The benefits of organic food production
Friday, July 31st, 2009
The Food Standards Agency yesterday published some research which claimed that organic food offers no extra nutritional benefits when compared with conventionally produced food.
Their aim, they suggest, is to enable consumers to make "an informed choice".
Have these researchers been living in a cave, with nothing to sustain them other than a few berries and nuts? I don't think that the majority of people who eat organic food think that it's going to make them healthier. They don't eat organic broccoli thinking that its stuffed full of nutrients that just aren't there in non-organic brocolli.
They eat it, I think, because they think that farming non-intensively, without routine use of pesticides, is a better way to produce food – better for us (in a wider health and wellbeing sense), better for wildlife, better for the long-term health of the planet. And it's not just about not using pesticides – it's often about a whole different approach to linking consumers, farmers and food.
You can read the Soil Association's response to the research here.
I thought I'd pop down to Swillington Organic Farm to see what they thought of the research. There were plenty of customers there who've clearly made up their own mind, and who frankly don't need second-rate FSA research to help them to make an informed choice. Here's what the Farm's Organic Apprentice thinks the benefits are of the way they farm at Swillington:
