Lucas, Cory
BIS301
Biochemistry Concentration
Multidisciplinary
Paper
Nutritional Differences Organic vs. Conventional Food Products
In times past, someone reading this paper might not have known what the term “organic” listed on a food item at the grocery store meant. That time has come and gone. Anyone that has spent any amount of time grocery shopping has most likely realized that it’s not just about price anymore. Another variable now exists in the grocery equation; whether to buy conventional or organic. This short writing will focus on two components of this debate. First, to define organic agriculture and secondly to show that organically grown products do not have a consistent verifiable nutritional difference from conventional farming methods.
WHAT DOES ORGANIC MEAN?
Excluding the general public’s perception of “organic”, the Directorate General for Agriculture and Rural Development of the European Commission’s definition follows:
“…The form of agriculture that relies on techniques such as crop rotation, green manure, compost and biological pest control to maintain soil productivity and control pests on a farm. Organic farming excludes or strictly limits the use of manufactured fertilizers, pesticides (which include herbicides, insecticides and fungicides), plant growth regulators such as hormones, livestock antibiotics, food additives, and genetically modified organisms.” (Organic)
Note: Notice the use of words “excludes or strictly limits. One must pay careful attention to the initial exclusion of something, followed by its re-allowance in a limited quantity. What determined the initial exclusion? What deemed it allowable in limited amounts? Who determines the limit? Most importantly, what governing body or driving force re-allowed the once excluded product? Profit driven business decisions, need constant monitoring and correcting, otherwise the actual difference between conventional foods and organic foods will slowly but surely blur into nothing more than a difference in packaging and pricing.
The term “organic” in a liberal sense (liberal in order to include all possibilities) might define itself as the reduction of certain components and the inclusion of others components with regards to farming; The nutritional end goal, to minimize food deficiencies and maximize health giving components as well as to promote a more sustainable environment.
With this in mind, the concept of organic agriculture maintains two premises:
1. All Synthetic products and their uses will prove harmful (either in there very nature or as byproducts of there use) and therefore their use minimized.
2. All Natural products and their uses convey a health benefit and therefore their use maximized.
The following SYNTHETIC items receive a harmful classification in a strict organic sense:
• Fertilizers
• Pesticides
• Fungicides
• Herbicides
• Insecticides
• Hormones
• Antibiotics
• Food additives
• Genetically modified organisms
Interestingly enough, the same items receive a healthful classification if deemed NATURAL.
A major challenge faced by this viewpoint reveals itself in that all things natural do NOT possess an inherent health benefit and all things synthetic do not possess inherently harmful effects.
The concept of organic, as viewed by the public, may require some clarification. Unfortunately, a review of the substantial studies as a whole show a need for more clear and unbiased results as well as consistently substantiated confirmations of proposed hypotheses. A larger number of well thought out studies show one result when just as many qualified scientific studies show something different or even contrary. A possible re-defining of the term “organic” may self-propagate as this occurs.
In all agriculture, the general and specific environmental conditions have a considerable effect on flora and fauna. This fundamental concept applies to conventional as well as organic farming techniques. Implementation of certain environmental controls improves the quality, increases the quantity and shortens the maturation cycle of plants used for human consumption. The controls deal with increased availability or minimization of simple resources. These can include water, sun, shade, and elements like nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium.
LIMITATIONS OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROLS
Availability or scarcity of an environmental factor has limited ability to change the plant. For example, no environmental condition exists wherein an apple tree becomes an orange tree. In similar manner, changing the environmental inputs only has the possibility of changing relative amounts of components within the plant that already exist and only in very small and limited amounts. Even that concept has very stringent limitations due to the fact that whether its molecular organization defines it as an apple, an alligator or a human, they all consist of the same basic major molecular components of carbon, hydrogen, oxygen and nitrogen organized in a different way. The basic components of a species and their construction do not vary significantly; otherwise any significant variance would constitute a different species. This seemingly simple concept reveals an important concept with regards to organic as well as conventional farming: Environmental controls will only go so far.
A REVIEW OF THE STUDIES
In the 2002 study Nutritional quality of organic food: shades of grey or shades of green?, Christine Williams said the following, “Despite the widespread conviction held by the public that organic food is ‘healthier’ than foods produced using conventional farming, evidence to support this perception is difficult to identify.” (Williams)
A review of the studies, indeed verifies this as he case. Both sides of the argument have a compelling proposal. Organic proponents put forth the hypothesis that organically grown foods have more nutrients, and lower levels of pesticides and fertilizers. Conventional food producers argue that animal based fertilizers along with reduced synthetic “-ides” like pesticides and herbicides open a the door to greater contamination of food products by harmful microorganisms, etc. Unfortunately, both sides put forth very polarized opinions.
In table 1 (Williams) 52,471 articles regarding organic foodstuffs, narrowed to just 162 studies, showed only 55 of a high enough quality for scholarly review. The conclusion stated, “…conventionally produced crops had a significantly higher content of nitrogen, and organically produced crops had a significantly higher content of phosphorus and higher titratable acidity. No evidence of a difference surfaced for the remaining 8 of 11 crop nutrient categories analyzed.” (Williams)
The data clearly shows no consistently verifiable nutritional difference between the organically grown plants and the conventionally grown plants (other than the nitrogen/phosphorus component). This data appears to correlate to another study of the effects of growth conditions on nutritionally relevant plan substituents.
DEEPER THAN ORGANIC VS CONVENTIONAL
Table 1 shows one example where the relationship between nutrients and growth conditions appears much deeper than just organic vs. conventional farming methods (Woese)
Here, a relationship between ascorbic acid (vitamin C), beta-carotene (vitamin a precursor) and nitrogen availability at the time of planting reveals itself. Nutrient levels in plants show a dependency on the nitrogen up-take availability at the time of planting. In addition to this dependency, the data presents and inverse relationship of ascorbic acid to beta-carotene. Both nutrients do not increase or decrease based on the same environmental stimulus. Also note that as the nitrogen levels decrease from the first year to the second year, the beta-carotene levels decreased, whereas the ascorbic acid level in the plants increased! This relationship would exist regardless of organic or synthetic fertilizers. (Woese) A plant would not differentiate an organic nitrogen molecule from a synthetic nitrogen molecule. Stress components also triggered increased ascorbic acid content in the plants not organic or conventional controls per se. Oxidative stresses such as full sunlight, low nitrogen availability or herbicides increased the vitamin C content. Conversely, optimum conditions that promoted growth increased the beta-carotene content.
In conclusion, a significant disparity exists between the public perception and the reality of what the term organic means with regards to food products. Performing more, high quality studies will bring to light more specific environmental factors that influence certain nutritional components of plants.
Bibliography
Dangour, Alan D. "Nutritional Quality of Organic Foods: a Systematic Review." The
American Journal of Clinical Nutrition. Web. 26 Sept. 2011.
.
"Organic Certification." U.S. Department of Agriculture. Web. 26 Sept. 2011.
.
"Organic Farming." Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia. Web. 25 Sept. 2011.
.
Williams, Christine M. "Nutritional Quality of Organic Food:
Shades of Grey or Shades of Green?" Cambridge Journals. Web. 20 Sept. 2011. .
Woese, Katrin. "A Comparison of Organically and Conventionally
Grown Foods—Results of a Review of the Relevant Literature." Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 13.S1 (1962): 1-56. Web.
