According to new research in the Society of Chemical Industry’s (SCI) Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture, there is no evidence to support the argument that organic produce is more nutritional than conventional produce.
In a study examining common shopping items carrots, kale, mature peas, apples and potatoes, over two seasons animals were fed a diet consisting of crops cultivated using three distinct methods.
The first technique was akin to organic cultivation; the second allowed low inputs of nutrients using animal manure, as well as pesticides; the third allowed high inputs of nutrients through mineral fertilisers and pesticides.
With all other variables remaining the same, such as soil, weather conditions, location and timing of harvest, no differences in the levels of major and trace nutrients were found in the produce. In addition, once fed to the animals, no difference in retention of the elements was discovered.
Dr Susanne Bügel, who led the research, commented: “No systematic differences between cultivation systems representing organic and conventional production methods were found across the five crops, so the study does not support the belief that organically grown foodstuffs generally contain more major and trace elements than conventionally grown foodstuffs.”
