Organic Islands - Ten Reasons Why Organic Food Is Better

Home	Blog	Directory	About

Back to Features

Ten Reasons Why Organic Food Is Better

by Guy Dauncey

Have you ever been at one of those after-dinner discussions when you are debating the merits of organic food? For organic food junkies, here are some useful arguments for the ultimate face-off with a McFood aficionado:

1. Organic farming is better for wildlife

A report by Britain’s Soil Association shows that wildlife is substantially richer and more varied on organic than on conventional farms. A typical organic field has five times as many wild plants, 57% more species, and 44% more birds in cultivated areas than a regular farm (1). Two 1996 studies show that organic farms have twice as many skylarks (the composer Vaughan Williams would like that), and twice as many butterflies (2). Every time we eat an organic lettuce or tomato, we are contributing to the restoration of wildlife. A German study showed that endangered species were only present on organic farms – there were none at all on conventional farms. It also showed that while there were 12.9 different plant species on organic pastures, and 11.1 on conventional natural pastures, there were just 7.1 on conventional seeded pastures (3).

2. Organic farming is better for the soil

The same Soil Association study shows that organic fields have deeper vegetation, and more weed cover. (Organic growers are nodding their heads). Another study shows that organically cultivated fields contain 88% more ‘epigeal arthropods’ (squiggly soil creatures); fields cultivated according to Rudolf Steiner’s biodynamic organic methods had 93% more (4). A new Swiss study demonstrates that organic soils house more soil microbes, more mcyorrhizae – the fungi that attach themselves to the tips of plant roots and help plants absorb nutrients - and more earthworms (5). It also found that soil insects are twice as abundant and more diverse in organic plots, including pest-eating spiders and beetles.

3. Organic food is better for animal reproduction

Out of 14 animal studies, ten show that animals fare better when fed organic food. Three show no difference, and one shows an improvement with conventional food. Animals are mammals, so we share a lot in common. Female rabbits fed on organic food have twice the level of ovum production, and chickens fed on organic food have a 28% higher rate of egg production. Rabbits that were fed conventional food saw a decline in fertility over three generations, compared to no decline for organically fed rabbits. There were half as many perinatal deaths and other deaths prior to weaning for rabbits and mice whose mothers ate organic food (6). Meanwhile, human sperm counts are falling, and many couples are finding it hard to have a baby….

4. Organic food may fight cancer, stroke and heart problems

In a recent study, Scottish scientists found that organic vegetable soups contain almost six times as much salicylic acid as non-organic vegetable soups. (Salicylic acid helps fight hardening of the arteries, and bowel cancer.) Eleven brands of organic soup had 177 nanograms per gram, versus just 20 nanograms in 24 types of non-organic soup (7). Salicylic acid is produced naturally in plants as a defence against stress and disease. If the plants never have to resist bugs because of pesticide-use, their immune systems are weaker; they generate less salicylic acid, and pass less on to us. It’s like the child who grows up in a fussily-clean environment, who is always getting sick. The same scientists found significantly higher concentrations of salicylic acid in the blood of vegetarian Buddhist monks, compared with meat-eaters.

5. Organic food contains more nutrients

At the June meeting of the American Chemical Society, a chemistry professor reported that organic oranges contained up to 30% more vitamin C than regular oranges, even though they are half the size of regular oranges (8). (Conventional orange trees are fed nitrogen fertilizer, causing the fruit to absorb more water, which makes them bigger.) In a French study, a cancer specialist is studying the nutrient qualities of food grown in the Languedoc-Roussillon region of France. For twelve foods on which his study is complete, the organic foods showed increased quantities of vitamins A, C, E, and the B group, increased elements such as zinc, increased minerals such as calcium, and increased fibre (9). In a review of 30 studies comparing the nutrient content of organic versus conventional crops, organic crops had higher nutrient content 40% of the time, while conventional crops were higher 15% of the time. The organically grown crops also fewer carcinogenic nitrates, and better protein quality (10).

According to a study of the nutrient quality of fruit and vegetables that was done by the Globe and Mail and CTV News in July 2002, compared to 50 years ago, today’s fruit and vegetables contain dramatically less vitamins and minerals (11). The average potato has lost 100% of its vitamin A, 57% of its vitamin C and iron, 28% of its calcium, 50% of its riboflavin, and 18% of its thiamin. Out of seven key nutrients studied, only niacin levels increased. Similar results applied to 24 other fruits and vegetables. For broccoli, all seven nutrients fell, including a 63% decrease in calcium and a 34% decrease in iron. Similar results have been found in Britain and the US. No wonder we are gulping down expensive supplements. There was no mention of organic food in the study.

6. Organic apples are …. well, they’re just better!

Between 1994 and 1999, a soil scientist at Washington State University ran a series of tests on a chemically grown orchard, an organic orchard, and an “integrated farming” orchard that used less chemicals and some organic methods. The organic orchard had the best soil, held water better, and resisted soil damage better. It was more energy efficient, and required less labour and less water per apple. The organic apples were firmer, and tasted sweeter and less tart to a non-expert panel. The organic orchard also made more money, since the apples sold for a higher price (12). They probably also contained more nutrients. (PS – the Salt Spring Apple Festival is on Sunday September 30th, with 14 orchards open to the public, and 350 varieties of organic apple. Contact Harry Burton, 250-653-2007).

7. Organic farming can feed the world

“But of course, organic methods could never feed a world of 6 billion people.” Oh no? In 1998, L.E. Drinkwater and his colleagues at the Rodale Institute in Kutztown, Pennsylvania, published the results of a 15-year study comparing 3 ways of growing maize and soybeans – a conventional rotation method that used chemical fertilizers and pesticides, an organic system involving crop rotation and legume crops, and an organic system that used cow manure as a fertilizer. The average yields were similar for all three systems, debunking the myth that organic methods are inefficient, and cannot feed the world (13). In Britain, an experiment has been run at Broadbalk by the Rothamsted Experimental Station for 150 years. It too shows that organic yields measure up: wheat yields on manured plots average 3.45 tonnes per hectare, compared to 3.40 tonnes on the chemically fertilized plots (14).

In a recently completed 21-year Swiss study, on the other hand, organic yields were 20% smaller than conventional yields. The organic plots required 34% to 53% less fertilizer and energy and 97% less pesticide, however, so they produced more food per unit of energy and fertilizer. Since the soil microbes, flora, fauna and soil fertility also increased, the study’s authors concluded the ecological benefits of organic farming made up for the reduced harvest (15).

In an 8-year study at the U of C, in Davis, California, the yields for conventional and organic tomatoes, safflower, corn and beans were shown to be similar, with the organic tomato yields outstripping conventional yields in the final year (16). There is also striking evidence smaller farms of 27 acres or less are two to ten times more productive than large farms, and that their dollar output per acre is ten times higher (17). The way to achieve it all, it would seem, is to divert all of our agricultural efforts into small organic farms.

8. Organic farming protects the climate

Organic soil is full of life, which carries carbon. In the Rodale experiment (see above), the organically managed plot stored much more carbon than the conventional plot. In the 150-year Broadbalk experiment, soil fertility (a measure of carbon and nitrogen levels) increased by 120% in the manured plots, versus 20% in the chemical plots. The same results occurred in the Swiss experiment. A study in California’s Central Valley showed that as well as producing similar yields and suffering similar pest damage, organically managed fields produced 28% more organic carbon. By storing carbon, organic farmers help to counteract global climate change.

9. Organic farming produces higher drought yields

With more carbon and more texture, organic soil should hold more water. And yes – in a review of many comparitive studies of grain and soybean production in the US Midwest, organic growers were shown to produce higher yields than conventional farmers in drier climates and during droughts. (They had similar yields in regular conditions) (18). The same results were found in the Rodale experiment. The organic matter in the soil also makes it less compact, allowing roots systems to penetrate more deeply to find moisture.

10. Organic food and farming is safer

Organic farming generates more jobs, produces more profits, and doesn’t pollute groundwater with nitrogen run-off. But let me finish with the reason why many people start eating organic food in the first place – because it is safer. Farmers in Canada, Kansas and Nebraska who use the pesticide 2,4-D suffer a higher rate on non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma (a cancer) in relation to the number of days and the number of acres they spray. The same applies to dogs whose lawns have been sprayed. In Sweden, exposure to phenoxy herbicides has been shown to increase the risk of contracting lymphomas six-fold (19). In the US, the death rates from myeloma (a cancer) are highest in rural farming areas (20). And so it goes on. Migrant farmworkers, growing all those fruits and veggies that fill our supermarkets, suffer an abnormally high rate of multiple myeloma, stomach, prostate and testicular cancer (21). Organic farming produces none of these risks.

There’s danger at the consumer end, too. In a Finnish study, it was shown that women whose breasts stored the highest levels of a lindane-like residue were ten times more likely to have breast cancer than women with lower levels (22). (Lindane is a pesticide). Overall, there is a strong association between breast cancer and exposure to chemical pesticides. Atrazine, another common ingredient in common pesticides, causes breast cancer in rats, chromosal breakdowns in the ovaries of hamsters (23), and hind-limb deformities in frogs.

But all of this can end if we shift to organic food. We can be healthier. Farmers and farm workers can be healthier. Frogs, worms, butterflies and skylarks can be healthier. Our planet can be healthier. All that it takes is for us to turn away from chemically grown food, and eat organic food instead.

Guy Dauncey is the author of Earthfuture: Stories from a Sustainable World (ecotopian short stories, summer reading!) and Stormy Weather: 101 Solutions to Global Climate Change, winner of a Nautilus Award at the New York Book Expo (New Society Publishers). He lives in Victoria. www.earthfuture.com

References

New Scientist, June 3, 2000
Ecology and Farming Magazine, IFOAM, Sept/Dec 1996
Ecology and Farming Magazine, IFOAM, Sept/Dec 1996
Ecology and Farming Magazine, IFOAM, Sept/Dec 1996
BBC News, May 30th 2002. Study by Paul Mader.
‘Effect of Agricultural Methods on Nutritional Quality’ by Dr. Virginia Worthington, Alternative Therapies, 1998:4.
New Scientist, March 14th, 2002
Research by Professor Theo Clark, Truman State University, Kirksville, Mo.
Reported in the newspaper ‘Ouest-France’, August 16th 2001
As 5, above
Globe and Mail, July 6th, 2002
New Scientist, April 18th 2001
Drinkwater, Wagoner and Sarronio, Nature 396, (1998). www.rodaleinstitute.org/science/fst1.html
’Can Organic Farming feed the World?” by Christos Vasilikiotis, Ph.D. www.cnr.berkeley.edu/~christos/articles/cv_organic_farming.html. Also www.era.iacr.ac.uk/broadbalk_1.html
See 5
See 13
See 13
See 13
‘Living Downstream’, by Sandra Steingraber, page 52.
Steingraber, page 64.
Steingraber, page 65.
Steingraber, page 11.
Steingraber, page 162

Organic by Numbers

Percentage of German farms that are organic today	3
Percentage that will be organic by 2010 if German agriculture minister Renate Kunst has her way	20
Number of organic farms in Argentina in 1995	220
Number of organic farms today	1,550
Yearly sales increase for organic food in Europe, 1990s	20-30%
Yearly sales increase for organic food in Italy, 1998 – 2000	85%
Global sales increase for organic food, 2001	20%
Yearly sales increase for organic food in Canada, last five years	20%
Total organic retail food sales in Canada	$1 billion
Total food retail food sales in Canada	$57 billion
Percentage of Europeans who want the right to choose whether to eat GM foods	94%
Percentage of Europeans who favour organic food production	72%
Organic milk’s share of the German milk market, 1999	2.1%
Organic milk’s share of the German milk market, 2001	4.6%
Organic milk’s share of the Danish milk market, 2001	30%
Percentage of British adults who eat organic food	2%
Percentage of British babies whose parents feed them organic food	33%