Did you hear the news?
Stanford University conducted a study that sent the news shows Tuesday morning into a food tizzy. Based on research conducted, these lovely folks at Stanford found that organic food (produce, meat, milk, etc.) has no increased nutritional value as compared to food grown conventionally.
Sorry, you can't detect sarcasm through the written word.
I know I shouldn't be snarky or sarcastic here, but this is yet another demonstration of how difficult it seems for some folks to exercise common sense. For example, I need a snack, so I reach for carrots (well, some times, but for illustration purposes, humor me). I wash the lovely veggies, stick them in a bowl and enjoy. Are they organic? Not necessarily. I choose generally based on price, but in my opinion, choosing carrots rather than chips or Peanut M&Ms should be the focus, not whether or not they were organic or not. We served beef for dinner last night, and although we're not certified organic, we're pretty darn close, so because I gave my kids that, some strawberries from the conventional strawberry plant and steamed peas (which nobody ate...not because they weren't organic), was that considered a bad meal?
I think when it comes to the Food Wars, we're worried about the wrong thing.
Plunking breaded popcorn chicken on a plate, organic or not, is still serving processed, breaded chicken. Allowing kids to snack on pretzels made from organic wheat, covered in sea salt (can the sea be considered organic?) is still giving your kids salty snacks. It's not the how that we should be so super sensitive about, it's the what.
Don't get me wrong, I don't want to pump my body full of chemicals, nor do I want my kids to be all juiced up on super charged foods. But isn't a carrot a carrot, nutritionally speaking? Shouldn't a parent be more focused upon offering healthy snacks and meals, rather than whether or not the skin they will ultimately peel off their apples for their kids (am I the only one who has to do that?) has been sprayed at some time by something that is not harmful to humans, but will ultimately help the crop survive?
As a person who's shoe habit has become increasingly dependent upon a plant's survival, or a shot of medicine to a calf who is sick so that calf can grow into a commodity that will help pay my power bill, I am super crazy about this debate.
I'm thankful for the good folks at Stanford to restate the obvious that we as food producers have tried to get out there for quite some time. I'm grateful for the Today Show of giving this story top billing the other day, and I'm hopeful that this won't fall upon deaf ears.
Eat a carrot. Have an apple. Cut up strawberries. Wash them first, obviously, but enjoy them, and enjoy the health benefits without pause.
End of sermon!