Pixabay/Skitterphoto

If you are interested in living the healthiest lifestyle, you likely spend a good amount of time browsing the internet and looking for new research that might point you towards the difference between organic and non-organic foods. Of course, if you are really diligent, you might have discovered that claims of organic vegetables containing greater nutrients is no more than a fantasy. In truth, all scientific evidence so far has suggested organic and non-organic vegetables result in the same nutritional counts. Despite this, a recent study at Newcastle University has studied over 200 different papers on organic animal products and found there is a nutritional difference there. Before you get too excited though, you may want to further review the findings.

What Went into the Study?

Pixabay/mwootan

Sometimes, a scientist’s best tools are not the lab results him or herself came up with, but rather the collective research papers of others. Going off of this theory, the researchers at Newcastle University reviewed 196 papers on milk and 67 papers on meet comparing organic and non-organic varieties. In doing so, they were able to observe overall trends and determine which ones remained consistent through the various studies and which might have been due to some bias. At the end, the major finding suggested that organic varieties of meat and milk offer a 50 percent greater amount of Omega-3 fatty acids than non-organic varieties.

Organic and Non-Organic Meats

Pixabay/wernerdetjen

Omega-3 fatty acids are recognized to have an overall positive effect on the body, strengthening the heart and shoring up the brain for a long and healthy life. Unfortunately, this 50 percent difference isn’t as significant as it sounds because milk and meat don’t actually contain all that much to begin with. Actually, it was discovered that the real increase overall would be about 1.5 percent in the average diet, which would do very little in terms of health. On the other hand, it is also important to note the organic milk contained 74 percent less iodine than non-organic varieties. Though not commonly looked at, iodine is essential for your diet, so missing out on this could end up netting a loss for many consumers.

In other words, the health difference is negligible at best, and for some it could be harmful.

Who Cares About Nutrients?

Pixabay/jill111

Of course, some people have come to accept there is no real nutritional difference between organic and non-organic foods but they still insist on sticking to that organic diet. The main reason is often because they see other benefits to such a choice. For instance, many scientists who study climate change suggest organic farming is actually much better for the earth. Additionally, animal rights activists insist organically raised animals are treated better, though this could be considered a subjective view. After all, an antibiotic-free environment means animals who get an infection either die or suffer through it, which doesn’t sound much like good treatment.

Is it time to put this argument to rest about organic and non-organic foods? We’re sure there will always be a viewpoint one way or the other. We will leave that up to you decide.

What is your stance on organic and non-organic foods? Are there other reasons you prefer organic foods? Let us know in the comments below.

Comments

comments