Some of the things mentioned in this article are things I’ve discussed, but this article put them very succinctly.
Organic Foods
Organic materials simply stated contain carbon. Therefore, technically, anything and everything that contains carbon is organic, from petroleum products to battleships to the computer you’re reading this entry on. The premise that being organic somehow makes something better than an inorganic object flies at the heart of bigotry and lies more in the realm of semantic preference than in scientific proof.
Despite what they tell you, nobody has scientifically demonstrated that organic foods are better for you than nonorganic sources. My milk says the FDA has not shown that milk from cows treated with hormones is worse than organic milk. As a plant scientist, I know that ultimately the only thing that makes a difference in nutrition of a foodstuff is the age and health of the source at the time of harvest. For fruits and vegetables, much of what we eat is largely waste not because there’s anything wrong with it but rather that workers pick the fruits before veraison is complete. Plants make fruits and vegetables for reproduction (in general), and so they wait until the opportune moment before filling the fruit with most of the nutrients for which we consume them. This is why they should be eaten in season, or better yet, grow your own. That way you know they were picked at opportune ripeness.
Besides regular food transport, the value to the “environment” is mitigated by the expense in time, money and materials bringing organic goods to market. The further an organic source lies from its destination, the more any “organic growing practices” (whatever the Hoboken than means) employed in husbandry of those foodstuffs cancels out the pollution created by the truck that delivers it to you. More often than not, it’s a null sum game, which is fine and well, but hardly a solution to “fix” the “environment”.
For these reasons- transportation and maturation- the only way to provide your body with better food lies in producing as much of it yourself as possible. Most people can’t refine sugar in their homes or add preservatives. I don’t even know offhand if you can buy BHT as an individual to put in your bottled fruit, or CaCl2 as an anti-caking agent. Only if the produce remains under your control can you be sure that 1. It contains nothing adverse to health and 2. It contains the things beneficial to health that made you want to eat it in the first place.
While working as a graduate student, one of our researchers turned us on to carcinogens known as ethyl carbamates. These compounds spontaneously occur in wine as a result of chemical reactions between alcohol and unresolved amino acids floating in the wine. Where they become a problem occurs when people in the chain of custody do not maintain the same standards as enforced on the producer and elective at the level of the consumer. If at any point from the vineyard to your table the wine rises above 70F, ethyl carbamates will be produced, mitigating any health “benefit” of wine, and those benefits, if they work at all, are only in red wines.
As a scientist, I have a healthy dose of circumspect as regards the sweeping claims of “experts”, many of whom are often refuted and surprised when unexpected things occur. In the end, you can’t control everything, so even produce from your own garden isn’t going to be as good as possible. Not everyone has time or interest to become a master gardener. However, all of you paying extra money at places like Whole Foods under the supposition that master gardeners deliver you a superior product ought to consider that the products sold there are only as good as the newest, greenest, least experienced farm hand or transport associate involved in bringing it to market. You never know if the person who had a hand in what you’re buying isn’t doing it right because it’s his first day or it’s company policy to allow such dereliction of service.
Disclaimer: the author has nothing against stores like Whole Foods. He just thinks they fail the cost-benefit ratio analysis.
No comments:
Post a Comment