The results of a new study published by Stanford University shows little difference between the nutritional content of organically grown food and conventional food.
The author of the study, Crystal Smith-Spangler, says that a team of researchers failed to find a significant difference between vitamins and other nutrients found in organic food as opposed to non-organic. They state in their published research paper the only detectable difference was the amount of phosphorous, which was slightly more in the organic produce.
There was a difference in amounts of pesticide residuals however. The conventional foods produced urine results in children with up to 33% of pesticide residuals whereas the organic produce had about 7%. It is unknown if these differences have an impact on overall health. The study was also unable to determine all confounding factors and didn’t account for pesticide use at home.
Both organic and conventional foods contained less than the allowable amount as determined by the U.S. government.
Although contamination risk is thought to be the same, when contamination is found, organic chicken and pork were found to be 33% less likely to be bacteria resistant against three or more different antibiotics, as compared to conventional meat. Antibiotic resistance is thought to be a reason why people are contracting germs that are difficult to treat.
While some scientists are calling for more research, Dr. Dena Bravata, a senior research affiliate to the study said, when it comes to individual health, “there isn’t much difference.”