Re: Organic Food Not Nutritionally Better Than Conventionally-pr Be my guest. I've been thinking about this thread since it started. :wink:
Re: Organic Food Not Nutritionally Better Than Conventionally-pr Doesn't a Brix meter measure sugars? Your tastebuds may tell you something's yummier (more sugar) but that might not mean better for you Everybody should read the study - very interesting (see my previous posts in this thread for links). They had to pick what nutrients to measure. Doesn't mean there aren't others.
Re: Organic Food Not Nutritionally Better Than Conventionally-pr The brix measurement can be read off the scale, showing levels of sugar, minerals, proteins and vitamins in the plant's juices, commonly referred to as dissolved solids. https://www.themeterman.com.au/interview.php Yes that is the point that I am trying to make it is still a giant leap to declare that Organic Food is Not Nutritionally Better Than conventionally grown.
Re: Organic Food Not Nutritionally Better Than Conventionally-pr .so now sweeter is not better,careful gbell big sugar will get you :lol:
Re: Organic Food Not Nutritionally Better Than Conventionally-pr I have a vague memory of watching the guy getting interviewed on tv and he said something along the lines of only looking at nutritional values and not considering pesticides etc. If the vitamin C is the same, but you get a bigger dose of carcinogens, I'd say that is significant no matter how much.
Re: Organic Food Not Nutritionally Better Than Conventionally-pr G'day I always thought the point of organically grown isn't that it's more nutritious but that it doesn't contain any toxic chemicals I think this whole nutrition thing is initiated by the chemical companies to distract people from the above - so your average punter will forget about the nasties. Feasible and likely I reckon. cheers
Re: Organic Food Not Nutritionally Better Than Conventionally-pr I'm with you gemjill though it is good to reflect on the possibility that growing your food in healthy, balanced soil with a broad spectrum of nutrients will produce more nutritious food then pumped up NPK in growing medium stuff.
Re: Organic Food Not Nutritionally Better Than Conventionally-pr Hmm... sort of. Depends on what/how much you've been reading the past few years. Proponents of organic food (and some studies) have been claiming better nutrition.
Re: Organic Food Not Nutritionally Better Than Conventionally-pr Kirlian Photograph showing comparison between Commercially grown mushroom and an Organic Mushroom...
Re: Organic Food Not Nutritionally Better Than Conventionally-pr Two questions-1which is which and2- Is it woo woo.
Re: Organic Food Not Nutritionally Better Than Conventionally-pr https://news.bfa.com.au/listmanager/disp ... =70#health
Re: Organic Food Not Nutritionally Better Than Conventionally-pr The supposed "handful of nutrients" in the other study was "vitamin C, calcium, phosphorus, potassium, total soluble solids, titratable acidity, copper, iron, nitrates, manganese, ash, specific proteins, sodium, plant non-digestible carbohydrates, ?-carotene and sulphur." Not exactly a limited list. The FSSA study had to look for increases "dry matter content". Yah! More dry matter content please! The higher antioxidants, minerals and healthy fats are indeed good news, but one wonders how minor are the nutrients they had to look for to get positive results? They accuse the other review of being "biased", but in what way, and how is the FSSA less biased?
Re: Organic Food Not Nutritionally Better Than Conventionally-pr yes! and to illustrate your first point: imagine.... 'organic' belladonna
Re: Organic Food Not Nutritionally Better Than Conventionally-pr Cynical of some things yes but not this. I was merely asking questions to clarify -1 which was the organic mushroom as the 1st picture to me showed more radiation and -2 what are peoples opinion on the permaculture standpoint of woo woo . To me woo woo Is just un proven from a scientific point of view,
Re: Organic Food Not Nutritionally Better Than Conventionally-pr sorry, i misunderstood you. the 'organic' is on the left - but it doesn't make any difference...you can get the same picture from inanimate/non-organic and recently-organic (ie. dead!) objects. I also include "disproven" in a definition of woo-woo. as far as i understand permaculture does not proceed via a process of bald assertion but by observation and experiment. theoretically, it's anti-woo-woo...very different in practice, i'm sure. :-D pretty pictures, though
Re: Organic Food Not Nutritionally Better Than Conventionally-pr Yes as I have experienced it woo woo is definitely not permaculture.However I do not like to cancel possibilities.I don't include disproven in woo woo to me woo woo is the middle ground which seems un provable and un disprovable at this time by scientific process.
Re: Organic Food Not Nutritionally Better Than Conventionally-pr Yes, the images are labelled under them... just need to scroll down a little in the attachment window to see the labels. I don't discredit science. But nature was looking after herself very well before man decided they could do a better job.
