No Difference between Organic Food and Chemically  Grown Food?

In a recent LA Times article, a columnist wrote that there is no difference between Organically grown food and Conventionally grown food. He cites several studies that prove that there is no difference between the nutritional levels and he cites doctors and they all say the same thing “Eating Conventionally grown produce is not only safe but just as nutritional”. 

  It is besides that fact that it totally ignores environmental issues, health issues of not just the consumer but the workers that pick it as well as the fact that powerful business forces are at work here to keep the public confused.

  Lets ignore these issues (for now) and lets take a look at what is wrong with this idea that organic food and conventionally grown food is equal.

First off, not every organic farmer knows what they are doing just like not every one that makes compost knows what they are doing.

You are only as good a gardener (farmer) as the compost you make. Not all compost are equal just like not all organic farmers are equal. Some are actual organic farmers while others are in name only.

Many farmers have decided to “Go Organic” because they will then be able to sell their “products” for more but if I were to ask them just one question and if they failed that question then they will have not only the same problems as the conventionally grown but their “produce” will not be any more nutritional than them; especially if the conventional farmer either does not make or use compost but also does not apply rock dust .

There is a basic law of nature that says,“You get out what you put in”. You want trace minerals? Then put that into the soil; however you cannot just throw rock dust every where and expect the minerals to then become available to the plants.

Even Rock Dust. All rock dusts are not the same, some are rich in calcium but low in iron; it all depends from what part of the world and how it was made that determines what minerals it has.

The article as well as the studies do not even mention soil depletion, I wonder why? If your soil is depleted of minerals then the produce grown on it will also depleted in minerals.

There is a key to this problem, in the article which mentions taste.  The better the taste the more minerals it has (i.e. see Brix levels Vs Mineral levels in past article).

Taste tells us we should eat it or not. We have developed over the years to eat what tastes sweet and not eat what taste bitter. Pests have developed along the same lines except that nature in her wisdom made it such that when a plant has high Brix, it will have higher sugar, which in turn means higher mineral content, which in turn means higher complex carbohydrates (insects cannot eat simple carbohydrates and it is this simple carbo that plants get if they are fed high nitrogen fertilizers, they grow fast but are weak and deficient in minerals).

When I started my business back in  1956, I heard the same (from the forces) that chemical and organic produce are equal in nutritional value and whats a little pesticide? That has not changed over the many years. You really want to know, then test real organic farmers like Death Smith Valley , Rodale or The Bio-Dynamic Institute and compare that! All of the studies, including the most recent study (which really just studied all the studies) are flawed in that they were not asking the right questions so they all found the same results and just passed that along. Did any study actually grow the different types of food and see for themselves?  That takes knowledge of growing which most do not have and so there whole study is based on a false assumption.

Please read http://www.soilandhealth.org/06clipfile/nutritional%20quality%20of%20organically-grown%20food.html

to get you started. I will write more next week!

Andy Lopez

Invisible Gardener

Any questions? Email andy@invisiblegardener.com