate clone “dams.” Source: Is the FDA’s Cloning Proposal Ready for Prime Time?, The Organic Center Critical Issue Report, February 2007.
Soil, Water, Energy, Yield and Global Climate Change
- In good weather, yields for organic and conventional corn and soybeans are comparable; in drought, organic soils are 28 – 70% higher in production than conventional soils. Source: Rodale Institute, based on 28-year field trials, www.rodaleinstitute.org.
- Organic corn production requires 30% less energy per bushel harvested, compared to conventional chemical farming. Source: Impacts of Organic Farming on the Efficiency of Energy Use in Agriculture, The Organic Center, August 2006.
- 40% of all energy used in conventional corn & soybean production comes from the use of ammoniated fertilizer for corn. Using a winter cover crop, such as hairy vetch, can eliminate its use. Source: Rodale Institute, based on 28-year field trials, www.rodaleinstitute.org.
- Organically farmed soil is higher in rich, carbon-based organic matter; more carbon held in soil that would otherwise be released into air. Source: Assessing Soil Quality in Organic Agriculture, The Organic Center, October 2006.
- Organic matter cements soil particles into larger groups, increasing percolation and decreasing runoff; there is 25 – 50% more H20 infiltration in organic soils. Also, organic soils tie up more carbon in the soil. For every pound of carbon increased in the soil you can add up to 40 lbs. of additional H20 retention; can increase water-holding capacity of the soil by up to 40,000 lbs per year. Source: Rodale Institute, based on 28-year field trials, www.rodaleinstitute.org.
About The Organic Center
The Organic Center is a national nonprofit research and education organization dedicated to advancing scientific research behind the health and environmental benefits of organic food and farming. The Center works with leading universities and researchers throughout the world to compile credible information to help educate consumers, media, businesses, policy makers and others about the proven benefits of organic to human health and animal health, in helping prevent global warming, and in conserving the environment. Visit www.organic-center.org, tel 303.499.1840, info@organic-center.org.
Information Resources Available
• Download all of our scientific studies at no cost at www.organic-center.org.
• Subscribe to our free e-newsletter, The Scoop, an easy-to-read monthly digest of news and research.
• Order Core Truths, a beautifully illustrated coffee-table book compiled by The Organic Center.
• Download a free consumer Pocket Guide, Organic Essentials, to reduce exposure to toxic pesticides.
• View our new six-minute educational video at www.youtube.com/theorganiccenter.
• Download a free copy of our latest report: “That First Step – Organic Food and a Healthier Future.”
Filed under: Commentary
We felt it important to alert friends of The Organic Center about recent developments in our home base of Boulder, CO, regarding the development of GMO agriculture on public lands.
In early 2009, six farmers leasing public land from Boulder County petitioned the County Commissioners to grow genetically modified “GMO” sugar beets on open space public land. At a study and public comment session hosted by the Boulder County Commissioners on May 28th, the farmers said they “would be at a considerable economic disadvantage” not to be able to use that land to grow Roundup-ready GMO sugar beets. Sugar beets are primarily grown to be processed into refined sugar, and after just one year since the introduction of GMO sugar beets, approximately 95% of the national sugar beet crop is now grown using Roundup-ready GMO seeds.
I was at this County Commissioners “study session-slash-hearing,” testifying on behalf of The Organic Center as an independent, nonprofit research and education institution serving to advance credible, peer-reviewed scientific research behind the health and environmental benefits of organic food and farming, and as a member of the Boulder organic community.
Proponents of GMO agriculture, including the farmers petitioning the county, say that such technology allows them to be more sustainable, as it requires less application of herbicides. Yet, according to data compiled by The Organic Center’s chief scientist Chuck Benbrook, Ph.D., overall herbicide usage has increased since the advent of GMO agriculture in the mid-1990s.
The jury also is out on the health and environmental effects of GMO food and agriculture, say critics of genetically engineered food and farming. A growing number of studies have shown that animal health may be compromised, and that GMO foods have been associated in laboratory studies with food allergies, lower fertility and immunity, and decreased body weight.
GMO’s threat to the environment includes the potential creation of “super weeds” resistant to such widespread use of Roundup herbicide. Also, this herbicide can remain for some time in the soil. Additional research has shown that GMO sugar beets may be more prone to root rot diseases, and that genetic drift may occur into related species such as table beets and chard. Researchers in Mexico have definitive evidence that GMO corn has contaminated the seed stock of traditional maize varieties, grown for thousands of years.
It’s hard to put this GMO stuff back into the box, so to speak. In fact, if it’s not organic and it’s got soy or corn, it’s likely to be GMO—the vast majority of all conventional soy and conventionally farmed corn is now genetically engineered—mainly to be Roundup resistant! And GMO wheat and veggies are being cued up next by the biotech industry for wide-scale commercialization.
Back to the Boulder County Commissioners, there’s more. Another study session was called for June 12 and yours truly was invited back to the table to offer input. Further hearings are set for July 23 (Parks and Open Space Advisory Council), July 30 (Food and Agriculture Policy Committee), and August 25 with the Board of County Commissioners. Check the website at www.bouldercounty.org/openspace/Sugarbeets.htm for updated information. Also, you can send comments to Tina Nielsen, Special Projects Manager, Boulder County Parks and Open Space, tnielsen@bouldercounty.org.
The Boulder region is a hotbed for organic farming and leading organic businesses—and if any farming is to be encouraged on publicly owned open space, organic agriculture surely ought to be considered for the truly environmentally friendly farming system that it is—saving energy inputs and costs, tying up more carbon in healthy organic soils, promoting biodiversity, and further contributing to Boulder’s healthy brand image.
The good news is the county is considering organic farming on open space land. With your comments, you can help sway their decision.
Organically yours,
Steve Hoffman, Managing Director
The Organic Center
www.organic-center.org
Note: This letter was originally published in the Summer 2009 Edition of Edible Front Range magazine (www.ediblefrontrange.com)
Filed under: Commentary
FoodNavigator.com in its Aug. 19, 2008, daily newsletter, posed the question to its readers, “Organics – fad or the future?” The Organic Center’s Chief Scientist Dr. Chuck Benbrook posted a response from his Oregon office, which we have excerpted on our blog for your review.
Organic food was once seen as a niche market but now major multinationals are offering organic products. In fact it has been one of the biggest trends in the food sector in recent years but do organics have staying power, or will consumers lose interest over time?
The scientific evidence linking organic production methods to enhanced nutrient density and lower food safety risks is growing more compelling. Two factors will define the future trajectory for organic food sales. First, whether and to what extent organic farmers and food companies focus on sustaining and expanding the inherent benefits in organic systems, e.g., by foregoing the temptation to push organic crop yields and animals beyond physiological limits where health is sacrificed to production. Second, whether and to what extent the rest of the food industry moves toward production systems and technologies that produce safer and higher quality foods.
Dr. Charles Benbrook, Ph.D., Chief Scientist, The Organic Center
Filed under: Commentary
A new study published in the latest issue of the Society of Chemical Industry’s (SCI) Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture claims that there is no evidence to support the argument that organic food is better than food grown with the use of pesticides and chemicals. However, The Organic Center’s Chief Scientist Chuck Benbrook, Ph.D., has the following to say about the study.
A study just out in the Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture is entitled “Effect of plant cultivation methods on content of major and trace elements in foodstuffs and retention in rats.” The Danish research team compared the retention of nutrients in rats fed a diet composed of organic and conventional dried fruits and vegetables. Only trace mineral levels were compared; no results were reported on vitamins, polyphenols, and antioxidants (nutrients that routinely are present at higher concentrations in organic food).
No differences were found in nutrient levels, leading the authors to suggest that such findings might dampen consumer demand for organic food. Some media outlets have picked up this finding, and have dramatically broadened it to support headlines and statements like “Organic food no more nutritious than conventional.” A review of the study’s experimental design, however, raises serious questions about whether this study’s results actually support the more narrow conclusions stated by the authors.
The team grew the fruits and vegetables in both the “conventional” and organic plots on soils that were previously managed organically. Accordingly, the conventional crops enjoyed all the nutrient-enhancing and plant-health benefits of heightened soil quality from prior organic soil management. Given the series of studies published in the U.S. in the last three years pointing to soil quality enhancement in organic systems as the major cause, or explanation of observed differences in nutritional quality, it is not surprising that this Danish study found no statistically significant difference in mineral levels in the organic and “conventional” crops that were harvested and fed to the rats.
In addition, the organic plots were grown under limited nitrogen, whereas the conventional crop was not. On the basis of the criteria the Center developed to judge the scientific validity of comparison studies, and used in completing our March 2008 report on the nutrient content of organic food, this Danish study is clearly “invalid” for purposes of comparing the nutrient content of conventional and organic foods.
The study was carefully conducted and valid for testing the impacts of the production conditions embedded in its experimental design, but by virtue of this design, little weight should be placed on its findings in terms of the differences in conventional and organic management on crop nutritional quality.
Source: Mette Kristensen, Lars Ostengaard, Ulrich Halekoh, Henry Jorgensen, Charlotte Lauridsen, Kirsten Brandt, and Suzanne Bugel. “Effect of plant cultivation methods on content of major and trace elements in foodstuffs and retention in rats,” Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture, 2008
Filed under: Commentary
In mid-July, the American Council for Science and Health (ACSH), an industry-funded organization that works on behalf of the pesticide, biotechnology and drug industries, issued a critique of the Center’s March 2008 report “New Evidence Confirms the Nutritional Superiority of Plant-Based Organic Foods.“ The ACSH report was written by Dr. Joseph Rosen of Rutgers University.
On July 23, Barry Estabrook of Gourmet Magazine posted a story on the critique, which provides a concise summary of Rosen’s comments. His piece is entitled “Politics of the Plate — Fighting Words”.
The response by the five co-authors of the Center’s report covers the major points of the ACSH critique, and has been posted on the Center’s website. Excerpts appear below.
“The American Council for Science and Health (ACSH) report by Dr. Joseph Rosen seems to accept, and does not argue with the factors we identified to screen published nutrient content studies for scientific validity. “
“But as he goes through the various sections of our report, he criticizes us for ‘cherry-picking’ results, excluding matched pairs where the results favor conventional food. That is not what we did. He misrepresents our methodology and offers inconsistent and illogical suggestions to correct what he perceives as ‘bias’ in our selection of the matched pairs of foods that were then used to compare nutrient concentrations. ”
“We applied the screening method and selection criteria consistently, and in fact eliminated more results favoring the organic food in a matched pair than the conventional food. Without our screening methods and criteria, the nutritional advantage of organic food would have been greater.”
Filed under: Organic Center In the News
The Organic Center is pleased to announce that four new members have been appointed to the Board of Directors –
- Sara Snow, host of TV’s Get Fresh with Sara Snow, Discovery Networks; media, consumer advocate
- Ken Cook, President of Environmental Working Group, an environmental consumer advocacy nonprofit organization
- Margaret Wittenberg, Global VP for Quality Standards and Public Affairs, Whole Foods Market; representing retailers
- Timothy Escamilla, VP for Procurement, Ready Pac; fresh produce industry
Current board members Michelle Goolsby and Anthony Zolezzi, were re-elected to new three year terms on the Board. Michelle Goolsby, former EVP of Development, Sustainability and Corporate Affairs for Dean Foods, is the Board Chair-elect, and will take over as Chairperson in November 2008. Alan Greene, M.D., Clinical Professor at Stanford University Children’s Hospital and Co-founder of DrGreene.com, is the current Board Chair.
Founding Board member Katherine DiMatteo, who was recently elected to serve as President of IFOAM (the International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movements), and Walter Robb, Co-president and COO of Whole Foods Market, will be leaving the Board in November after many years of service. Their many contributions to the work of the Center will be sorely missed, but fortunately they have agreed to serve along with Dr. Andrew Weil, M.D., as “Advisory Directors” of the Center.
New board members Snow, Cook, Escamilla and Wittenberg will be working together with existing board members including Alan Greene, M.D.; Kathleen Merrigan, Ph.D., Director of the Agriculture, Food and Environment Program, Tufts University; David Pimentel, Ph.D., Professor, Cornell University; George Siemon, CEO of Organic Valley; Mark Retzloff, President, Aurora Organic Dairy; Sheryl Lamb, organic advocate; James White, Senior VP, Consumer Brands, Safeway; Anthony Zolezzi, Co-founder of Pet’s Promise and President of Zolezzi Consulting; David Gagnon, Interim Executive Director, Organic Trade Association; and Chair Elect Michelle Goolsby.
The Organic Center welcomes its new board members and officers and very much appreciates their contributions in furthering the mission of the Center to advance the scientific research behind the human health and environmental benefits of organic food and farming–and to communicate those findings to consumers, media, businesses, policy makers, academia and other thought leaders.
For more info, visit www.organic-center.org.
Filed under: Organic Center In the News
The Organic Center’s Chief Scientist Dr. Chuck Benbrook, Ph.D., will be a featured speaker at the upcoming annual convention of the American Dietetic Association on Oct. 25-28 in Chicago. According to Dr. Benbrook, it is an excellent opportunity to educate nutrition professionals who are becoming increasingly interested in the health and nutritional benefits of organic food, and who have an influence on a greater part of the population.
Dr. Benbrook also has accepted an invitation to give the Rachel Carson Memorial Lecture sponsored by the Pesticide Action Network-U.K. The event occurs Dec. 4, 2008, in London at the School of Oriental and African Studies. Chuck is working on scheduling other events during his trip to the U.K. He has been invited by scientists at the University of Newcastle to do two seminars, one on the Center’s organic food quality research, and a second on the impacts and future direction of biotechnology in U.S. agriculture.
Additionally, The Organic Center’s Development Director, Seleyn DeYarus, will speak on organic and sustainability at the University of Minnesota as part of a conference produced by the university’s Austrian Studies program. The event, Global Climate Change, Sustainable Agriculture, and Bioresources: Challenges, Opportunities, and Choices, will take place on the Minneapolis campus of the University of Minnesota on Sept. 26, 2008. Seleyn will speak on a panel with Horst Rechelbacher, founder of Intelligent Nutrients and Aveda. Horst has lived for many years in the U.S. and is a native of Austria.
