Organic Food has no benefit?
Did anyone else see the story that organic food has no nutritional superiority by the British government's Food Standards Agency?
"Our review indicates that there is currently no evidence to support the selection of organically over conventionally produced foods on the basis of nutritional superiority."
I think just not eating all the pesticides, herbicides and chemical fertilizers buried into the foods is sufficient for the premium, let alone the activity of farming is actually improving the planet, not harming it like conventional farming.
I am not sure what the Brits are thinking, but you can look at the performance of WFMI and know that organics not only are superior in the belly, but in the portfolio also. For those that listened (WFMI, the horse is out of the barn) and held on to your positions, congrats! True believers in deed.
"Our review indicates that there is currently no evidence to support the selection of organically over conventionally produced foods on the basis of nutritional superiority."
I think just not eating all the pesticides, herbicides and chemical fertilizers buried into the foods is sufficient for the premium, let alone the activity of farming is actually improving the planet, not harming it like conventional farming.
I am not sure what the Brits are thinking, but you can look at the performance of WFMI and know that organics not only are superior in the belly, but in the portfolio also. For those that listened (WFMI, the horse is out of the barn) and held on to your positions, congrats! True believers in deed.
Posted by Bradley Fluetsch at 7/31/2009 5:19 AM 
Categories: Speculation
Tags: organic benefits natural health WFMI food
Categories: Speculation
Tags: organic benefits natural health WFMI food
Comments