New Study Finds Organic Crops Are Healthier Than GMOs

0
68

Researchers from Washington State University (WSU) and Newcastle University (NCU) have released a study regarding the healthful benefits of organic fruits and vegetables showing in conclusion that “organic crops, on average, have higher concentrations of antioxidants, lower concentrations of [the toxic mental] Cd and a lower incidence of pesticide residues than the non-organic comparators across regions and production seasons.”

Because of the higher concentrates of antioxidants, these foods are cancer preventatives, provide more nutrients necessary for optimal health and are overall better to consume than their genetically modified counterparts.

The WSU paper also asserts that organic food has higher concentrations of antioxidants such as “phenolic acids, flavanones, stilbenes, flavones, flavonols and anthocyanins … many of these compounds have previously been linked to a reduced risk of chronic diseases, including CVD and neurodegenerative diseases and certain cancers, in dietary intervention and epidemiological studies.”

The researchers showed that “in general organic crops have several nutritional benefits that stem from the way the crops are produced.”

It was surmised that “organic crops had 18 to 69% higher concentrations of antioxidant compounds” and this means that simply by switching to organic foods the individual “would get 20 to 40 percent more antioxidants.”

Other findings of the study:

• Pesticide residues were three to four times more likely in conventional foods than organic ones
• Because of certain fertilizers, conventional crops had roughly twice as much cadmium, a toxic heavy metal contaminant, as organic crops

The conclusions pointed to how “organic plants tend to produce more phenols and polyphenols to defend against pest attacks and related injuries. In people, phenols and polyphenols can help prevent diseases triggered or promoted by oxidative damage, like coronary heart disease, stroke, and certain cancers.”

In 2012, Stanford University (SU) published a study claiming that the nutritional values of organic food are not more than conventionally grown and GMO food.

The study stated the price hike of organic food combined with the researcher’s allegation that organic food supporters over-blown health benefits result in “no advantages of organic meat and produce”.

Dr. Dena Bravata, lead author of the study and affiliate with Stanford’s Center for Health Policy, explained: “When we began this project, we thought that there would likely be some findings that would support the superiority of organics over conventional food. I think we were definitely surprised.”

The summation of the study: organic food is a marketing scheme to coerce people into paying higher prices for the same quality food. The study says: “The evidence does not suggest marked health benefits from consuming organic versus conventional foods although organic produce may reduce exposure to pesticide residues and organic chicken and pork may reduce exposure to antibiotic resistant-bacteria.”

Claiming that the supposition of the study was to inform the public on the nutritional value of conventional versus organic food, Bravata asserts that there was no outside financing that would have created a bias.

Bravata believes that organic food bears no more nutritional value nor have more beneficial vitamins over conventional and GMO produce and meat.

Stanford has multiple ties to GMO giants such as Monsanto of whom they receive funding from that totals an estimated half billion dollars.

Susan J. Colby, chief executive officer for the Clayman Institute for Gender Research, previously served as co-president for Monsanto’s Sustainable Development sector.

In the data gathering for the Stanford study, the researchers purposefully excluded previous studies and research that did not “meet their criteria for scientific rigor”.

In a two year study, scientists from Washington State University found that “organically grown strawberries were far more nutritious than their chemically grown counterparts.”

John Reganhold, lead researcher and professor, states that with all the data they have collected, and comparing chemical methods of growing food as juxtaposed with organic techniques, the actual way in which the food is grown affects the nutritional value of the food. Use of pesticides and chemicals create dangerous food laced with carcinogenic properties.