A new research at the University of Copenhagen has shown that there is no evidence to support the view that organic food is better than food grown with the use of pesticides and chemicals.
Shoppers pay more than a third more for organic food in the belief that it has more nutritional content than food grown with pesticides and chemicals.
Researchers looked at the following crops - carrots, kale, mature peas, apples and potatoes - staple ingredients that can be found in most families' shopping list.
The first cultivation method involved growing the vegetables on soil, which had a low input of nutrients using animal manure and no pesticides except for one organically approved product on kale only.
In the second method, researchers applied a low input of nutrients using animal manure, combined with use of pesticides, as much as allowed by regulation.
The third method comprised a combination of a high input of nutrients through mineral fertilisers and pesticides as legally allowed.
The crops were grown on the same or similar soil on adjacent fields at the same time and so experienced the same weather conditions.
All were harvested and treated at the same time. In the case of the organically grown vegetables, all were grown on established organic soil.
After harvest, researchers found that there were no differences in the levels of major and trace contents in the fruit and vegetables grown using the three different methods.
Taken from:
http://www.nowpublic.com/health/no-e...tional-content
whats your take on Natural foods? 
