Poll surge

Have you noticed that the poll on the comparative nutritional value of organic produce versus conventional produce? It started out 9 to zero - organic produce has no better nutrition values than conventional. However, now the poll says 13 to 6, with 6 indicating belief that research will show that organic produce is more nutritious than conventional f/v.

Why the surge for organic? One reason may be I mentioned the poll when I visited The Ethicurean blog. Draw your own conclusions about readership and beliefs...

By the way, here is one story published last fall references a still unpublished study claiming that organic produce is indeed more nutritious than conventional produce. From the story:

Some organic foods, including fruit, vegetables and milk, may be more nutritious than non-organic produce, according to an investigation by British scientists.

Early results from a £12m study showed that organic fruit and vegetables contained up to 40% more antioxidants than non-organic varieties, according to Professor Carlo Leifert at Newcastle University, who leads the EU-funded Quality Low Input Food project.

Larger differences were found in milk, with organic varieties containing more than 60% more antioxidants and healthy fatty acids, he said.

Antioxidant-rich food is often promoted as healthier because in lab tests the compounds neutralise free radicals that are thought to contribute to ageing.

The findings contradict advice from the Food Standards Agency, which maintains there is no scientific evidence to suggest organic food is healthier.

During the four-year project, Prof Leifert's team, which is based at the university's Tesco centre for organic agriculture, reared cattle and grew fruit and vegetables on adjacent organic and non-organic sites across Europe, including a 725-acre farm attached to the university. The full results of the study will be released in full over the next 12 months.