文章基本信息

标题：Organic Food Conclusions Don’t Tell the Whole Story
本地全文：下载
作者：David C. Holzman
期刊名称：Environmental Health Perspectives
印刷版ISSN：0091-6765
电子版ISSN：1552-9924
出版年度：2012
卷号：120
期号：12
页码：a458
DOI：10.1289/ehp.120-a458
出版社：OCR Subscription Services Inc
摘要：A widely reported Stanford University study1concluding there is little difference in the healthfulness and safety of conventional and organic foods has been criticized by experts in the environmental health sciences for over-looking the growing body of evidence on the adverse effects of pesticides. Critics take to task the authors' omission of relevant studies and overinterpretation of the data. The meta-analysis of 237 studie s, pub-lished in the September 2012 Annal s of Internal Medicine, largely focused on nutrient content and viral /bacterial/fungal contamination of organic versus conventionally grown foods. Nine studies reporting pesticide residues, including three of residues exceeding federal limits, were included in summary analyses. The authors concluded that the studies reviewed do not support what they call the "widespread perception" that organic foods overall are nutritionally superior to con-ventional ones, although eating an organic diet may reduce exposures to pe sticides and antibiotic-resistant bacteria.1A Stanford press release quoted senior author Dena Bravata as saying, "There isn't much difference between organic and conventional foods, if you're an adult and making a decision based solely on your healt h."2(According to the Stanford Medical Center press office, Bravata is no longer doing interviews about t he st udy.) In one key finding, the team reported a "risk difference" of 30% between conven-tional and organic produc e, meaning organic produce had a 30% lower risk of pesticide contamination than conventional produce. That number was based on the difference bet ween the percentages of conventional and organic food samples across studies with any detectible pesticide residues (38% and 7%, respectively).