UK's FSA Finds No Health Benefits To Organic Food
blackbeak writes "The UK Food Standards Agency's 'Independant Organic Review' results were just released, and the BBC rushed to publish the findings in the shockingly titled article, 'No Health Benefits to Organic Food.' From the article, 'There is little difference in nutritional value and no evidence of any extra health benefits from eating organic produce, UK researchers found.' A peek into the research at Postpeakpublishing provides a slightly deeper look."
---
Exotic Food Feed @ Feed Distiller
How the hell did I get to be 50, and how did my mother reach 80 eating all of these deadly chemicals. And didn't I just read somewhere that the 'over 100' club has more people in it than ever before??
I guess all these people must be eating organic food, otherwise how would they have survived.
I rarely read replies, it's my opinion and if you thought about your opinion a little more, I'm OK with that.
Your not having heard of ethylene gas being used to ripen tomatoes matters very little to me.
As for beef, marbling isn't the only thing that matters to the palate. I've had properly fed, properly handled, properly prepared Angus plenty of times, and I prefer Hereford. I prefer caribou venison over both though, so maybe I am odd.
And I did not write "growth hormone" I wrote "chemicals". In the US growth hormones are illegal to use with chickens and turkeys, have been for a long time. "Chemicals", it will surprise you to learn, include antibiotics. Those are added to fowl feed often to keep them in good health despite extremely high population densities inside CAFOs. You don't even have to inject it, they eat the stuff right up.
Pigs do too. Again CAFOs need chemical food additives otherwise the animals will all die.
And as with cattle, swine and fowl breeds are selected for fast growth over quality. Tamworth hogs make tastier bacon, but Wal-Mart doesn't compete on taste.
"Sacrifice for the good of The State" - The State
Yes, I did read what I responded to. Even more, and unlike you, I comprehended the meaning.
It doesn't matter one bit what he observed - because he didn't make his decision based on any knowledge of the actual effects of what he observed. Once you take away knowledge, emotion is all that is left. (Ok, may be superstition is left too.)
That's what one gets when one uses a word just because of the warm and fuzzy associations it evokes, confusion. And why exactly should I trust whoever is in charge of the regulations this week? I'd prefer actual facts instead of a fell-good stamp on the package.
Analogies don't equal equalities, they are merely somewhat analogous.