Organic Food Not Healthier than Conventional Produce, Study Finds

Consumers are willing to pay a premium for food produced organically based on claimed health and nutritional benefits. The global organic food market was estimated to be worth USD 47 billion in 2007. But an international study, published by the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, found there is no evidence of any difference in nutrition between conventional and organically produced food. Researchers from the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine led by Alan Dangour, made the "most extensive systematic review of the available published literature on nutrient content of organic food ever conducted." They searched online databases, such as PubMed, Web of Science, and CAB Abstracts, for relevant articles published in the last 50 years.

The researchers found that key nutrients, including magnesium, potassium, calcium and zinc, were similar in organic and conventional crops. However, they found that non-organic crops had significantly higher nitrogen content and that organic crops contain higher levels of phosphorus. Dangour said that these differences relate to differences in production methods, like fertilizer use and ripeness at harvest, and are unlikely to be of any public health relevance. The study was funded and commissioned by the UK Food Standard Agency.

Download the paper at http://www.ajcn.org/cgi/content/abstract/ajcn.2009.28041v1 For more information, read http://www.lshtm.ac.uk/news/2009/organicfood.html