Debate continues over value of organic food

During the past few years, the chic and health-conscious alike have been flocking to organic food stores, which are cropping up all across the country. Supermarkets across the nation are hurrying to bolster their organic foods sections. In fact, the organic food industry is becoming big business, a label that many long-time supporters shun. The organic food industry has grown at a rate of 20 percent every year for the past decade and generated more than $7 billion in the past year. Locally, Bloomingfoods claims to be busier than ever this summer. Still, it's unclear whether or not organic food is healthier than conventionally grown foods.\nEssentially, organic foods have not been produced with the aid of chemical pesticides, fertilizers or additives -- in the case of meats, the animal feeds are completely organic. Many people fear that pesticide residues on fruits and vegetables can increase their chances for cancer later in life. Audrey Spence, floor manager at Bloomingfoods, cited this as a reason for the rising popularity in organic foods.\n\"People just don\'t want chemicals on their foods," Spence said. \nSid Jaffe, the founder of Jaffe Bros. Natural Foods, went even further in his company\'s mission statement, which reads, in part: \"The ingestion of foods laced with residues of toxic materials is a distinct menace to well-being.\"\nBut skeptics of organic food believe any pesticide residues that remain on produce are marginal at worst. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) studies found that 70 percent of unwashed vegetables tested contained no pesticide residues. Many scientists believe that humans are exposed to far less than the allowable intake of pesticides. Regulatory monitoring performed by the FDA on 10,000 food samples from 1985 to 1991, as close to production as possible, resulted in fewer than 50 samples in violation of designated tolerances by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Of those 50, nearly all were illegal pesticides. The FDA declined to comment on organic food safety.\nMany people have strong suspicions that organic food might actually be less healthy than conventionally grown foods. Often organic farmers, as a natural alternative to chemical fertilizers, will use manure in their fields. Manure contains many pathogens, including E. coli (this should not be confused with E. Coli 0157:H7, a much more virulent strain). Also, fruits and vegetables contain natural pesticides which repel potential pests. \nSome studies have shown that organic foods actually contain higher levels of these natural pesticides, debunking the myth that organic foods are pesticide-free. Also, opponents argue that organic farmers often use sulfur and copper sulfate instead of chemical pesticides to control pests. These chemicals kill with less specificity than conventional pesticides. It should be noted that organic standards will phase out the use of copper sulfate by 2003.\nSupporters of organic farming defend the use of manure as a fertilizer.\n\"They are not using fresh manure," said Spence. "They compost it; by the time it is used it is nitrogen. (Because of this) I am not concerned about contamination.\"\nChemical nitrogen is what most conventional farmers use to fertilize their fields. Spence also believes that organic farms are friendlier for the environment, a sentiment that many supporters share, noting that farmers tend to rotate the crops in their fields and use techniques to prevent run-off. \nOpponents of organic farming repudiate claims that conventional farming is environmentally unfriendly. They believe that high-yield farming is absolutely necessary for cheaply feeding the world\'s immense and growing population. Also, they argue that high-yield farming spares land, providing habitats for plants and animals. Conventional farmers can use modern technology so people can continue to have diets rich in fruits and vegetables, which reduce an individual\'s chances of getting cancer.\nWhen trying to determine the difference in nutritional content between conventional and organic products, both sides seem uncertain. Conventional farmers maintain that there is no appreciable difference in nutritional content and point to studies that reinforce this claim. The organic industry has often made claims that their product is more nutritious but seems to be backing off just a little. \nShane Krieger, produce manager at Bloomingfoods, concedes that some ambiguity remains but said he objects to what he feels is a malicious campaign being waged by stakeholders of conventional growing aimed at discrediting organic products. \n\"The chemical industry is trying to debunk the organic industry by saying that the nutrient levels are the same. The best argument they can make is that it is equal, but some evidence shows that they (organic foods) are more nutritious. More research needs to be done on a unbiased level.\"\nConsumers often resolve this deadlock by simply choosing the produce they feel tastes better.\nOne thing both sides can agree on is that consumers should always wash fruit and vegetables, whether organically or conventionally grown, before eating them. This will reduce the amount of bacteria and pesticide residues that remain on the food and protect your health.