Is organic better?

A friend recently asked me what I thought about organic food vs conventional food.  This was my response.

Is organic better? Yes, especially if you're *pregnant, but not if you can't afford it.  In other words, eating 2 cups of conventionally grown vegetables (ex: 2 lb at $1.50/lb = $3.00 total) is better for your overall health than only eating 1 cup of organic produce (ex: 1 lb at $3.00/lb = $3.00 total).

Explanation: By USDA National Organic Program definition, organic products are grown without the use of synthetic fertilizers, sewage sludge, irradiation, and genetic engineering.  There is no doubt that there are fewer pesticide residues on organic produce than conventionally grown produce.  (fewer, not none, because sometimes organically grown foods are contaminated by pesticides from neighboring fields or during the transport and manufacturing processes).  This make them better for you insomuch as that they do not add to the toxic burden on the body -- which is already very high from our pill-popping, car driving, SAD and stressful American lifestyle.

Avoiding pesticide residues is especially important for *pregnant women.  The children of mothers exposed to high levels of organophosphates (the main chemical in many insecticides, herbicides, and nerve gasses), were found to have lower IQs than other children according to studies by  Columbia University, the University of California, Berkeley, and Mount Sinai Hospital.  In addition to the developing fetus, children are also more susceptible to the negative effects of pesticides.

The jury is still out as to whether organic produce is more nutritious than conventionally grown produce.  A recent study by Stanford University (PubMed, full text) claimed that there is no statistically significant difference in nutrient content (except for phenols, which protect against cancer!), but I still believe that organic foods are inherently more nutritious as a result of being grown in nutrient-rich soils in ecological balance.

When I say "more nutritious," I'm talking about the phytonutrients like phenolic acids, flavonoids, tannins, stilbenes, curcuminoids, coumarins, lignans, and quinones more so than the standard vitamins and minerals touted by the 2010 Dietary Guidelines for Americans.  Yes, calcium, vitamin D and potassium are important for normal function of the body, but I advocate for optimizing function and disease prevention - the kind of prevention that can only result from eating a diet rich in fruits and vegetables.

That being said, diet rich in conventionally-grown fruits and vegetables probably contains more nutrients than a diet which includes only organic vegetables and fruits sparingly.  Here's an example for those people who like math.

• Question: Let's say that an organic apple costs $1.00 and contains 8 mg of flavonols and a conventional apple costs $0.50 but only contains 6 mg of flavonols.  If you have $2.00 to buy apples, how can you get the most flavonols for your money? 
• Answer: You buy four conventional apples (6 + 6 + 6 + 6 = 24 mg).

So, back to my main point.  Organic is better, but only if you can afford it.  If you are one of the many living paycheck to paycheck, or perhaps just watching your food budget, it's better to spend your money on many, many vegetables and fruits and eating them on a daily basis than it is to spend your money on just a couple of organic vegetables that you only eat once a week.