Does 'Organic' Matter?

This is one in a series of articles. For more on this subject visit The Daily Meal Special Report: Is Our Food Killing Us? Diet, Nutrition, and Health in 21st Century America.

When a food or drink is labeled "organic," we tend to assume that it must be healthier and better tasting than its conventionally produced counterpart. This reaction is an example of "the halo effect," a biased judgment that causes us to associate one positive trait (the "organic" label, in this case) with other positive traits that may or may not be related.

To say that something is organic, is to say that it has been grown or made without the use of artificial substances, such as synthetic fertilizers (as opposed to compost or manure), herbicides, and pesticides, and that it is free of genetically modified organisms. Organic growing isn't a new concept, but with our increasing concern for health and well-being, many of us have shifted toward buying organic products over conventional ones. From 1997 through 2011, organic food sales in the United States grew from $3.6 billion to $24.4 billion, and today they account for more than three percent of total U.S. food sales, according to the United States Department of Agriculture.

That said, are we paying more for organic foods because they're better for us, or just because we just think they are?

A study by a graduate student at Cornell University in 2011 devised a test in which 144 people participated in a comparison of what they believed to be organic versus conventional foods. The foods tasted were plain yogurt, chocolate sandwich cookies, and potato chips, each in "organic" and "conventional" varieties. Despite the fact that all the foods in the tasting were actually organic, participants unanimously agreed that the foods they thought were organic tasted better, and perceived them to be lower in fat and calories and higher in fiber and in price than the supposedly conventional choices.

When choosing between organic and conventional foods, taste is generally subjective, says Joy Bauer, M.S., RD, CDN, and health expert for The Today Show. People may opt for packaged organic foods such as crackers and cookies thinking they'll taste better, when actually there's little difference in flavor. Organic produce, on the other hand, possibly does taste better, according to Lori Shemek, Ph.D., CLC, NC, and Bauer's counterpart on ABC's Good Morning Texas.

"It [organic produce] tastes a lot better because it's higher in anti-oxidants and in nutrients," Shemek says.

Flavor aside, it's difficult to say for certain whether organic foods are significantly better for you nutritionally than non-organic ones, since studies comparing the nutritional properties of both tend to flip-flop, some arguing in support of organic and others arguing against it.

Bauer says it depends on what types of foods you're choosing. Organic fruits and vegetables, dairy, and whole grains may pack more of a nutritional punch than conventional foods, partly due to a built-in, natural pest control — which organic plants use (rather than pesticides) to protect themselves — as well as the reduced time it takes to get them to market shelves. But cookies and other snacks marked "organic" aren't necessarily good for you nutrition-wise.

Reviews of countless studies have shown that organic plant-based foods (fruits, vegetables, and grains) do offer significantly higher levels of nutrients than conventional plant-based foods do. Organic tomatoes, for instance, have been shown to contain higher levels of the anti-oxidants quercetin (79 percent) and kaempferol (97 percent) than conventional tomatoes. In a review of 97 studies comparing the nutritional qualities of organic versus conventional foods — grown in similar soils and climate and with similar plant genetics, irrigation systems, nitrogen levels, and harvest practices — it was found that eight of 11 nutrients studied contained much higher levels of polyphenols and anti-oxidants. Yet vitamin A and beta-carotene levels have been found consistently higher in conventional plants by about 10 percent. One study concluded that organically-grown plant-based foods contain, on average, 25 percent more nutrients than conventionally-grown ones, as well as offering more essential nutrients per serving or calorie consumed. Animal-based organic foods, however, have not been shown to offer notably higher nutrients. A more recent study, on the other hand, shows the exact opposite — that organic foods are not significantly more nutritious.

In 2012, a research group at Stanford University conducted the most comprehensive analysis to date of existing studies, comparing the health qualities of organic and conventional foods (fruits, vegetables, grains, meats, milk, poultry, and eggs) and did not find any strong evidence that organic foods as a whole are more nutritious or carry fewer health risks. Only one nutrient — phosphorus — was found to be significantly higher in organic foods. Organic milk was also found to contain higher levels of Omega-3 fatty acids than conventional milk.

Bauer says if you're concerned about nutritional quality, it may be smarter to choose healthier, more wholesome foods in general than to limit your options to strictly organic ones.[pullquote:left]

"Non-organic foods still offer up so much," she says. "The upside of eating non-organic fruits and vegetables packed with vitamins and nutrients outweighs the downside that you might be harmed by pesticides."

Pesticides are a potential health concern, of course, since conventional foods contain high levels of pesticide residue, which has been implicated in the genesis of various diseases, including ADHD in children, Parkinson's Disease, birth defects, and various life-threatening cancers, such as breast cancer and Non-Hodgkin lymphoma. In the 2012 Stanford study, 38 percent of conventional produce tested contained detectible pesticide residue compared with seven percent on organic produce, which can be contaminated by nearby conventional farms.

A 2013 study of the effects of glyphosate, the active ingredient in Roundup — the most common herbicide used in conventional farming — on human health found that the chemical enhances the harmful effects of foodborne chemicals and environmental toxins, which can often lead to diseases and cancer.

Despite these findings, there's still evidence against the claim that organic food consumption decreases the risk of cancer and other diseases. In a very recent study in which 16 of the most common types of cancer were tracked in women aged 50 or older over a period of nine years, scientists from Oxford University found that women who eat organic foods all or most of the time are no less likely to develop cancer than women who eat a diet of mostly or all conventional foods. However, they did find a decrease in the risk for breast cancer and Non-Hodgkin lymphoma.

If you're going to buy conventional fruits and vegetables, there are two lists released by the Environmental Working Group: the "Clean 15" and the "Dirty Dozen Plus" that might prove useful The first is a list of produce with little to no trace of pesticides, even though it may not be labeled as organic; the second is a list of produce that is commonly contaminated with high levels of pesticides. As consumers, we can use this information to decide whether we want to pay the extra dollar or two to go organic, depending on what we're buying.

So, ultimately, does organic matter? It depends on how highly you value the flavor, nutritional value, and potential long-term health benefits of the food you're eating. We'll leave it up to you to decide.