The
Benefits
of Food
By January Lok Yi Cheung
張樂兒
According
to the U.S. Department
of Agriculture (USDA), produce grown without the
use of artificial fertilisers, pesticides and dyes and
not processed using industrial solvents can be
categorised as organic. Animals that turn into meat
cannot be fed growth hormones or regular use of
antibiotics. Furthermore, both produce
and meat cannot have undergone
genet i c mod i f i cat i on. These
stringent rules typically translate
to higher prices in the organic
products are generally viewed
as the healthier option.
However, according to a
recent comprehensive literature
review conducted by scientists at
Stanford University Medical Center,
organic food may not necessarily contain higher
nutritional value or offer fewer health risks than non-
organic food. Taking account of 17 studies that
documented subjects who had normal diets versus
organic diets, and 223 studies which examined
nutrient levels in organic food and conventional
produce, they did not find substantial evidence
that supported significant health benefits in organic
foods. Aside from phosphorous, vitamin content
was similar in both types of food as well.
The study did reveal that organic produce in
particular had less risk of pesticide contamination
and that while they still contained pesticides, the
levels were all under safety limits [1]. However,
Chr istie Wi lcox, postdoctoral researcher and
scientific communicator at Scientific American,
explains that conventionally grown produce is also
strictly monitored for pesticide residue [2], and “from
a practical standpoint, the marginal benefits of
reducing human exposure to pesticides in the diet
… appears to be insignificant” [3].
That being said, the advantages of organic
farming for the environment and for ethical reasons
are far-reaching, even if the health benefits seem
to fall flat. In a paper published by
Nature
, scientists
David Crowder and colleagues repor ted that
organic farming not only alleviates ecological
damage brought about by human activity, but also
restored balance between predator and pathogen
biological control agents, which extended to
natural pest control [4]. For instance, organic weed
management enhances suppression, instead
conventional farming.
There is also evidence to show that organic
farmi ng may be more energy ef f icient than
conventional methods. In a three decade study
conducted by the Rodale Institute, they grew
conventional and organic corn under controlled
conditions and recorded the energy usage in both.
The results were astounding. One hectare of corn
grown conventionally required 71% more energy
than that of the organic corn. They attributed this
large discrepancy in energy requirement to the
use of nitrogen-based fertilisers. Conventionally
grown corn used synthetic nitrogen fertilisers, which
requires a large amount of oil to manufacture [5].
While the organic crop also required nitrogen,
they were able to use sources from compost,
n it rogen - f i x i ng crops (l egumes) and natu ra l
fertilisers that contained the element. It seems, that
organic farming may reduce our carbon footprint
significantly.
Organic foods are indisputably more expensive
than conventionally grown crops and the average
consumer must make a decision as to whether it is
worth the extra investment. The premiums attached
to organic foods come from a typically lower
yield – more time to produce and smaller farms.
While there appears to be mounting evidence
