Organic food producers dismiss flawed British study

Print

Thu, 30 Jul 2009 12:00a.m.

By Laura Turner

Some of New Zealand's finest food producers have lashed out at a British study claiming organic food is no better for you than conventionally-produced food.

Those producers were pushing their products at the Auckland food show today. Their message: that it's what's not in their products that makes them so good.

While Australian celebrity chef Donna Hay drew the big crowds this morning, the big debate bubbling over was what to eat organic or not organic.

Britain's Food Standards Agency released a report overnight claiming organic food is a waste of time and money, and it's no better for you than your normal produce.

But try telling that to the organic food producers themselves.

"At the end of the day it's fruit for us that's grown in the ground," says Shannon Auton. "Unless you have to add chemicals to it - then why do it?"

While the ladies at the organic Pitango soup stand had no trouble getting 3 News to sample the soup, it was the organic argument they did the hard-sell on - no chemicals equals a healthier product.

"The vegetables and the products that are organic are free from pesticides, and the way they're grown is far more natural," says Annabel Stuart.

The British study didn't take pesticides or fertilisers into account - its conclusion was drawn simply from nutritional content.

While the organic producers at today's show couldn't prove their products have more nutrients than their cheaper, conventional counterparts, they still argue: why eat chemicals if you don't have to?

It's a theory that's now spread further than food.

While alcohol is not the healthiest of products, Marlborough's Yealands Estate Winery has begun growing its own organic vineyards. This is not just for the health of the consumer, but for the environment - something staff say no report can argue with.

"If we mow our lawns with tractors around our vineyards, versus using our babydoll sheep to keep the grass down, then obviously that's far more natural," says Debbie Jones.

But if the organic food debate has your head in a spin, there's plenty of other food on offer at the show, from sausages to omelettes - and even vodka.

They're not organic, but that doesn't mean you can't eat them.

3 News
Become a fan of 3 News on Facebook and on Twitter.

Post a Comment

Before commenting, please take the time to read our moderation guide


(Won't be published)



Comments

31 Jul 2009 08:57a.m.

JD wrote:

Organic food is only better because you want to believe its better. What scientific evidence do you have, to prove that all pesticides/herbicides are bad. Your cannot only base your statement on emotive evidence. Of course the organic food producers are dismissing this study, there entire marketing campaign has always centred around the myth that it was better for you. Much in the same way as any company that inserts the word 'eco' into there logo or branding, in almost a blackmail attempt to make people feel guilty of destroying the world if they buy regular branded products. The only green thing in the whole organic/save the planet industry, is the colour of the money.

31 Jul 2009 07:14a.m.

Gus wrote:

There are many aspects to the organic food debate. As far as nutrition goes though,surely this depends on soil health. You can have an unhealthy inactive soil and still be farming organically. On the other hand you can farm conventially in a soil with a higher nutrient turnover. Soil health is what makes the difference.

31 Jul 2009 02:01a.m.

Trevor wrote:

Organic food is better. Pesticides are bad. Britain's Food Standards Agency needs to look at all facts.