Organic vs. inorganic - marketing vs. better nutrition.
Numerous studies like the one reviewed have already pointed out the the lack of superior nutrition, and even the decreased safety from "organic" food choices due to higher bacterial loads from "organic" manuring. Sure traditional NPK food production has had instances where chemicals were not used well. However, and just a clue, "organic E. coli can be just as fatal as traditionally produced E. coli and much more likely to be found on "organic foods" where anti-bacterial washes aren't used.
The vast majority of the people who buy "organic" do so because they think it is a blanket solution to good nutrition and good health and unfortunately it isn't that simple. In reality they either don't have the technical background, or simply can't take the time to be better informed. Where as if they improved their knowledge of food production science and nutrition they could be far healthier whether they used "organic" or not. If they never had heard the term "organic foods", but if they selected their foods better - avoided simple carbs, consumed more Omega-3s and less Omega-6s, had under 2 oz. of alcohol intake/day - red wine preferably, kept their weight proportional to their build (forget the height to wt. BMI - total medical fraud measurement) and got regular moderate exercise they would be far healthier than the most religiously "organic food consumer" - and far ahead economically both in food costs and medical bills. All you have to do is read the "pro-organic" comments here to understand that the "pro-organic" following is based on more cult/religion than well based nutrition and scientific analysis.
