LOL, just another scam

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
You wouldn't expect any nutritional benefits... I'd be interested to see a report on the affects of the extra chemicals/additives etc... I think that is the main reason people buy organic.
 
Paxil said:
You wouldn't expect any nutritional benefits... I'd be interested to see a report on the affects of the extra chemicals/additives etc... I think that is the main reason people buy organic.
Click to expand...

bingo...
 
Paxil said:
You wouldn't expect any nutritional benefits... I'd be interested to see a report on the affects of the extra chemicals/additives etc... I think that is the main reason people buy organic.
Click to expand...

I assume they were counting the effects of pesticides and additives in non-organic food, otherwise this is a completely worthless study.
 
I'm sure the extra nutrition you get out of the additional worms, insects and fungi have to bring some nutritional value to the organic table.
 
Magrag-for-hire Reuters, as always, grossly distorts the similar nutritional findings and their applicability to the issue of "health benefits" by ignoring the real health benefit of not ingesting deadly poisons 3 times a day.

Lack of poisons, the fact they're grown locally usually, and a huge improvement in taste are the reasons people choose organics. I've never heard anyone claim they were more nutritious, or even care if they were.
 
Minstrel... I doubt it was worthless to the people who paid for it. =) Which most likely was someone who produces non-organic food.
 
Paxil said:
Minstrel... I doubt it was worthless to the people who paid for it. =) Which most likely was someone who produces non-organic food.
Click to expand...

Well, I don't know the history of the organization that did the study. If they're a legitimate science/health agency, then you'd expect that they'd do a study that bears on what people actually believe about organic/non-organic food (that organic food is healthier due to lack of pesticides/additives). If they're essentially a mercenary "think tank," then absolutely it was probably just propaganda.
 
Nobody expected Nutrition to be different. What they expect is not not be eating pesticides or growth hormones in their food. Any study that was on those subjects is probably not long enough to be any good at all, since that stuff accumulites in your body over a lifetime. Studies and statistics can say anything you want them to if you tweak it enough. If you don't like organic food, then don't buy it. But don't try to stop me from buying it, or we will have a problem.
 
Something about this study reminds me of the "ZERO FAT!" label they put on Gummi Bears. It's called deliberately missing the point.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top