Food Standards, eh?
July 31, 2009 at 8:13 pm Leave a comment
The Food Standards Agency wants to help you make an “informed choice” about your food. They’ve put together a study, comparing the nutritional value of organic versus non-organic food. Of course, calling it a study is a little misleading. They’ve read other people’s studies, and have parsed out the answer: there’s little nutritional benefit to organic food. Of course, “The review rejected almost all of the existing studies of comparisons between organic and non-organic nutritional differences,” so it’s easy to see how they came to that conclusion.
Oh, and they didn’t think it was important to consider the effects of eating pesticides, many of which are carcinogenic. Thanks, Food Standards Agency; I could have made a terrible environmentally conscious decision if you hadn’t opened my eyes (again)! Eat on…
Via BBC
Entry filed under: Food. Tags: carcinogen, Ethical food, Food, Food Standards Agency, nutrients, nutrition, Organic, pesticides, science.
Trackback this post | Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed