conventional Archives - Best Food Facts

Choosing the “Best” Eggs? Let Us “Egg” Splain

Best Food Facts — Mon, 14 Sep 2015 21:02:35 +0000

A reader recently asked about housing conditions for egg-laying hens, wondering which housing system is most humane.

The Coalition for Sustainable Egg Supply examined this issue to help support greater understanding of hen housing, so we looked to their research for insight. The study compared hens in three housing systems:

Conventional cages, in which hens are stacked in cages
Cage-free housing, in which hens are allowed to roam freely through sections of the barn
Enriched colony, which is a hybrid between the two systems in which hens are in larger cages that contain perches, nesting and foraging areas

Check out an infographic that explains the housing systems.

So which housing system had the happiest, healthiest hens? While happiness can’t be measured in hens, the research shows the answer to which was healthiest is not necessarily clear cut, as each housing system was found to have positive and negative aspects.

In addition to assessing aspects of food safety, food affordability, the environment, and worker health and safety, researchers studied a number of factors that impact animal well-being. You can view an interactive infographic to evaluate each of those elements and determine which eggs to choose based on what matters to you. Following is a summary of the key animal health and well-being findings.

Exhibiting Natural Behaviors: Hens in the cage-free and enriched colony systems had freedom to exhibit natural behaviors, regularly using perches and nest boxes. In the cage-free houses, they also dust-bathed. Even though hens in the enriched colonies had access to scratch pads, they did not use them very much. Due to their enclosures, hens in the conventional cages had limited ability to exhibit natural behaviors.

Bone Health: Hens in cage-free housing had stronger bones overall, likely because of their ability to “exercise.” However, they also had more keel bone (breastbone) fractures, which may have been caused by failed attempts to fly. Hens in conventional cages had the highest incidence of foot problems.

Mortality Rates: The death rate of hens was more than twice as high in the cage-free system than in either conventional cages or enriched colonies. The leading causes of death in all housing systems were hypocalcemia (low blood calcium levels) and egg yolk peritonitis (due to leakage of egg yolk into abdominal cavity). The cage-free houses had the highest incidence of hens being cannibalized or excessively pecked.

Physiological Health: In order to determine if the hens were experiencing stress, blood samples were drawn and adrenal glands measured. Overall, that physiological data did not demonstrate the presence of acute or chronic stress for hens in any housing system.

Food Safety: When properly managed, it was found that each of the three housing systems researched can provide safe, high quality eggs.

Understanding that each housing system has positive and negative aspects in each of the elements researched, we encourage you to choose eggs produced by hens housed in the system that you feel is best.

_{“Eggs” by John Morgan is licensed under CC BY 2.0.}

The post Choosing the “Best” Eggs? Let Us “Egg” Splain appeared first on Best Food Facts.

Best Food Facts and Foodies Head to California for the TASTE Tour

Best Food Facts — Thu, 14 Aug 2014 05:00:00 +0000

Best Food Facts took California by storm during our inaugural TASTE: Unearthing the Art and Science of Food Blogger Tour – a three-day extravaganza that explored the technology and science used in food production. TASTE gave seven foodie bloggers the opportunity to connect with experts, farmers and nutritionists, and have conversations aplenty about biotechnology, organic and conventional foods, wine production and more. Our company was truly delightful with Adriana, Annalise, Christina, Courtney, Heather, Melanie and Sheila along for the journey!

Orchard Excursion
Our trip started with a venture to K&J Orchards where we experienced taste-testing privileges as well as a tour given by orchard manager and daughter of the orchard founders, Aomboon Deasy. Here’s what we learned:

There are benefits to both organic and conventional methods of growing food and this orchard uses both.
Pesticides are used in both organic and conventional methods. Organic production can use only pesticides that are naturally-occurring, whereas conventional can use pesticides that are synthetic.
There aren’t nutritional differences between organic and conventional foods, so both are great options.
The health benefits of consuming all fruits and vegetables – no matter how they are grown/produced – far outweigh any risks of pesticide exposure.

Dinner with Dr. Denneal Jamison-McClung
We closed the first night of our California adventure with amazing eats and discussion with Denneal Jamison-McClung, PhD, Associate Director of the Biotechnology Program and faculty member at UC Davis. Here’s what we learned:

There is extensive research in the area of biotechnology and genetic modification (GM) under way at University of California-Davis and other universities around the world – and has been for decades!
GM foods are safe. The FDA works with companies developing biotech crops through a consultation process that begins in the early stages of crop improvement and proceeds through final approval (10-15 years).
GM technology can prevent unintended consequences that can occur with other types of plant breeding.
There are only eight GM crops: alfalfa, canola, corn, cotton, papaya*, soybeans, squash, and sugar beets (these crops also have non-GM varieties, except for Hawaiian papaya)

Napa Adventure
Day two kicked off with a trip to Napa, CA to learn about wine making at Black Stallion Winery. Here’s what we learned:

Yeast is a tool (also a fungus!) that vintners use to transform grapes into wine. Yeast starts the fermentation process – breaking down sugars in the grapes into ethanol and carbon dioxide.
The white matter you see on grapes growing in orchards is actually a naturally occurring yeast.

Yeast can impact flavor and it’s easily manipulated, so vintners use it to create exactly the type of wine they want to make.
No wine is sulfite-free. Sulfites are naturally-occuring in grapes and are an antibacterial and antioxidant.

Lunch with Mitch Harkenrider
We had lunch with Mitch Harkenrider, senior doctoral student and researcher in the Plant Biology Graduate Group at UC Davis. Here’s what we learned:

Harkenrider loves gardening and has a passion for efficiency in crop production, which led him to focus his career on plant biotechnology.
He studies under world-renowned Dr. Pamela Ronald. Dr. Pamela and her husband Raoul are a dynamic duo, with Dr. Pamela focusing her research on GM plants and her husband focusing on organic production. They co-authored Tomorrow’s Table and live in harmony, realizing we need every tool in the toolbox to meet the food needs of our diverse and growing world.

Robert Mondavi Institute for Wine and Food Sciences
Located on the UC Davis campus, the Robert Mondavi Institute houses the departments of Viticulture and Enology, and Food Science and Technology. In addition to touring the Institute’s LEED Platinum-certified building, we learned about the food science behind olive oil and honey processing, brewing and winemaking. We met:

Amina Harris, Executive Director of the Honey and Pollination Center at the Robert Mondavi Institute of Wine and Food Science at UC Davis
Sue Langstaff, owner of Applied Sensory, LLC and member of the UC Davis Olive Oil Taste Panel and the UC Cooperative Extension Sonoma County Olive Oil Taste Panel
Roger Boulton, PhD, professor and Stephen Sinclair Scott Endowed Chair in Enology in the Department of Viticulture and Enology at UC Davis.

Here’s what we learned:

There is a science to the sensory experience associated with the tastes of both honey and olive oil.
There is no organic honey produced in the continental United States.
The fridge test for olive oil is not a reliable test for purity or quality.
The Robert Mondavi Institute facilities are water- and energy-positive.
The Institute has a private collection of wine with some bottles being worth tens of thousands of dollars.

Dinner with Drs. Elizabeth A. Maga and James D. Murray
We joined Elizabeth A. Maga, PhD, adjunct professor in the Department of Animal Science at UC Davis, and James D. Murray, PhD, professor of Animal Science and Department of Population Health and Reproduction at UC Davis, to talk about their recent research on goat’s milk. Here’s what we learned:

Maga and Murray bred transgenic (GM) goats to produce milk that can protect children in developing countries from diarrhea – a common cause of death.
The milk contains enzymes that strengthen the stomach and fight off harmful bacteria, therefore, making or keeping children healthy.

The Amazing Tomato Trek
Our last adventure included following a tomato on its journey from the farm to your table. The trek started with a tour of the Rominger Brothers Farm followed by a tour of a Campbell Soup Company processing facility. Along the way, we met Rick Rominger, a fifth-generation farmer and owner of Rominger Brothers Farms; Daniel Sonke, PhD, manager of sustainable agriculture programs at Campbell Soup Company; David Kiehn, Campbell Soup Company processing facility manager; and more.

Here’s what we learned:

The kinds of tomatoes grown for tomato paste and sauce are very different than the ones you buy fresh at the market. These tomatoes have a much harder skin and far lower water content and are sweeter.
California is the number one area in the world for tomato production – 95 percent of all tomatoes in the United States and 30 percent of all the tomatoes in the world are grown in California.
Tomatoes are picked and processed within hours to preserve nutrients and reduce the potential for spoilage.
Because of its focus on sustainability, Campbells has rigorous goals to reduce their environmental impact, yet still produce the same amount of food – they aim to reduce water use in fields by 20 percent and by 50 percent in their facilities over the next 10 years.

Our power-packed TASTE Tour showed us that technology and science improves many aspects of our lives including the way our food is produced. And technology, as it relates to food, can mean greater accessibility, enriched nutrition, better flavor, improved safety and more. Stay tuned for more posts about the tour.

Image: “First Harvest” by Mike McCune is licensed under CC BY 2.0.

The post Best Food Facts and Foodies Head to California for the TASTE Tour appeared first on Best Food Facts.

True or Not: Organic food is better for your health than non-organic food.

Best Food Facts — Wed, 23 Oct 2013 21:05:16 +0000

The Skinny

For the average American consumer, the term “organic” has a positive connotation and the beneficial properties of organic foods may be misinterpreted or exaggerated. Surveys indicate many proponents of organic food production look beyond the final product to consider factors such as environmental impacts, worker safety, and economic considerations which are not related to organic production standards. U.S. consumers frequently have the choice between purchasing organic and conventional foods and make food purchasing decisions that reflect their values, concerns, and lifestyles.

Studies show conventional foods may contain more pesticide residue than organic, but organic foods should not be considered to be pesticide free. Most health professionals consider the risks from pesticide residues in the diet to be negligible and consuming organic foods is unlikely to result in health benefits.

For optimal health, consumers should continue to eat a balanced diet regardless of whether the food is produced by organic or by conventional practices.

Carl K. Winter, PhD says:

Organic foods are clearly different than conventional foods but such differences, when viewed comprehensively, do not support the conclusion that organic foods are healthier.

Several recent peer-reviewed studies have been published demonstrating that organic foods contain lower levels of pesticide residues than do conventional (non-organic) foods and that some organic foods may also possess higher levels of potentially beneficial antioxidant chemicals than their conventional counterparts. It seems reasonable, therefore, to conclude that organic foods may be healthier to consume than conventional foods. In my opinion as a food toxicologist, however, this fairly simplistic conclusion is misguided as it ignores the complexities and tradeoffs associated with different food production systems. Organic foods are clearly different than conventional foods but such differences, when viewed comprehensively, do not support the conclusion that organic foods are healthier.

Several pesticide monitoring studies have consistently shown that conventional foods contain more pesticide residues than do organic foods. Organic foods should not be considered to be “pesticide-free” foods, however, since some U.S. Environmental Protection Agency approved pesticides are allowed for use in organic production while other pesticides not approved for organic production have nonetheless been commonly detected on organic foods.

Consumer risks from pesticide residues in foods are most directly related to the amounts of pesticides on foods rather than the presence or absence of pesticide residues. Using our best available data, typical consumer exposures to pesticides in the diet are at levels of 10,000 to 100,000 times lower than levels that have been fed to laboratory animals on a daily basis throughout the animals’ lifetimes that have shown no effects in the animals. Thus, the present risks posed from pesticide residues in the diet are considered by most health professionals to be negligible and further reduction in pesticide residue exposure through increased consumption of organic foods is unlikely to result in any additional health benefit for consumers.

According to results of several recent studies, organic fruits and vegetables, when compared with conventional fruits and vegetables, have frequently been shown to contain higher levels of potential antioxidants known as plant polyphenolics. Increases in plant polyphenolics are attributed to two differences between organic and conventional food production practices. Organic practices do not allow the use of synthetic fertilizers; this results in slower plant growth and greater utilization of a plant’s complex biosynthetic pathways necessary for production of chemicals such as plant polyphenolics. In addition, plants may respond to stressful conditions such as insect attack or colonization by plant pathogens by producing polyphenolics or other chemicals to allow the plants to defend themselves. Insect and plant pathogen pressures may frequently be lower for conventional fruits and vegetables since synthetic pesticide use provides one mechanism to reduce such stresses. Since synthetic pesticides are not available for organic producers, the potential increased stress on organic fruits and vegetables may lead to the formation of increased levels of plant polyphenolics and other plant defense chemicals.

While organic foods may contain higher levels of plant polyphenolic compounds, the health benefits of the increased amounts of these potential antioxidants have yet to be established. Comprehensive studies are required to demonstrate the mechanisms by which these chemicals may improve health and the amounts of these chemicals required to result in health benefits. Until such research is conducted, it is premature to conclude that the increased levels of plant polyphenolics in organic foods make the foods more nutritious than conventional foods.

Ironically, the same factors that may be responsible for the increases in plant polyphenolics from organic fruits and vegetables (slower plant growth using more complex biochemical pathways and plant defense) also put organic foods at greater potential risk with respect to naturally-occurring toxins. Hundreds of naturally-occurring toxins have been identified and several have received regulatory scrutiny due to their documented short-term and long-term toxicological effects in laboratory animals and in humans. It is logical to conclude that naturally-occurring toxin levels in organic foods may be higher than those from conventional foods since organic plants grow slower in the absence of synthetic fertilizers and may be subject to greater stresses in cases where insects and plant pathogens are more difficult to control without the use of synthetic insecticides and fungicides. As is the case with the potential health benefits of increased levels of polyphenolic chemicals, further research is necessary to establish the increased risk levels, if any, that are posed from the presence of increased levels of naturally-occurring toxins in organic foods.

Differences in organic and conventional fertilization practices may also result in differences in microbiological safety risks between the two production practices. In the U.S. annually, it is estimated that 76 million cases of foodborne illnesses occur annually due to the presence of pathogenic bacteria, fungi, and viruses in foods. One potential source of bacterial pathogens is animal manure; while both conventional and organic agricultural practices utilize animal manure as a fertilizer, the practice is more widespread in organic production due to the prohibition of synthetic fertilizers. In cases where the animal manure is not composted properly, the use of the manure as a fertilizer could present a microbiological food safety risk in the event that bacterial pathogens from the manure ultimately contaminate the food crop being grown. While U.S. organic standards require than animal manures be composted according to specific procedures or applied more than 90 days before harvest, some studies have indicated that bacterial contamination rates for fruits and vegetables may be higher in organic produce than in conventional produce.

In summary, while it is clear that organic and conventional foods differ with respect to pesticide residues, plant polyphenolics, naturally-occurring toxins, and microbiological contaminants, it seems premature to conclude that either food production system is superior to the other in terms of healthiness. It should also be pointed out that many proponents of organic food production practices look beyond the final food product to consider factors such as environmental impacts, worker safety, and economic considerations. Fortunately, consumers in the U.S. frequently have the choice between purchasing organic and conventional foods and make food purchasing decisions that reflect their values, concerns, and lifestyles. For optimal health, consumers should continue to eat a balanced diet that includes significant amounts of fruits, vegetables, and grains, regardless if such foods are produced by organic or by conventional practices.

_References:

_{Winter, C.K. and S.F. Davis. 2006. Institute of Food Technologists Scientific Status Summary on Organic Foods. Journal of Food Science 71(9): R117-124.}

_{Winter, C.K. 2009. Organic food production and its influence on naturally occurring toxins. p. 231-239. In: Kirchmann, H. and L. Bergstrom, eds. Organic Crop Production: Ambitions and Limitations, Springer, New York.}

Francisco Diez-Gonzalez, PhD says:

Depending on the specific property of a given organic food, this may or may not be considered as health promoting.

The demand for organic foods has grown very rapidly in the last 15 years. According to the Organic Trade Association the total sales of organic foods increased almost 5 times from $3.6 to $17.7 billion from 1997 to 2006 (4). This market expansion is largely driven by the strong consumer interest for eating foods produced with the minimum amount of synthetic components, which are generally regarded as “natural”. Organic foods are the only category among “natural” products that a regulatory policy has been clearly defined, known as the Organic Rule, and in the U. S. they are regulated by a certification system overseen by the National Organic Program of the U. S. Department of Agriculture (3).

For the average American consumer, the term “organic” has a very positive connotation and very often the beneficial properties of organic foods are misinterpreted and even exaggerated. These consumer beliefs are frequently fueled by the popular press, and more recently by many Internet sites. A variety of consumer surveys have identified multiple reasons why the public buys organic foods. The qualifiers that are frequently attributed to organic foods include: more healthful, better for the environment, more nutritious, more humane, more natural and fresher (7).

A study conducted in 2001 by Roper Starch Worldwide, Inc. reported that 63% of Americans considered organic foods as “more healthful” than their conventional counterparts (5). A more recent survey in 2004 directed by Whole Foods Market, Inc. found that at least 54% of organic foods buyers purchased these products because they “are better for their health” (6). The term “healthful” is a relatively broad and ambiguous concept and its use by consumers may be founded on a variety of motives. The most frequent reason why organic foods are referred as healthful is because of the reduced use of synthetic ingredients for their production and processing. Organic foods are also regarded as better for health because of the belief that they are more nutritious and contain more health-promoting substances as a result of being produced under more natural conditions.

Among the different synthetic ingredients used for conventional food production, chemical pesticides are the main concern for health-conscious consumers of organic foods. The presence of pesticide residues in food crops has been monitored by the U. S. Department of Agriculture and other researchers, and their findings have found marked differences between organic and conventional products (1). In general, more than 50% of conventional crops have pesticide residues compared to less than 18% of organic produce. Conventional crops are approximately 3 to 5 times more likely to contain synthetic pesticides than organic ones at concentrations more than 8-fold greater. Despite this noticeable differences among organic and conventional crops, the long-term negative effects on health of periodically consuming pesticide residues is yet to be confirmed.

While the concept of healthful “implies a positive contribution to a healthy condition” (Merriam-Webster Dictionary) when it is used to foods it also intrinsically entail that their consumption will cause no harm to the individual’s health. Based on this argument, safety considerations should be incorporated in deciding if a food product is healthful or not. Most consumers that consider organic foods as healthful, however, very often overlook any safety considerations. Because of the limitations imposed by organic regulations, food safety experts have questioned whether these may increase the risk of food borne disease transmission.

The Organic Rule prohibits the use of any synthetic fertilizer for crop production and only allows natural minerals and wastes of plant and animal origin. Organic regulations describe more than five different categories of natural fertilizers, but because of availability and cost, animal manure is the most commonly used soil fertilizer for organic crops. It has long been recognized that manure is a vehicle for transmission of foodborne pathogens since these organisms are natural inhabitants of the gastrointestinal tract of animals. Considering the potential presence of pathogenic microorganisms in manure, organic regulators established considerations to minimize the risk of transmission, especially to fresh fruits and vegetables. It should be noted, however, that conventional farmers may also use manure as fertilizer, but most of them are not required to follow any manure management practices.

Current organic regulations were issued almost 10 years ago and they allowed the use of livestock manure as soil amendment under the following conditions: manure should be preferably composted to reach temperatures of at least 131ºF, but untreated manure may also be used if applied to the soil between 90 to 120 days depending whether the produce is in contact with the soil (3). These recommendations were determined based on expert advice and the available scientific literature at that time. Since 1999, a large number of scientific studies have been conducted to assess the survival of foodborne pathogens in manure, soil, fresh produce and during composting (2). While the results of those investigations have been somewhat variable, many of them suggest that 120 days or less may not be sufficient to ensure the absence of pathogenic bacteria. Composting may also be a highly variable process and it could only accomplish a complete pathogens inactivation if it is carefully controlled. A revision of the above regulations it is encouraged.

The above considerations may suggest an increased risk of foodborne disease related to organic fresh produce, but the epidemiological evidence and product survey testing do not seem to indicate that organic produce pose a serious health risk. To date, almost no food poisoning outbreak has been confirmed to be due to fresh produce grown according to the Organic Rule practices. Multiple studies conducted in Europe and the U. S. that have tested organic produce at the production and market levels have found almost no sample positive for either Salmonella or enterohemorrhagic Escherichia coli (2). These facts indicate that at the moment the potential risk of organic fresh produce may not be substantiated.

In light of the complexity of the food production system, blank statements such as “organic foods are more healthful than non-organic” are oversimplifications that are often sustained by the lack of knowledge or evidence. Depending on the specific property of a given organic food, this may or may not be considered as health promoting. Consumers are encouraged to critically evaluate the information read in the popular press and attempt to obtain an opposing view, including preferably at least a scientific source. We live in an age in which the information on any issue is within our reach just “a click away”.

_References

_{1. Baker, B. P., C. M. Benbrook, E. Groth, and K. L. Benbrook. 2002. Pesticide residues in conventional, integrated pest management (IPM)-grown and organic foods: insights from three U. S. data sets. Food Addit. Cont. 19:427-446.}
_{2. Diez-Gonzalez, F., and A. Mukherjee. 2009. Produce safety in organic vs. conventional crops. In X. Fan, B. A. Niemira, C. J. Doona, F. E. Freeherry, and R. B. Gravani (ed.), Microbial Safety of Fresh Produce. IFT Press/Wiley Blackwell, New York.}
_{3. NOP/USDA 2002, posting date. Organic production and handling standards. AMS/USDA. [Online.]}
_{4. OTA. 2006. U.S. organic industry overview. OTA’s 2006 manufacturer survey. Organic Trade Assn.}
_{5. WalnutAcres 2001, posting date. Americans are confused about organic food but are confident that it is better. [Online.]}
_{6. WFM. 2006. 2005 Whole Foods Market Organic Trend Tracker. Whole Foods Market.}
_{7. Winter, C. K. 2006. Organic foods. J. Food Sci. 71:R117-R124.}

_{“Interior Grocery Store Decor | Produce Area Decor | Market Decor Design | Thriftway Produce Area | Grocery Store Decor Design | Ralph’s Thriftway” by I-5 Design & Manufacture is licensed under CC BY-ND 2.0.}

The post True or Not: Organic food is better for your health than non-organic food. appeared first on Best Food Facts.

Is Non-Organic Food Full of Chemicals?

Best Food Facts — Wed, 20 Mar 2013 19:20:17 +0000

Recently, we launched a series of videos about GMOs, which spurred many questions. One question that seemed to be on everyone’s mind was the differences between organic and non-organic food. One viewer asked, “Is non-organic food full of chemicals?”

To answer this question, we reached out to Dr. Ruth MacDonald, Chair and Professor of the Department of Food Science & Human Nutrition, Iowa State University.

Dr. MacDonald said,

There is a widely held thought that conventionally-grown fruits and vegetables are loaded with pesticide and herbicide (chemical) residue. This is simply not supported by facts. The FDA and USDA routinely monitor the food supply for chemical residues and post results on their websites.

There are substantial rules in place about how and when chemicals are used on foods, and they are meant to limit human exposure. All chemicals have a set safety limit that is defined by research on the effects the chemicals have on human systems. The reports show that these limits are almost never exceeded for food (the program surveys food taken from grocery stores all around the country – it is a huge study).

What may be surprising is that organic foods also contain chemical residues from organic-approved chemicals used in their production, or those accumulated from the environment (same as for conventional foods). The fact is this: we are exposed to chemicals all the time from the air and water, and in cars, houses and workplaces – and even in things like cosmetics. The amount of exposure from food residues is far less than all of these.

There is no evidence that things like cancer, infertility, ADHD, obesity or hypertension are related to chemical exposures from fruits and vegetables.Consumers are readily frightened by legitimate research stories where large doses of a chemical are shown to have some negative aspect on health (usually in animal research). The issue with those findings is that the dose amounts in the study are far greater than would be achieved by eating normal amounts of fruits and vegetables. When the studies are published, media and other groups oftentimes conclude that the chemicals are dangerous because they are present in food, but they aren’t paying attention to the amount of exposure that is normal and acceptable to consume. Scientists who study this always say that it’s not the presence or absence of a chemical, it’s the amount or dose present.

There is no doubt that chemicals can cause bad things in the body, and we continue to learn more about that, but the truth is that consuming more fruits and vegetables, from either organic or conventional processes, is a healthy choice. No one needs to feel that they should only consume organic foods to be ‘safe.’ We have the safest food supply in the world and there are many systems in place to ensure and monitor that safety.

For more information on pesticide residues, please check out the calculator on SafeFruitsandVeggies.com.*

Do you have a food question for the experts? Submit a question here.

*Best Food Facts is not affiliated with SafeFruitsandVeggies.com or the Alliance for Food and Farming. We just think the calculator is a great, fact-based resource that helps us understand how pesticide use impacts our food.

The post Is Non-Organic Food Full of Chemicals? appeared first on Best Food Facts.

Study Claims Organic Is Not More Nutritious

Best Food Facts — Tue, 04 Sep 2012 12:31:24 +0000

Do you buy organic? If so, why? A new study published in the Annals of Internal Medicine by Stanford University researchers may change your mind about eating organic.

The study found that fruits and vegetables labeled organic were, on average, no more nutritious than conventional fruits and vegetables. Organic fruits and vegetables were not any less likely to be contaminated by dangerous bacteria like E. coli. And, there were no obvious health advantages to organic meats.

Best Food Facts has looked at organic vs. conventional food in the past, and our experts have agreed with this latest study. Dr. Carl Winter and Dr. Francisco Diez answered True? or Not? in regards to organic food, and Dr. Ruth MacDonald looked at the nutritional differences.
Do you buy organic? If so, why? Please leave a comment!

_{“Dessert” by Nana B Agyei is licensed under CC BY.}

The post Study Claims Organic Is Not More Nutritious appeared first on Best Food Facts.

Milk: Organic, Raw, Ultra-Pasteurized… What’s Safe and What Do You Need To Know?

Best Food Facts — Tue, 03 May 2011 13:01:33 +0000

Consumers throughout the country are confused when it comes to buying milk. There are all sorts of recommendations about raw, organic, fat-free, ultra-pasteurized – it’s no wonder confusion exists.

A recent article on the Stroller Traffic Blog titled Got [Organic] Milk? aimed to assist consumers about what is necessary to know before buying milk at the grocery store. In the post, the following recommendations were made by Kim Walls, a naturalist:

Buy Organic.
Get to know your local farmer.
Drink it raw, if you can.
Consider goat.
Remember that soy milk is not milk.
Whatever you do, avoid ultra-pasteurized milk.

To get additional information on the subject, we enlisted the assistance of Dr. Jean Weese, professor of Food Science at Auburn University.

Click here to hear our interview with Dr. Weese.

Dr. Weese summarized:

While a growing number of people believe organic milk is superior to non-organic milk, Dr. Weese says scientific research does not support that conclusion. “We have not seen any thorough research or data that I’ve collected. They are extremely similar. It does not affect the nutritional content of the milk that we regularly get that has been homogenized and pasteurized. It does not affect the nutritional quality.”
There are great risks with drinking unpasteurized, or raw, milk. There are many studies documenting great reductions of illnesses and deaths associated with milk consumption since pasteurization became a widely adopted food safety process.
Ultra-pasteurization, a process by which milk is processed at a higher temperature so it can be processed for a shorter period of time, impacts the nutritional value of milk even less. This updated process serves to process the milk more quickly while killing all the bacteria without destroying the nutrients.
Soy milk and other such products are processed much more than conventional cow’s milk, but can have comparable nutritional value if calcium is added.

Do you have questions about buying milk? What is most important to you when selecting milk in the grocery store?

_{“milk jugs in a barn” by Kyle Hickman is licensed under CC BY-SA 2.0.}

The post Milk: Organic, Raw, Ultra-Pasteurized… What’s Safe and What Do You Need To Know? appeared first on Best Food Facts.