In article ,
songbird wrote:

---from a google news headline in passing...---

The Guardian - 1 hour ago

Organic produce and meat typically is no better for you than
conventional food when it comes to vitamin and nutrient content,
although it does generally reduce exposure to pesticides and
antibiotic-resistant bacteria, according to a US study.

---

ok, so tell me, how does "reduce exposure to pesticides and
antibiotic-resistant bacteria" equate with "typically no better
for you" ?


songbird

And who sets the levels that are considered safe? The EPA that sent
first responders into "ground zero" while it was still toxic, and
reassured residents that it was safe to return home?

Would it come as a surprise that Proposition 37 on California's November
ballot is about labeling GM products?

The study wasn't a "gold standard" (double blind) study. It was a
review of other studies (a megastudy) which brings in judgement calls on
what to include, and what to leave out. Ancel Keys, maybe the most
famous perpetrators of this type of study used 6 countries to show a
link between cholesterol, and heart disease. He used 6 countries when he
had data for 22 countries. Needless to say, when all 22 countries were
included, the connection between cholesterol, and heart disease went
away, but today, Lipitor makes a lot of money from cholesterol.
p 18
Good Calories, Bad Calories: Fats, Carbs, and the Controversial Science
of Diet and Health (Vintage)
by Gary Taubes
http://www.amazon.com/Good-Calories-...nce/dp/1400033
462/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1271102831&sr=1-1
(at a library near you)


The "partisan" organic site
http://organic.lovetoknow.com/Nutritional_Content_of_Organic_Food
lists a John Hopkins, 2001 study of organic vs conventional (which used
to be organic) . As I understand it, as explained by Alyson E.
Mitchell, foods grown on different soil will have varying amounts of
nutrient compounds, so matching them at a check-out counter may not be
definitive. Some vegetables grown conventionally on rich soil may have
equal nutrients. As she explained it, carrots and tomatoes grown
organically will have more nutrients. Bell peppers and other vegetables
have roughly equal amounts of nutrients grown either way.

The strongest argument I can find is a study on the "Effect of Organic
and Conventional Cropping Systems on Ascorbic Acid, Vitamin C,
Flavonoids, Nitrate, and Oxalate in 27 Varieties of Spinach (Spinacia
oleracea L.)" by Alyson E. Mitchell
http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/jf300051f

and

http://www.ota.com/organic/benefits/nutrition.html

Then there is the soil, and the pesticides.

--
Welcome to the New America.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hA736oK9FPg
or
E Pluribus Unum
Green Party Nominee Jill Stein & Running Mate, Cheri Honkala
http://www.democracynow.org/2012/7/13/green_party_nominee_jill_stein_running