Skip to main content

Organic is about more than nutrition

This was interesting "news" this morning...I'll post a couple different links to various versions of it. Depending on the spin, it either made me angry or left me wanting to explain more. Runners World actually did it a bit better. Then there was the ridiculous NPR version.

Oooh, organic foods may not be nutritionally better than convention foods!

I take issue with the word "healthy" being thrown around so carelessly. If you're buying organic simply because you think the added price is getting you some unknown benefit to your body from a calorie standpoint, you do indeed have another thing coming. That's not why you should buy organic and the fact that we're wasting scientific time on such nonsense is a bit beside the point.

As proud owners of a weekly CSA box from a wonderful, hard-working family of farmers at Iron Creek Farm, I can tell you that nutrition has little to do with our choice to prefer organic. If you made the long list, it would be at the bottom. Rather, we like to know who grew our food and where. We like that is free of pesticides and chemicals. We like that it tastes better. We like that it's better for the planet to have sustainable agriculture. We like to support small, family farmers. We like that our food has integrity from soil to table.

So what do you mean by "healthy?" Organic sounds pretty healthy when you put it that way. It's better for you, the planet, the economy...that sounds like a win for everyone.

You're not paying for better nutrition when you buy organic and local. You're buying peace of mind. And taste. And better quality. Something that probably wasn't flown here unripe from a foreign country. In the case of animals, your beef probably wasn't raised in a huge feedlot and injected with hormones and drugs. If it's eggs, your hen who laid it probably had a little better diet and life.

The "news" today about organic food isn't really news at all.

Comments