- Thursday 23 May 2013
- My Account
- Logout
- Register
- Login
- News
-
Voices
-
Find by writer
- Yasmin Alibhai-Brown
- Rebecca Armstrong
- Memphis Barker
- Terence Blacker
- Chris Blackhurst
- David Blanchflower
- Archie Bland
- Ian Burrell
- Andrew Buncombe
- Ben Chu
- Patrick Cockburn
- Laura Davis
- Mary Dejevsky
- Grace Dent
- Robert Fisk
- Andrew Grice
- Stefano Hatfield
- Philip Hensher
- Ian Herbert
- Howard Jacobson
- Ellen E Jones
- Alice Jones
- Owen Jones
- Simon Kelner
- Dominic Lawson
- Donald Macintyre
- Lisa Markwell
- Comment
- Campaigns
- Debate
- Editorials
- Letters
- IV Drip
- Archive
- Our Voices
- Commentators
- Columnists
- Democracy 2015
- IV Drip Archive
-
Find by writer
- Sport
- Tech
- Life
- Property
- Arts & Ents
- Travel
- Money
- IndyBest
- Blogs
- Student
Wednesday 5 September 2012
Archie Bland: Why we just can't stomach the truth about organic
Freeview from the editors at i
Organic food just sounds better for you. It conjures images of ruddy-cheeked farmers dusting the soil off charmingly nobbly, inimically British potatoes, and delivering them to their local Tesco in wooden boxes; wholesome, well-adjusted, tolerant cows, roaming the countryside unfettered and turning down unhealthy foods before cheerfully volunteering for a painless death. Enough people like those sorts of ideas for the industry to be worth £1.64bn in the UK.
It was curious, then, to read yesterday a news story that would seem to throw doubt on the idea that organic food is quite so wonderful. Refreshingly enough in a field in which most consumers seem to rely simply on the soothing sound of one word – organic – against the creepier overtones of another – pesticide – this story actually had hard serious evidence behind it. Scientists at Stanford University took a comprehensive look at the studies done so far on the benefits of organic food, spent four years applying rigorous statistical analysis to the data, and found… no discernible health benefit whatsoever. There's no proof it's better for you, but also no proof it isn't. There was no need for a study, on the other hand, to establish that it is eye-wateringly expensive.
Now, a lot of people who eat organic say it just tastes better, although I should like to blindfold them and see if they can really tell when I offer them a pint of delicious, chemically-enhanced milk. Also, maybe more impressively, the organic lobby will claim that consumers know just what they're after in organic food – that, as the study confirmed, it is less likely to retain traces of pesticide. But such a claim is disingenuous. People like the sound of less pesticide because they think pesticide sounds dangerous, not because of some obscure moral objection.
I don't expect any of this to make the slightest difference, though. The organic steam train is way too far along for any mere synoptic study to derail it. That's frustrating enough, when people are parting with so much of their money for an imprimatur that doesn't mean what a lot of them think it means.
Worse still is the marketing blather that organic has brought with it; everything advertised as if it was made by an elderly couple living next to a bubbling brook, and everything being bloody NATURAL, or if not natural at least part of NATURE'S HARVEST, or ENERGY BOOSTING, or LOCALLY SOURCED WHERE POSSIBLE, and all of it also being NOT NECESSARILY ANY BETTER FOR YOU AS A RESULT. Organic food, you have a lot to answer for. And you're not even doing me any good.
-
Grace Dent: I’m not sure how these people can avoid being called ‘bigots’. And the more ‘civilised’, the worse they are
Grace Dent -
After woman sells virginity for $780,000, here are the results of our prostitution survey
Laura Davis -
The Daily Cartoon
-
Woolwich murder: They killed, then they performed - these men should be starved of our attention
Frank Furedi -
Woolwich attack: The EDL will seek to exploit this evil crime for their own evil ends
Jamie Lewis
-
Woolwich murder: They killed, then they performed - these men should be starved of our attention
-
Embrace the e-book, Stephen King. It is not for an author to tell his readers how to read
-
Debate: Is it right to call the murder in Woolwich a ‘terrorist attack’?
-
Woolwich attack: We have a duty to report these images, but editors face difficult ethical questions
-
The legal aid cuts are just the beginning of a move towards a fully privatised criminal justice system
-
Cot Death: Doctors and scientists should be clear when official advice changes
Get your summer started with British Military Fitness
BMF is the UK’s biggest and best loved outdoor fitness classes
Visit York
Find out what The Independent's resident travel expert has to say about one of the most beautiful small cities in the world
Making reading fun for kids
Nook is donating eReaders to volunteers at high-need schools and participating in exclusive events throughout the campaign.
Introducing the 'Get Reading' campaign
Get the latest on The Evening Standard's campaign to get London's children reading.
Enter the latest Independent competitions
Win anything from gadgets to five-star holidays on our competitions and offers page.
Business videos from commercial thought leaders
Watch the best in the business world give their insights into the world of business.
Archie Bland
Get the best in opinion from Independent Voices, straight to your inbox every Thursday lunchtime.
Subscribe
Amol Rajan
A weekly update from the Editor
Day In a Page
Edward VIII’s phone calls - and how MI5 bugged them
Hollywood's random acts of red-carpet kindness
Not secure any more: G4S boss heads for exit at last
How to say ‘I’m a sellout’