Study Are organic foods not healthier?

According to a study, organic products do not differ in their nutritional content compared to conventional foods

05/09/2012

Are organic foods just as healthy as conventional products? A US study came to this conclusion and summed up that organic products are not more nutritious in terms of the ingredients and therefore hardly healthier. „Vitamins, carbohydrates, proteins and minerals are almost identical“ the scientists write in their research report. However, conventional food and organic goods differ in one respect: the risk of taking harmful pesticides is much lower for organic food. Animal husbandry is also more suitable for organic producers than for conventional agricultural enterprises.

Does a study raise new doubts about the actual benefits of organic foods? The conventional food industry could now come to this conclusion and use current study results from Stanford University in California as an argument in the future. Because organic products are becoming increasingly important, especially in Germany, because more and more consumers prefer to use natural foods. However, if you take a close look at the results, you will find that actual proof of health has failed because comprehensive data collection can not include key factors and ignore other aspects such as environmental and climate change.

More and more people are turning to bioconservation
A few weeks ago, the Bavarian State Office for Health and Food Safety (LGL) reported on an in-house study. Accordingly, be food „which are declared as biological, in fact also organic“. Because more and more supermarkets and discounters sell biowares at ridiculous prices, the uncertainty was great, if in fact that is what is promised by the manufacturers. But the agency gave the all-clear: Consumers can rely on the organic labeling, according to the result of the investigation of about 1700 foods from organic production. Almost never were violations obvious.

A citizen survey conducted by the Gesellschaft für Konsumforschung revealed that German consumers place great trust in organic products. Almost every German household (about 94 percent) buys organic items. On average, respondents spend about 84 euros per year. In addition, most of the respondents went to a survey by the pollster „Ernst & Young“, Assuming that buying organic food also strengthens animal rights, because organic farms rely on a species-appropriate attitude. In addition, most people believed that they also had their own health „do something good“. But these assumptions have so far hardly been checked and Bio is not automatically an automatic predicate for happy animals.

Concrete statement barely possible
Now, a research group from Stanford University in the US state of California came to the conclusion that organic products are apparently hardly healthier than conventionally produced foods. For the meta-analysis, the researchers led by head of studies Dena Bravata thousands of previous studies and selected from these 223 research. The present studies compared either the nutrient content or the levels of contamination with germs, fungi or pesticides of organic products with normal products. Among them were six randomized clinical trials comparing peer groups, either conventional or predominant „Bio“ malnourished. But a global statement, the researchers can not ask. None of the available research was a long-term study that looked at the health effects of different diets over a meaningful period of time. The observation periods were too small and amounted to between two days and two years.

When reviewing the data volumes, the scientists could therefore provide no significant evidence that „organic food contains more nutrients or is more conducive to health“. However, as the researchers confirm in the science magazine "Annals of Internal Medicine", the fact is that „Organic food reduces the risk of consuming chemical pesticides“. And that's exactly what manufacturers and researchers have been arguing about for years. Finally, directives would ensure that the supply of pesticides to the end-user remains as low as possible and therefore that there is no health risk. Environmentalists and consumer advocates hold against it, because studies have repeatedly shown in the past that manufacturers handle mixtures of pesticides guidelines and thus, for example, cancer can be promoted in the long term.

Nutrient content hardly differs
„The vitamin content is hardly different“, the researchers summarize. Proteins, fats and minerals were almost identically distributed. „Also pathogens in the form of bacteria or fungi were never found in both groups much more common“, Study author Bravata. Also, no particularly healthy fruits or vegetables from organic farming could be found. "We were surprised we did not find anything," said one of the authors, Crystal Smith-Spangler, from Stanford University.

But how meaningful is the comparative study of the data really? Even if benefits were found in one of the two groups, that would not be proof for a long time. In order to confirm the assumption scientifically, large and different groups of people, who either feed one way or another, would have to be accompanied decades. To ensure that these results are not consumed, both groups of people would have to maintain almost the same lifestyle. Because other factors such as habitats, exercise, smoking, genetics or stress are known to play a major health role. Therefore, it seems almost impossible to provide scientific proof.

Twisted facts
However, many mainstream magazines and agencies write that organic products are not healthier than conventional foods. This general statement is wrong and is not proven by the authors of the study. The argument of pesticides remains powerful. Many pesticides have been proven to damage health and increase the risk of cancer.

The Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (RKI) argues that regulations regulate how much pesticide residues may be present in food so as not to harm the health of the consumer. And if the salary were exceeded, it would not automatically mean that there was an increased risk to health, said Nele Boehme of the RKI.

Pesticides and antibiotics
It is precisely these limits that are constantly dealt with by conventional agriculture, in which several different pesticides are used. Greenpeace therefore criticizes the mixtures for years as „chemical cocktails“, which pose an increased risk to humans in the long term. In addition, livestock is used in large quantities antibiotics, leading to antibiotic resistance. Although most researchers are still covered in this statement, but this is only because currently a development is perceived, clinical studies on this context (still) missing.

Environmental and climate protection important arguments
That's why the Stanford researchers emphasize that their conclusion „in no way intended to dissuade people from organic food“. Finally, talk „many more arguments such as better livestock farming, sustainable growth and environmental protection for the purchase of organic food“, says Bravata.

Gerald Wehde, spokesman for the organic farming association Bioland, also looks serenely at the study results. According to his statements „the health is not our main fight field“. The main goal of organic farming is to preserve the environment. "Water protection, climate protection, species protection, soil quality - that's where we deliver a great deal of ecological performance." Says Wehde. (Sb)

Read about:
People who buy organic live healthier lives
Stiftung Warentest: Organic not necessarily better
Greenpeace: Fruits and vegetables with pesticides
Antibiotics in the baby age increase overweight risk

Picture: Peter von Bechen