Very good points. Thanks for commenting!

Great comments. Yes, I think the soil quality is hugely important (organic or not) as well as time/distance from being harvested to being consumed. And, the higher pesticide levels can’t be a good thing (maybe within EPA limits, etc. but still…). I, too, feel better about conventional but still will try for organic as much as possible, available, etc. Thanks for stopping by!

Also, I’m reading this from the Data Synthesis: “Two studies reported significantly lower urinary pesticide levels among children consuming organic versus conventional diets, but studies of biomarker and nutrient levels in serum, urine, breast milk, and semen in adults did not identify clinically meaningful differences. All estimates of differences in nutrient and contaminant levels in foods were highly heterogeneous except for the estimate for phosphorus; phosphorus levels were significantly higher than in conventional produce, although this difference is not clinically significant.”

Does this mean they didn’t actually analyze the nutritional content of the foods? It sounds like they are basing their conclusion on nutrient levels found in the bodies of the people who ate the foods. Also, they say phosphorus was significantly higher, but that that’s not clinically significant. Why not? I’m sure Dr Weston Price would have said it was significant!

Lastly, it does state that those who consumed organic had significantly less urinary pesticide levels. Hmm…so this isn’t important? I mean, good thing it’s coming out of the body, but what’s it doing while it’s in there?

At least I feel a little better about the conventional produce I buy, but I will continue to get organic when I can.