Med USA News

Take care of your health

Scientists Have Questioned the Benefits of Organic Products

Organic food is no longer useful and safe for human health than the ordinary. To this conclusion was reached by researchers from Stanford University (USA), after an analysis of 240 publications, which have been devoted to food that have appeared in the scientific literature since 1966. The work group was headed by Dan Bravat, it has become the most extensive research in this area, and was published September 4 in the journal Annals of Internal Medicine.

The so-called organic food - food is grown without the use of pesticides, antibiotics, hormones, etc. - Positioned as much more useful and safer than usual because it is more pure and contains more vitamins, minerals and other nutrients. Organic foods are sometimes almost twice as expensive as products grown using traditional methods, but, despite this, their popularity, especially among the population of developed countries has multiplied over the past decade. For example, in the United States since 1997. by 2011. organic food market has increased from $3600000000 to $24400000000.

To confirm or refute the thesis regarding the significant advantage of one of two types of food over another, the authors conducted a systematic study of the results of 240 reports. 223 of these reports were devoted to a comparison grown by organic or conventional fruits, grains, vegetables, meat, eggs and milk on the content of trace elements, fungal and bacterial contamination and pesticide. The remaining 17 publications covered the health indicators in the context of food consumed. Fully entire array analyzed data published in the scientific literature since January 1966.

The only significant advantage over conventional organ`ic products, in terms of their content of vitamins and minerals, was a higher content of phosphorus, which, according to the authors, can be very useful for people who suffer a deficit of this trace element.

As vitamins, and other beneficial agents for humans, there is clinically significant for human health differences were found. Thus, the authors note that protein and fat composition of organic and ordinary milk were approximately the same, although in some publications and held assumption that organic milk may contain higher amounts of unsaturated fatty acids.

Also, the authors found no convincing evidence that conventional food is much more harmful to health than organic. However, the latter, with 30% less likely contaminated with pesticides than usual, although they can not be called completely free of toxic chemicals. In addition, this difference is hardly noticeable in the case of exceeding the shelf life of products. As bacterial contamination indicators are also approximately equal. The authors suggest that the use of organic chicken and pork reduces the risk of developing resistance to antibiotics, and note that the clinical evidence of this assumption does not exist.

Commenting on the results, the authors noted that they could easily affect the heterogeneity of research methods used in the studies, as well as various factors that affect the safety and quality of products, such as weather, soil composition, methods of farming, etc. It should be noted that the conclusions made by experts at Stanford University, the same, in general, the results of a study conducted by scientists at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine in 2009.

Comments