Clear differences between organic and non-organic food, study finds

[dipsydoodle]

Organic food has more of the antioxidant compounds linked to better health and lower levels of toxic metals and pesticides, according to the most comprehensive scientific analysis to date.

The international scientific team behind the new work suggests that switching from regular to organic fruit and vegetables could give the same benefits as adding one or two portions of the "five a day" currently recommended.

The team, led by Prof Carlo Leifert at the University of Newcastle, concludes that there are "statistically significant, meaningful" differences, with a range of antioxidants being "substantially higher" – between 19% and 69% – in organic food. It is the first study to demonstrate clear and wide-ranging differences between organic and conventional fruits, vegetables and cereals.

The researchers say the increased levels of antioxidants are equivalent to "one to two of the five portions of fruits and vegetables recommended to be consumed daily and would therefore be significant and meaningful in terms of human nutrition, if information linking these [compounds] to the health benefits associated with increased fruit, vegetable and whole grain consumption is confirmed".

The findings will bring to the boil a long-simmering row over whether those differences mean organic food is better for people, with one expert calling the work sexed up.

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/jul/11/organic-food-more-antioxidants-study

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

1. I hope they published the study in a journal with a

lot of people citing it, or else we'll be seeing folks along shortly to slam them for not publishing in a 'high impact index' journal. (Looks like it's in the British Journal of Nutrition.)

(PubMed Link Higher antioxidant and lower cadmium concentrations and lower incidence of pesticide residues in organically grown crops: a systematic literature review and meta-analyses.)

[jeff47]

3. Nah, in this case the problem is here:

more of the antioxidant compounds linked to better health

That claim hasn't been borne out by studies.

More details here: http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/nutritionsource/antioxidants/

Free radicals contribute to chronic diseases from cancer to heart disease and Alzheimer’s disease to vision loss. This doesn’t automatically mean that substances with antioxidant properties will fix the problem, especially not when they are taken out of their natural context. The studies so far are inconclusive, but generally don’t provide strong evidence that antioxidant supplements have a substantial impact on disease.

It's possible that it will turn out you need decades of a high-antioxidant diet to make a difference, which is going to take a very long time to study. But the studies so far don't show ingesting antioxidants to have an effect on health.

[wisechoice]

4. natural form does help

, especially not when they are taken out of their natural context. The studies so far are inconclusive, but generally don’t provide strong evidence that antioxidant supplements have a substantial impact on disease.

It is the supplements that they are doubting more. So eat more organic fruits.

[jeff47]

8. They're bringing up supplements as a possible reason it wasn't shown to have an effect.

But nobody's shown organic fruits to have an effect either.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

5. Depends on the specific antioxidant, I suppose.

And what you need them for. There was a recent study, for instance, showing that lycopene did some nice things for blood vessels in people with cardiovascular problems. Didn't do anything for them if you were healthy already, but for those folks it was beneficial. And pubmed certainly has a bazillion studies on anthocyanins that refer to chemopreventive effects.

Whether or not anti-oxidants are necessary specifically for antioxidant properties, many of them certainly seem to have specific utility in their own right in the body.

[aint_no_life_nowhere]

13. Kind of cherry picking

A portion of that unsigned article discussing the effects of vitamin E supplementation admits a 24% decrease in mortality, which is pretty significant. The fact is there are volumes of research results documenting the beneficial effects of anti-oxidant supplementation that are beyond massive. For example, Co-Q 10 (ubiquinol) supplementation has shown to have very beneficial effects on the heart. As we age, we lose the concentrations of this natural anti-oxidant in the heart muscle. Replenishing that anti-oxidant has improved the all-important factor of ejection fraction in the heart. Here are just a few published studies:

Awata N, et al. The effects of coenzyme Q10 on ischemic heart disease evaluated by dynamic exercise test. In: Yamamura Y, Folkers K, et al, eds. Biomedical and Clinical Aspects of Coenzyme Q. Vol 2. Amsterdam , Netherlands : Elsevier-North Holland Biomedical; 1980:247-254.

Crane FL , Navas P. The diversity of coenzyme Q function. Mol Aspects Med. 1997;18(suppl):S1-S6.

Nakamura Y, Takahashi M, et al. Protection of ischaemic myocardium with coenzyme Q10. Cardiovasc Res. 1982;16:132-137.

Nayler WG. The use of coenzyme Q10 to protect ischaemic heart muscle. In: Yamamura Y, Folkers K, et al, eds. Biomedical and Clinical Aspects of Coenzyme Q. Vol 2. Amsterdam , Netherlands : Elsevier-North Holland Biomedical; 1980:409-425.

Frei B, Kim MC, et al. Ubiquinol-10 is an effective lipid-soluble antioxidant at physiological concentrations. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA . 1990;87:4879-4883.

Ondarroa M, Quinn PJ. Proton magnetic resonance spectroscopic studies of the interaction of ubiquinone-10 with phospholipid model membranes. Eur J Biochem. 1986;155:353-361.

Weant KA , Smith KM . The role of coenzyme Q10 in heart failure. Ann Pharmacother. 2005;39:1522-1526.

Mortensen SA. Overview on coenzyme Q10 as adjunctive therapy in chronic heart failure; rationale, design and end-points of “Q-symbio”—a multinational trial. Biofactors. 2003;18 9-89.

Berman M, Erman A, et al. Coenzyme Q10 in patients with end-stage heart failure awaiting cardiac transplantation: a randomized, placebo-controlled study. Clin Cardiol. 2004;27:295-299.

Jeejeebhoy F, Keith M, et al. Nutritional supplementation with MyoVive repletes essential cardiac myocyte nutrients and reduces left ventricular size in patients with left ventricular dysfunction. Am Heart J. 2002;143:1092-1100.

Taggart DP, Jenkins M, et al. Effects of short-term supplementation with coenzyme Q10 on myocardial protection during cardiac operations. Ann Thorac Surg. 1996;61:829-833.

Judy WV, Folkers K, et al. Improved long-term survival in coenzyme Q10 treated chronic heart failure patients compared to conventionally treated patients. In: Folkers K, Littarru GP, et al, eds. Biomedical and Clinical Aspects of Coenzyme Q. Vol 4. Amsterdam , Netherlands : Elsevier Science;1991:291-298.

Hosoe K, Kitano M, Kishida H, et al. Study on safety and bioavailability of ubiquinol (Kaneka QH) after single and 4-week multiple oral administration to healthy volunteers. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol. 2007 Feb;47(1):19-28.

Shults CW, Oakes D, Kieburtz K, et al. Effects of coenzyme Q10 in early Parkinson disease: evidence of slowing of the functional decline. Arch Neurol. 2002 Oct;59(10):1541-50.

Shults CW, Flint BM, Song D, Fontaine D. Pilot trial of high dosages of coenzyme Q10 in patients with Parkinson’s disease. Exp Neurol. 2004 Aug;188(2):491-4.

Langsjoen P. 5th Annual International CoQ10 Symposium. Kobe, Japan: November 9-12, 2007.

Langsjoen PH, Langsjoen AM. Overview of the use of CoQ10 in cardiovascular disease. Biofactors. 1999;9(2-4):273-84.

Langsjoen PH, Littarru GP, Silver MA. Role of concomitant coenzyme Q10 with statins for patients with hyperlipidemia. Curr Topics Nutr Res.2005;3(3):149–58.

Langsjoen PH, Langsjoen AM. Coenzyme Q10 in cardiovascular disease with emphasis on heart failure and myocardial ischaemia. Asia Pacific Heart J. 1998;7(3):160-8.

[jeff47]

22. No, actually you're doing the cherry picking.

A portion of that unsigned article discussing the effects of vitamin E supplementation admits a 24% decrease in mortality, which is pretty significant

Except it only affects people with a rare condition. You can't take that and then claim antioxidants are beneficial to everyone.

Just like you can't say asthma medicine helps everyone because it helps asthmatics during an attack.

The fact is there are volumes of research results documenting the beneficial effects of anti-oxidant supplementation that are beyond massive.

And then when attempts are made to replicate that research, or go from a small study to a larger one, the benefits have not continued.

[aint_no_life_nowhere]

23. I guess some people won't be convinced no matter what the science says

You're mistaken about your own article. It was a large study of nearly 40,000 women and showed a 24% decrease in mortality. That's significant.

As far as CoQ 10 in the form of high-dose ubiquinol is concerned and its benefit as an anti-oxidant in the treatment of congestive heart failure, you have apparently ignored the weight of scientific evidence including a paper published in the Proceedings Of The National Academy Of Sciences. Out of a total of 22 controlled trials of supplemental CoQ10 in congestive heart failure, only three have failed to show significant benefit. The first study by Permanetter et al. failed to measure plasma CoQ10 levels, such that there is no way to know if therapeutic CoQ10 levels were attained. The second trial by Watson et al. demonstrated a mean treatment plasma CoQ10 level of only 1.7 mcg/mL, with only two of the 30 patients having a plasma level greater than 2.0 mcg/mL.26 Finally, the third study by Khatta et al. demonstrated a mean treatment plasma CoQ10 level of 2.2 ± 1.2 mcg/mL, indicating that some patients on treatment had levels as low as 1.0 mcg/mL.27 Unfortunately, these last two trials with sub-therapeutic CoQ10 levels are the most frequently quoted as evidence for a lack of benefit for CoQ10 in heart failure. Nineteen of the twenty-two studies have shown significant benefit. My mother has CHF and I've been dealing with these issues for a long, long time as well as with her doctors who recommend it.

Here's a paper presented just last year at the European Society of Cardiology, an organization comprised of over 80,000 heart specialists and scientists, just one example of many studies (in fact the majority of studies) that show significant benefits of this supplement:

http://www.escardio.org/about/press/press-releases/pr-13/Pages/first-drug-in-decade-improves-heart-failure-mortality.aspx


A potential new approach to improve heart failure outcome Coenzyme Q10 decreases all cause mortality by half in randomised double blind trial

Topics: Heart Failure (HF)
Date: 25 May 2013

CoQ10 is the first medication to improve survival in chronic heart failure since ACE inhibitors and beta blockers more than a decade ago and should be added to standard heart failure therapy.

Lisbon, 25 May 2013: Coenzyme Q10 decreases all cause mortality by half, according to the results of a multicentre randomised double blind trial presented today at Heart Failure 2013 congress. It is the first drug to improve heart failure mortality in over a decade and should be added to standard treatment, according to lead author Professor Svend Aage Mortensen (Copenhagen, Denmark).

Coenzyme Q10 (CoQ10) occurs naturally in the body and is essential to survival. CoQ10 works as an electron carrier in the mitochondria, the powerhouse of the cells, to produce energy and is also a powerful antioxidant. It is the only antioxidant that humans synthesise in the body.

CoQ10 levels are decreased in the heart muscle of patients with heart failure, with the deficiency becoming more pronounced as heart failure severity worsens. Statins are used to treat many patients with heart failure because they block the synthesis of cholesterol, but these drugs also block the synthesis of CoQ10, which further decreases levels in the body.

Double blind controlled trials have shown that CoQ10 improves symptoms, functional capacity and quality of life in patients with heart failure with no side effects. But until now, no trials have been statistically powered to address effects on survival.

The Q-SYMBIO study (2) randomised 420 patients with severe heart failure (New York Heart Association (NYHA) Class III or IV) to CoQ10 or placebo and followed them for 2 years. The primary endpoint was time to first major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE) which included unplanned hospitalisation due to worsening of heart failure, cardiovascular death, urgent cardiac transplantation and mechanical circulatory support. Participating centres were in Denmark, Sweden, Austria, Slovakia, Poland, Hungary, India, Malaysia and Australia.

CoQ10 halved the risk of MACE, with 29 (14%) patients in the CoQ10 group reaching the primary endpoint compared to 55 (25%) patients in the placebo group (hazard ratio=2; p=0.003). CoQ10 also halved the risk of dying from all causes, which occurred in 18 (9%) patients in the CoQ10 group compared to 36 (17%) patients in the placebo group (hazard ratio=2.1; p=0.01).

CoQ10 treated patients had significantly lower cardiovascular mortality (p=0,02) and lower occurrence of hospitalisations for heart failure (p=0.05). There were fewer adverse events in the CoQ10 group compared to the placebo group (p=0.073).

Professor Mortensen said: “CoQ10 is the first new medication to improve survival in chronic heart failure and it should be added to standard therapy.”

He added: “Other heart failure medications block rather than enhance cellular processes and may have side effects. Supplementation with CoQ10, which is a natural and safe substance, corrects a deficiency in the body and blocks the vicious metabolic cycle in chronic heart failure called the energy starved heart.”

CoQ10 is present in food, including red meat, plants and fish, but levels are insufficient to impact on heart failure. CoQ10 is also sold over the counter as a food supplement but Professor Mortensen said: “Food supplements can influence the effect of other medications including anticoagulants and patients should seek advice from their doctor before taking them.”

Patients with ischaemic heart disease who use statins could also benefit from CoQ10 supplementation.

Professor Mortensen said: “We have no controlled trials demonstrating that statin therapy plus CoQ10 improves mortality more than statins alone. But statins reduce CoQ10, and circulating CoQ10 prevents the oxidation of LDL effectively, so I think ischaemic patients should supplement statin therapy with CoQ10.”

[magical thyme]

18. that specifically refers to "antioxidant supplements," not

foods containing higher levels of antioxidant compounds. And the trials cited in your Harvard reference focused on single "antioxidants," when in fact there are thousands of them.

Stating that they don't "fix the problem" pretty dramatically oversimplifies the problem and the solution.

There isn't going to be a pill that "fixes" cancer, Alzheimers or heart disease. Nor is there going to be a single supplement or even a few.

[jeff47]

20. Taking the chemical and putting it into a pill does not magically change it.

The reason they used supplements was so that they could control the experiments - the difference would be the supplement, and not some other thing that happened to be in the food.

Stating that they don't "fix the problem" pretty dramatically oversimplifies the problem and the solution.

Good thing they aren't doing that. They're saying there has been no proof found that antioxidants actually do anything when ingested, except in certain rare conditions.

There isn't going to be a pill that "fixes" cancer, Alzheimers or heart disease. Nor is there going to be a single supplement or even a few.

Tell that to the folks pushing antioxidants as a panacea.

[jtuck004]

6. All they can do is submit it. If a big journal thinks it's all woo, it has to go elsewhere. n/t

[1StrongBlackMan]

11. Slightly off topic ...

(no really off topic); but ...

Growing up, every year in late March/early April, my Mom would declare We're gonna have a vegetable garden ... which meant, I was going turn over the soil; I was going to plant the seeds; I was going to spend my entire summer, weeding and tending the garden; and she, would pick a couple tomatoes, a bunch of greens and string-beans, and declare: "WE did a good job on this garden."

I swore, when I came of age and had my own spot, the only thing that was going to grow in my yard was something God put there, and if God didn't water it ... Oh well!

After reading some of the stuff I've read on DU about food and the food chain, this year, I planted my first vegetable garden in almost 40 years!

(I've found, stuff doesn't like to grow in Arizona and there is no such thing as a "String-bean", anymore; but I have more Turnip, Mustard Greens, and Squash, than the law should allow!)

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

12. Much applause!

There's nothing like eating something fresh from the yard. I never thought I'd like warm (or hot) strawberries, but I can't resist eating a few right after picking them. I don't know what sorts of squash you're doing, but I really like spaghetti squash, I've grown them several years, and I think they work as a great replacement for spaghetti. I just pulled in this year's garlic, which really was pitiful - the brutal winter killed over half of it outright, and almost all of what was left was really stunted. I think I wound up with about a quarter of what I pulled in last year, even though I planted half again as much as the year before.

[BrotherIvan]

2. Another problem is big corps "greenwashing" their products

Organic products shipped from Mexico & Central America or even Asia is not nearly as healthy as that which you can get from a farmer's market or CSA. Foreign foods are picked unripe and then shipped all over. The ripening period is very important for a fruit or vegetable to reach the peak of taste but also of the antioxidants because that's when it usually reaches its bright hue.

[jtuck004]

7. Organic standards are different outside of here, more strict in certain ways. So if it won't

pass muster there, send it here, and our corps will make sure it is "organic".

[pnwmom]

9. Unless your organic food was grown in places like China,

where the air pollution settles into the soil and the soil is contaminated with heavy metals.

We import a lot of rice products from China, and even apple juice.

[Texano78704]

10. Raises some interesting questions

Obviously lower income people will pick non-organic, that is, less healthy (per this study) food. Should I be okay with that?

If I can buy four non-organic apples for the same price as one organic apple, should I care about the study results?

What happens when organic farming is no longer a viable method for feeding a growing population?

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

14. It actually might become the only viable method, if climate change worsens.

Look back a day or two for the postings on Japanese indoor farming. By raising produce in tall stacking shelves under LED lighting, they're getting something like 100 times as much food in the same footprint as they would outside, and using a TINY amount of water. And since it's indoors and climate-controlled, they aren't needing pesticides or herbicides.

With droughts hitting many current agricultural areas, new ultra-low water methods that produce far more food in the same amount of space are just the ticket for feeding 'growing populations'.

[Humanist_Activist]

15. The only problem with indoor agriculture is the energy intensive nature of it...

as you said, its a controlled environment, which means that energy, in the form of electricity, has to be used to power the lights, the air and water pumps, etc. Much of this energy is, for lack of a better word, free in an open environment. Whether the lack of needing to expend money on pesticides and herbicides, in addition to the increased crop yields will make using the extra energy worth it is still up in the air, and we have to make sure the energy is from renewable sources, then it might be worth it.

However, I'm extremely skeptical of the "100 times as much food" claim, I could see crop yield doubling, perhaps even tripling under such methods, and per acre of land(rather than acreage of the floor plan), it may be up to 10-20 times standard crop yield.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

16. Part of it is the stacking.

instead of one level of crops (ie, ground level), they have 5, 10, 20 stacked shelves of crops all in the same area.

Here's a link to one of the prior threads.

[Humanist_Activist]

21. Yeah, that does make a difference, in addition the types of crops grown...

cabbages and lettuce, for example, don't have large stalks, so can be stacked easily and be properly alighted by LED's, they don't have a lot of lumens, however, so other plants like tomatoes or corn, wouldn't benefit as much from LED lights, they would need more powerful lights, that are more energy intensive, or possibly redirected sunlight.

Not to mention you would have to dedicate an entire floor to, for example, a crop of corn or wheat, yield difference will shrink the taller a plant grows, and these plants can grow well above 6-12 feet in many cases. So this type of farming may have limited utility in regards to certain staple crops.

[magical thyme]

19. I'd be interested in seeing the nutrients offered by indoor farming

and also hydroponics.

[malaise]

17. Read it this morning

Very interesting