British authorities claim that there is no health benefit to eating organic fruits and vegetables, according to an article in the Guardian I read this morning. The crux of the article is that it is more important to eat fruits and vegetables than to worry about whether or not they are organic, with the argument being that organic food is more costly, so for people in the lower classes, it might be prohibitive. This following hard on the heels of a story about reviving the victory garden to get more Britons involved in the production of their food.

There are a couple of problems with the Guardian article. For one thing, although it briefly references the nutritional differences between organic and conventionally produced food, it didn’t delve into them, instead treating them very dismissively. In fact, there are substantial nutritional differences between organic and conventional food, with all evidence pointing towards organic food as a substantially better choice, healthwise. It contains a number of useful vitamins and minerals which are not present in conventionally produced food, thanks to the fact that organic food is produced in healthy soil. I think this shoots a pretty big hole in the claim that organic food has no benefit to health.

Furthermore, organic produce is not contaminated with pesticides, fungicides, and herbicides. Despite claims that washing conventional produce will eliminate this problem, it seems clear that at least some produce absorbs these substances, causing the people who eat the produce to ingest these substances as well. I’m pretty sure that most people agree that ingesting the -cides is not good for people.

I would also argue that organically produced food also has a tangible environmental benefit, which can translate into a health benefit, especially if the food is produced locally. By buying organic produce, consumers are voting for clean waterways, healthy field workers, and a more sustainable mode of food production. It’s not that “green” is trendy, it’s that by eating green, people are making a conscious choice to protect the environment, and that, my friends, is a good thing. And a good thing which has direct health benefits, not just for you, but for other people.

I understand the crux of the article, I really do. In a situation where the choice is conventional tomatoes or no tomatoes, I vote for conventionally produced tomatoes, because the tomatoes are the important thing in the equation. But when the choice is organic, locally produced tomatoes or potato chips, I vote for the tomatoes. One thing that the article did not address was the need to rethink food budgeting, devoting more money to food in general, and specifically more money to minimally processed ingredients. The junk food needs to go, and so does the packaged food, for a variety of reasons. Not least of which is simple cost: organic tomato sauce is expensive, but making your own tomato sauce with organic produce is not, and people need to learn to think beyond the box.

This was really illustrated for me the other day when I was talking with a friend about the cost differences between the local grocery stores. As locals know, there is a long-standing claim that Harvest is more expensive. In fact, as my father discovered through several sessions of comparison shopping, Safeway is more expensive. It’s just that Harvest has expensive packaged junk, so people who buy that stuff have the perception that Harvest is pricier. If you actually make your own food, rather than following the directions on a box, Harvest is substantially cheaper. Since I ignore whole aisles in grocery stores because they are filled with packaged food, my grocery bills are pretty low, considering how much food I make, and I think I eat better, because I am able to control what goes into my food. If you make the choice for ingredients over packaged food, eating organic starts to become a lot more doable.

I also note that the claim shied away from any discussion of organic vs. conventional meat and dairy products, perhaps because they knew it would be a losing battle. Hormone laced chicken, or free range? It doesn’t seem like there’s a whole lot of argument there.