Going Organic

[Quiet Heather]

I appreciate your stance, Jeff. I'd hate to see someone not eat good healthy foods just because they aren't organic. And I agree that it's very sad and frustrating what is going on with corporate organics.

This is a link to a chart that shows some independently owned organic food companies. It's Canadian, but most of the brands are available here in the states. I found it useful.

http://www.certifiedorganic.bc.ca/rcbtoa/services/corporate-independent-brands.html

And here is a long list of the corporate owned natural food brands:


Who really owns those "NATURAL" food companies?

• Adams Baking is owned by Charter Baking Co.
• After the Fall is owned by Smuckers
• Arrowhead Mills is owned by the Hain Celestial Food Group
• Back to Nature is owned by Kraft, which is owned by Philip Morris
• Ben & Jerry's is owned by Unilever
• Boca Burgers are owned by Kraft Foods which is owned by Philip Morris.
• Burt’s Bees is owned by AEA Investors
• Cascadian Farms is owned by Small Planet Foods, which is owned by General Mills.
• Celestial Seasonings is owned by the Hain Celestial Food Group
• DeBoles is owned by the Hain Celestial Food Group
• Earth's Best is owned by the Hain Celestial Food Group
• Garden of Eatin' is owned by the Hain Celestial Food Group
• Health Valley is owned by the Hain Celestial Food Group
• Horizon Organic is owned by Dean Foods
• Jason's Natural Cosmetics is owned by the Hain Celestial Food Group
• Kashi is owned by Kellogg.
• Lightlife (purveyors of Gimme Lean, Smart Dogs, Foney Boloney, and Smart Deli Slices) is owned by ConAgra,
• Morningstar Farms is owned by Kellogg
• Mountain Sun is owned by Walnut Acres, which is owned by the Hain Celestial Food Group
• Muir Glen is owned by Small Planet Foods, which is owned by General Mills.
• Nantucket Nectars is owned by Cadbury Schweppes
• Nile Spice is owned by the Hain Celestial Food Group
• Odwalla Juice is owned by Coca-Cola.
• Organic Cow of Vermont is owned by Horizon, which is owned by Dean Foods
• Rudy’s Organic Bakery is owned by Charter Baking Co.
• R.W. Knudsen is owned by Smuckers
• Imagine Foods (Rice Dream) is owned by the Hain Celestial Food Group
• Santa Cruz Organics is owned by Smuckers
• Seeds of Change is owned by M&M Mars Candy.
• Simply Asian is owned by McCormack & Co.
• Spectrum Organics is owned by the Hain Celestial Food Group
• Stonyfield Farm is owned by Danone
• Terra Chips is owned by the Hain Celestial Food Group
• Thai Kitchen is owned by McCormack & Co.
• Tom's of Maine is owned by Colgate
• Tostitas Organic is owned by Pepsi
• The Vermont Bread Company is owned by Charter Baking Co.
• Walnut Acres is owned by the Hain Celestial Food Group
• Westbrae Natural is owned by the Hain Celestial Food Group
• Westsoy is owned by the Hain Celestial Food Group
• White Wave (makers of Silk Soy Milk) is owned Dean Foods
• Worthington Foods is owned by Kellogg
• Yves Veggie Cuisine is owned by Hain Celestial Food Group

I don't think Kraft is owned by Philip Morris anymore, but I'm not sure.

[Chumly]

CSA's (Community Supported Agriculture) is a good way to get fresh, local produce. I have found two organic farms within 12 miles of my home where I can purchase a CSA share. I did this last year and thought it was a wonderful experince! Most of the food was picked the morning i picked it up and tasted so delicious! Most of the vegetables in the supermarket are so bland in comparison. When my shares ended last year, my vegetable consumption dropped quite a bit at first until I got used to the lower quality.

[hatshepsut]

This is a very interesting thread.

As the wife of a cancer survivor (surgeries, chemotherapy, etc.), I am very careful about my husband's foods. While I am sympathetic to the local foods movement for environmental reasons, I feel that my husband is in a subset of people for whom there is no margin for an error in choices. I do buy organic for every item I can find and we eat a vegan very low-fat diet. I buy local organic whenever possible.

I am aware of the lists that exist showing the fruits and vegetables that are most likely to have heavier pesticide residues and I am also aware of products that advertise that they cleanse conventional produce of pesticide residues. Since people who have posted in this thread are obviously informed on this subject, I wonder if you could share information you have about the most effective ways of cleaning conventional produce.

Thank you.

Hatshepsut

[JeffN]

, I wonder if you could share information you have about the most effective ways of cleaning conventional produce.

Thank you.

Hatshepsut

check out this discussion on the topic.

http://www.jeffnovick.com/component/opt ... 7/catid,9/

In Health
Jeff

[JeffN]

Nutritional quality of organic foods: a systematic review
Published July 29, 2009; doi:10.3945/ajcn.2009.28041
Alan D Dangour, Sakhi K Dodhia, Arabella Hayter, Elizabeth Allen, Karen Lock, and Ricardo Uauy

ABSTRACT

Background: Despite growing consumer demand for organically produced foods, information based on a systematic review of their nutritional quality is lacking.

Objective: We sought to quantitatively assess the differences in reported nutrient content between organically and conventionally produced foodstuffs.

Design: We systematically searched PubMed, Web of Science, and CAB Abstracts for a period of 50 y from 1 January 1958 to 29 February 2008, contacted subject experts, and hand-searched bibliographies. We included peer-reviewed articles with English abstracts in the analysis if they reported nutrient content comparisons between organic and conventional foodstuffs. Two reviewers extracted study characteristics, quality, and data. The analyses were restricted to the most commonly reported nutrients.

Results: From a total of 52,471 articles, we identified 162 studies (137 crops and 25 livestock products); 55 were of satisfactory quality. In an analysis that included only satisfactory quality studies, conventionally produced crops had a significantly higher content of nitrogen, and organically produced crops had a significantly higher content of phosphorus and higher titratable acidity. No evidence of a difference was detected for the remaining 8 of 11 crop nutrient categories analyzed. Analysis of the more limited database on livestock products found no evidence of a difference in nutrient content between organically and conventionally produced livestock products.

Conclusions: On the basis of a systematic review of studies of satisfactory quality, there is no evidence of a difference in nutrient quality between organically and conventionally produced foodstuffs. The small differences in nutrient content detected are biologically plausible and mostly relate to differences in production methods.

Received for publication May 7, 2009.
Accepted for publication July 2, 2009.


From ScienceDaily

Organic Food Not Nutritionally Better Than Conventionally-produced Food, Review Of Literature Shows

ScienceDaily (July 29, 2009) — There is no evidence that organically produced foods are nutritionally superior to conventionally produced foodstuffs, according to a study published July 29 in The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition.

Consumers appear willing to pay higher prices for organic foods based on their perceived health and nutrition benefits, and the global organic food market was estimated in 2007 to be worth £29 billion (£2 billion in the UK alone). Some previous reviews have concluded that organically produced food has a superior nutrient composition to conventional food, but there has to-date been no systematic review of the available published literature.

Researchers from the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine have now completed the most extensive systematic review of the available published literature on nutrient content of organic food ever conducted. The review focussed on nutritional content and did not include a review of the content of contaminants or chemical residues in foods from different agricultural production regimens.

Over 50,000 papers were searched, and a total of 162 relevant articles were identified that were published over a fifty-year period up to 29 February 2008 and compared the nutrient content of organically and conventionally produced foodstuffs. To ensure methodological rigour the quality of each article was assessed. To be graded as satisfactory quality, the studies had to provide information on the organic certification scheme from which the foodstuffs were derived, the cultivar of crop or breed of livestock analysed, the nutrient or other nutritionally relevant substance assessed, the laboratory analytical methods used, and the methods used for statistical analysis. 55 of the identified papers were of satisfactory quality, and analysis was conducted comparing the content in organically and conventionally produced foods of the 13 most commonly reported nutrient categories.

The researchers found organically and conventionally produced foods to be comparable in their nutrient content. For 10 out of the 13 nutrient categories analysed, there were no significant differences between production methods in nutrient content. Differences that were detected were most likely to be due to differences in fertilizer use (nitrogen, phosphorus), and ripeness at harvest (acidity), and it is unlikely that consuming these nutrients at the levels reported in organic foods would provide any health benefit.

Alan Dangour, of the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine's Nutrition and Public Health Intervention Research Unit, and one of the report's authors, comments: 'A small number of differences in nutrient content were found to exist between organically and conventionally produced foodstuffs, but these are unlikely to be of any public health relevance. Our review indicates that there is currently no evidence to support the selection of organically over conventionally produced foods on the basis of nutritional superiority. Research in this area would benefit from greater scientific rigour and a better understanding of the various factors that determine the nutrient content of foodstuffs'.

The study was commissioned and funded by the UK Food Standards Agency. The funder had no role in study design, data collection, analysis, interpretation or writing of the report. The review team held six progress meetings with the funder.

Journal reference:

1. Alan D Dangour, Sakhi K Dodhia, Arabella Hayter, Elizabeth Allen, Karen Lock, Ricardo Uauy. Nutritional quality of organic foods: a systematic review. The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, July 29, 2009 DOI: 10.3945/ajcn.2009.28041

[Clairembart]

" For 10 out of the 13 nutrient categories analysed, there were no significant differences between production methods in nutrient content"

Would you know what were these 13 categories? I wonder if micronutrients values were measured.

My understanding is that organic products are generally higher in phytonutrients or phytonutraceuticals or whatever it is called these days: the small molecules organic and wild plants do produce in larger quantities to protect themselves against invaders. According a local cancer researcher here in Quebec it is those same molecules that are particularly active against cancer cells in our body. Hence organic products would not be better because of macro nutrients like vitamins, proteins, carbohydrates and lipids or even vitamins and minerals. They would be better because of the higher production of the micronutrients that conventional produce do not produce in as large quantity since they are not "attacked" as much with their pesticide protection. He says also the minute amount of pesticide residues on all fruits and vegetables is not a problem with conventional food (unless you are a farm worker - especially in latin America). Lastly he also says conventional produce still does contain good amount of phytonutraceuticals and good health does not require eating organic foods.

What do you think of those considerations?

Personally I always try to go organic and local. But I have no hesitation eating fresh vegetables from the farm stand even if it is not organic. I just bought beautiful and dark green broccoli from a local farmer. Not organic but freshly harvested (less than 1 hour) and delicious. I'll choose that over wimpy old organic broccoli any time.

[Rob]

Jeff -

Thank you for the update with the most recent studies on the subject of organic food. We belong to a CSA. Knowing the source of our food and how/where it is grown has been more important than the USDA Organic label. Having said that, we cannot source all of our veggies year-round from the CSA so we have been buying a mix of certified organic and those foods we believe to have been grown traditionally (without heavy use of chemicals) rather than conventionally (with chemicals). There are farmers who simply don't want to go to the time and expense of having their produce certified as organic.

We've found significant differences in flavor and texture between organic and traditionally grown apples, tomatoes, cauliflower and broccoli, for example. I feel this is in part due to the specific variety and growing conditions.

More importantly, any products we purchase that are made from soy or corn, we make certain that they are organic to avoid GMO's. For example, we would never consider buying anything but organic tofu and tempeh.

[JeffN]

My understanding is that organic products are generally higher in phytonutrients or phytonutraceuticals or whatever it is called these days: the small molecules organic and wild plants do produce in larger quantities to protect themselves against invaders. According a local cancer researcher here in Quebec it is those same molecules that are particularly active against cancer cells in our body. Hence organic products would not be better because of macro nutrients like vitamins, proteins, carbohydrates and lipids or even vitamins and minerals. They would be better because of the higher production of the micronutrients that conventional produce do not produce in as large quantity since they are not "attacked" as much with their pesticide protection. He says also the minute amount of pesticide residues on all fruits and vegetables is not a problem with conventional food (unless you are a farm worker - especially in latin America). Lastly he also says conventional produce still does contain good amount of phytonutraceuticals and good health does not require eating organic foods.

What do you think of those considerations?

The largest review of cancer to date (WCRF/AICR 2007 Report) which I have discussed here several times, found no evidence to recommend organic fruits and veggies over conventional.

I would be willing to look at any evidence that shows an increase in cancer risk due to the consumption or conventionally grown produce. However, virtually every study to date has shown that eating more fruits and vegetables results in lower risk and incidence of disease including cancer and all these studies were done using conventional produce.

One of the reasons you sometimes see a difference in nutrition level is due to a dilution effect as conventional produce often has a higher water content.

Again, I am not for the use of chemicals in anyway in our environment, soil, or food at all. I used to set up on a street corner every weekend selling organic produce out a truck that I had brought in from Texas, Oregon and CA back when those states had their own certifications that were very strict. I also ran an organic co-op out of my kitchen each week at the same time. But I am against false claims, false beliefs and especially an industry who many trust, who takes advantage of those who trust them by charging more because of false beliefs in their product.

In Health
Jeff

[cecac]

I have heard that it is very important to purchase rice that is organic because it is actually sitting in water and if it isn't organic it is therefore well inundated with chemicals.

Being a large family, we have not been able to afford to purchase organic without a considerable price difference. This thread is a relief to me, but I guess I'd appreciate that particular information debunked seeing as how we are going thru rice around here at a very alarming rate.

We will make the investment if it is considered very harmful, so any comment on this would be appreciated. I am about to purchase 50-100 pounds of brown rice.

Thank you,
Cara

[JeffN]

I have heard that it is very important to purchase rice that is organic because it is actually sitting in water and if it isn't organic it is therefore well inundated with chemicals.

Being a large family, we have not been able to afford to purchase organic without a considerable price difference. This thread is a relief to me, but I guess I'd appreciate that particular information debunked seeing as how we are going thru rice around here at a very alarming rate.

We will make the investment if it is considered very harmful, so any comment on this would be appreciated. I am about to purchase 50-100 pounds of brown rice.

Thank you,
Cara

Hi Cara

To be fair, in order to comment, I would have to see the study or report where these comments on rice come from as I am unfamiliar with them.

In Health
Jeff

[JeffN]

An author of a San Rafael newspaper did the experiment and ate nothing but locally produced food for a month. His weekly cost was $300 per person.

Also, according to a study published on April 16 in the journal Environmental Science & Technology, the fuel burned in transporting food items from farm to marketplace creates just a small percentage of the total greenhouse gas emissions associated with the food. Instead, they recommended consumers should shift their diets to include more foods that require less energy to produce in the first place.

Quoting from an article on the study..

http://news.mongabay.com/2008/0602-ucsc ... miles.html

"The start-to-finish process of raising and distributing red meat causes more greenhouse gas emission than any other food group, with dairy products coming in second. Animal products create the greatest amounts of nitrous oxide, emitted as a result of soil fertilization and management, because animals are inefficient at using plant energy. Producing red meat and dairy also causes the bulk of all methane emissions, which are put out by ruminant animals and manure fertilizer. Lower on the greenhouse gas emission scale are non-red meat protein sources such as chicken, fish, eggs and nuts, as well as fruit and vegetables."

A 2006 UN Report concluded;

"the livestock sector emerges as one of the top two or three most significant contributors to the most serious environmental problems, at every scale from local to global." “…responsible for 18% of the world’s greenhouse gas emissions”

Chronic diseases account for more than 60% of medical care expenditures with CVD, Stroke, Diabetes, Obesity and Cancer leading the way.

According to a report published in the August issue of The American Journal of Medicine, bankruptcies due to medical bills increased by nearly 50% in a six-year period, from 46% in 2001 to 62% in 2007.

The WHO report, 'Preventing Chronic Diseases: A Vital Investment' 06/06/2005, said;

"the major causes of chronic diseases are known, and if these risk factors were eliminated, at least 80% of all heart disease, stroke and type 2 diabetes would be prevented; over 40% of cancer would be prevented."

They have also identified the 4-5 lifestyle related behaviors which would prevent these diseases. Yet, several studies have shown that only about 3-4% of Americans engage in all 5 of these.

Therefore, these 4-5 lifestyle behaviors would alone have the biggest impact on our economy, health, & environment. These 4-5 lifestyle behaviors are described in the Triage Your Health thread above.

So, from my professional perspective, these lifestyle behaviors are the single most important issues for anyone to focus on. As Dr Esselstyn says, (and I am paraphrasing) we each only have so many "units" of what we can focus on at a time and be successful, therefore focus on the most important first.

Once they have incorporated these into their lives (which I recommend they do), then taking the next steps, whichever they decide to be most important (organic, local, non GMO, etc) would make sense to me and I would highly encourage.

Otherwise, I am going to have many patients dying of CVD, Stroke, Diabetes and Cancers with a cupboard full of organic and/or non GMO food.

In Health
Jeff

[cecac]

I have heard that it is very important to purchase rice that is organic because it is actually sitting in water and if it isn't organic it is therefore well inundated with chemicals.

Being a large family, we have not been able to afford to purchase organic without a considerable price difference. This thread is a relief to me, but I guess I'd appreciate that particular information debunked seeing as how we are going thru rice around here at a very alarming rate.

We will make the investment if it is considered very harmful, so any comment on this would be appreciated. I am about to purchase 50-100 pounds of brown rice.

Thank you,
Cara

Hi Cara

To be fair, in order to comment, I would have to see the study or report where these comments on rice come from as I am unfamiliar with them.

In Health
Jeff

Oh yes, I see what you mean. It is taking me a bit to get deprogrammed from all the reading I've done over the years.

Thank you for the information on this thread and also on the Triage sticky. While I was only able to scan read it, I see the point. I think it will be required reading for my highschoolers.

It is so nice to have some of the hang ups falling away for me. Case in point is the 2 cans of peaches/pears that I like to put in the morning cereal (it is the ones canned in pear juice). I've always considered something like that a treat because of all I've read about raw and etc......now I have the freedom to realize we like those canned fruits and there is nothing wrong with and everything right with feeding them to my family.

I completely agree that maximizing on the most important things is by far the best way to go......and it is so helpful to realize this concept being someone such as myself, a mom trying to wade thru all of this and do what I can for my kids and husband.

Blessings,
Cara

[JeffN]

An author of a San Rafael newspaper did the experiment and ate nothing but locally produced food for a month. His weekly cost was $300 per person.

That is amazing! My wife and I buy about 50-75% organic and spend about $150-175 per week TOTAL! That's $75-85 per person. Of course things cost less in Tucson than San Rafael but we do shop mostly at Whole Foods...

The story is on page 23

http://www.pacificsun.com/morguepdf/200 ... ction1.pdf

In Health
Jeff

[JeffN]

While they can criticize this report, it is inline with all the other data I have posted. In addition, to make their point, they have to provide the research and evidence making it, which they don't.

Remember, even the Organic Industry itself can not make the claim that their product is nutritionally superior because the evidence does not exist.

In Health
jeff

[JeffN]

http://www.ajcn.org/cgi/content/abstrac ... 10.29269v1

Nutrition-related health effects of organic foods: a systematic review Alan D Dangour, Karen Lock, Arabella Hayter, Andrea Aikenhead, Elizabeth Allen and Ricardo Uauy


ABSTRACT

Background: There is uncertainty over the nutrition-related benefits to health of consuming organic foods.

Objective: We sought to assess the strength of evidence that nutrition-related health benefits could be attributed to the consumption of foods produced under organic farming methods.

Design: We systematically searched PubMed, ISI Web of Science, CAB Abstracts, and Embase between 1 January 1958 and 15 September 2008 (and updated until 10 March 2010); contacted subject experts; and hand-searched bibliographies. We included peer-reviewed articles with English abstracts if they reported a comparison of health outcomes that resulted from consumption of or exposure to organic compared with conventionally produced foodstuffs.

Results: From a total of 98,727 articles, we identified 12 relevant studies. A variety of different study designs were used; there were 8 reports (67%) of human studies, including 6 clinical trials, 1 cohort study, and 1 cross-sectional study, and 4 reports (33%) of studies in animals or human cell lines or serum. The results of the largest study suggested an association of reported consumption of strictly organic dairy products with a reduced risk of eczema in infants, but the majority of the remaining studies showed no evidence of differences in nutrition-related health outcomes that result from exposure to organic or conventionally produced foodstuffs. Given the paucity of available data, the heterogeneity of study designs used, exposures tested, and health outcomes investigated, no quantitative meta-analysis was justified.

Conclusion: From a systematic review of the currently available published literature, evidence is lacking for nutrition-related health effects that result from the consumption of organically produced foodstuffs.