tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14162253.post294832054356029030..comments2024-03-27T08:39:28.807-06:00Comments on Wash Park Prophet: Jury Out On Organic Health BenefitsAndrew Oh-Willekehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02537151821869153861noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14162253.post-73514699450966894372008-01-10T18:27:00.000-07:002008-01-10T18:27:00.000-07:00You provided five links. The first one was a bad ...You provided five links. <BR/><BR/>The first one was a bad link and I couldn't find the article. An article on the topic at the same site is <A HREF="http://health.msn.com/nutrition/articlepage.aspx?cp-documentid=100160465" REL="nofollow">this one</A>. It concurs with me that there are differences in pesticide exposure between organics and non-organics, but that the levels received from eating conventional foods is so low that it isn't clear whether or not it is clinically significant, and the alleged nutritional benefits have not been established to be consistent (i.e. a result of organic farming as opposed to just a result of quality farming), or significant for the quantity of foods that normal people eat in the context of a larger healthy diet. It confirms my observation about sustainability "crop yields were about 20 percent lower in organic systems. But . . . in some cases, organic farming methods used less than half the fertilizer and energy of conventional methods. Thus, organic farming methods may ultimately be more sustainable than chemical-intensive farming." <BR/><BR/>The second echos the study I cite which shows that organic produce is distinguishable from non-organic produce in certain ways, and that the distinctions could plausibly could lead to health benefits, but doesn't actually show any health benefits.<BR/><BR/>The third (ehponline) shows that pesticide and fertilizer use on farms is corrollated to a statistically significant level with increased incidence of autism spectrum disorders among mothers who were living near these pollution sources at the time the pollution was being emitted in the weeks of pregnancy (the first eight) which is associated the development of the systems impaired in pregnancy. Specifically, it found that "models comparing<BR/>children of mothers living within 500 m [about three city blocks in distance] of field sites with the highest nonzero quartile of<BR/>organochlorine poundage to those with mothers not living near field sites suggested an odds ratio<BR/>for ASD of 6.1 (95% confidence interval, 2.4–15.3). ASD risk increased with the poundage of<BR/>organochlorine applied and decreased with distance from field sites."<BR/><BR/>The second to last link (Organic Center 101) involves pregnant women using organic milk and meat and is dated August 2007. This is similar in design to the first study I linked to in my post, and is also conducted in Europe, at almost the same time. But, unlike the study I cite, I says that organic dairy and meat changes breast milk composition in a way that in theory ought to be good, rather than linking it to a health outcome. There is only a health benefit if rumenic acid levels in breast milk of comparable women who do not eat organic doesn't meet an infant's needs, something not established by the study. It is a bit like saying that Vitamin C levels are higher in people who drink a tall glass of orange juice every day and also take a vitamin supplement. Maybe it is good, but there is nothing in the study that shows that this is the case.<BR/><BR/>The last of the links (Organic Center 102) shows that pestisides are harmful to pregnant farmers who encounter them occupationally.<BR/><BR/>In short, all of those links agree with my post that the evidence of actual health benefits from eating organic food is slim, even though organic may have health benefits and may be a good thing for other reasons.Andrew Oh-Willekehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02537151821869153861noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14162253.post-30452459480096338042008-01-10T09:37:00.000-07:002008-01-10T09:37:00.000-07:00Your "lack of proof" may more be a result of you n...Your "lack of proof" may more be a result of you not being aware of the many, many studies showing the benefits of organics and the harmful effects of conventional farming. Here are a few: http://green.msn.com/articles/article.aspx?aid=295>1=10725 <BR/>http://cordis.europa.eu/fetch?CALLER=EN_NEWS&ACTION=D&SESSION=&RCN=28607<BR/>http://www.ehponline.org/members/2007/10168/10168.pdf<BR/>http://www.organic-center.org/science.hot.php?action=view&report_id=101<BR/>http://www.organic-center.org/science.hot.php?action=view&report_id=102Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com