Why Organic?

Why not is a better question. The debate about the superiority of organic foods is still being hotly debated in the scientific community. Questions about the environmental impact, soil quality and the nutritional value of organically grown foods abound. If we consider this question from a common sense standpoint, it seems like an obvious answer. Does it really seem plausible that a synthetic chemical used to kill insects would not pose some risk to the larger creatures that are being exposed to it. Or that bovine hormones that are known to increase the risk of hormone sensitive cancers will not make their way into the bodies of those who consume the meat. The plausibility of these arguments seems poor and the organic community is rising to the occasion with research that refutes these.

At a symposium at the 2009 annual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, some of this important research was presented. Many of the analysis' were centered around the question of organic food quality versus conventionally grown food. In one study, 27 cultivars of organically grown spinach demonstrate significantly higher levels of flavonoids and vitamin C, and lower levels of nitrates. Nitrates are known to be detrimental to human health because they lead to the formation of known carcinogenic compounds in the gut, called nitrosamines. Organically farmed tomatoes were found to have significantly higher levels of soluble solids and natural plant molecules called secondary plant metabolites, including flavonoids, lycopene, and Vitamin C. If the nutrional quality of organically grown food is not enough to tempt you in that direction, consider the toxic component of conventionally grown foods. Pesticies that are currently in use are atrazine, cyanazine and simazine which are collectively referred to as triazine pesticides. Studies in animals haved indicted that the triazines as well as some others in the same chemical class, produce mammary tumors in rats. Opponents of organic farming will argue that the human studies of pesticide harm are not conclusive enough. At what point does preliminary evidence of harm become definitive enough to abide by measures that could save lives? One such chemical of question was DDT back in the 70's. The chemical was finally banned in 1972 and four years later researchers reported that women with breast cancer had significantly higher levels of DDE (the metabolized form of DDT) in their tumors than the surrounding healthy tissues of their breasts. This and other correlations seem too important to ignore.

For many reasons, animal products should be kept to a minimum for cancer treatment and prevention. One of many reasons is that the consumption of meat puts one at greater risk of exposure not only to hormones and antibiotics, but additional pesticide exposure through animal feed. We fully understand that organic food is more expensive than conventionally grown produce and meats. However, so are the medical bills that we as a nation will be responsible for as a result of poor health practices. When deciding what to put in your bodies, this is not the place to skimp on cost. Always buy organic animal products and whenever possible, purchase those that come from animals that are pastuerized. There are produce items that tend to absorb less of the pesticides than others so if you must, the following items are the safer ones to skimp on.

- onion
- avocado
- sweet corn
- pineapple
- mango
- asparagus
- sweet peas
- kiwi
- cabbage
- eggplant
- papaya
- watermelon
- broccoli
- tomato
- sweet potato