Talk about not stating a question correctly!
There have been reports in the news recently that claim that organic/bio food is “not better” or “not healthier” than what has become the conventional industrially produced types of food. But I think that finding betrays a biased hypothesis that was being tested.
Listen… I wish I were a health-food nut. I wish I could find in myself the energy to pay more attention to the food I buy and eat. But I’m not at that point yet. Perhaps it’s a resolution I’ll eventually make.
The reports did say that organic/bio food has been found to be tastier. I have no doubt about that, having had the opportunity to try organically farmed eggs, for instance. However, it defies logic — at least to me — that genetically modified foods pumped with hormones and pesticides and preservatives aren’t more problematic than organic/bio foods. Just because we haven’t been able to establish a direct cause-effect link damning “tampered” foods doesn’t mean that they’re not messing us up.
The question never should have been if organic/bio food is better for us in terms of vitamins, proteins and general nutrition. There are still people out there, like my mother, who have been around long enough to remember what most foods used to taste like, and today’s renditions pale in comparison. Besides, it only seems logical to me that a steady diet of hyper-processed food must have undesirable consequences.
I wonder, if we were to dig deeper, if we could find out who funded this latest report. However, for me, given a choice between food that could contain residues of pesticides “within acceptable limits” or food with none whatsoever, I don’t think I would need to think very long to make my decision.