No evidence to support 'organic is best'?

FYI - The actual source is the University of Copenhagen. Dr Susanne Bügel and colleagues from the Department of Human Nutrition, University of Copenhagen, were the ones who did the study. SCI just published the results.
Of course there are no more nutrients in “organic” food. All food is organic; the difference is in the process of growing the food, not what it is made of genetically. I like pesticides; they keep the arthropods away from my food.

If you just look at who posted this entry: Society of Chemical Industry's (SCI) Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture .. it might make you wonder what vested interest this journal has in the argument. Let's see, if I was part of the CHEMICAL INDUSTRY, don't you think I would want to knock the idea that organic is better, since I sell chemicals? All the latest studies point to organic foods having higher nutritional value. In addition, people buy organic for a number of other reasons, including: not wanting chemicals in their bodies, the studies showing pesticides showing up in breast milk, not wanting to pollute the soil and water. Buying organic makes sense, plain and simple.

You need to (re-)watch the episode of Penn & Teller where they were tasting mineral water...

First of all, this is a very misleading title for the content below. The study measured “major and trace elements” and equated that with “nutritional content”. Sorry. Thank you for playing but there’s more manure than what was put in the field. Proteins, carbohydrates, vitamins, amino acids and antioxidants are recognized components of nutrition, but their study didn’t measure these so I don’t think they are justified making claims about “nutrition”.

I’m starting a fruit business and I’m and learning that there are many types of organic growing--and the crop, type of soil and style and diligence of the farmer all have bearing on yield and overall quality of the end product. So, were they doing mono or polyculture? Till/no till? Subirrigation? Cover crops, tillage or mulch for weed management? What was the previous crop? More importantly, who did the organic growing? The organic farmer or someone else?

I also have a BS in science--about half in biology--and have gotten some of my best lessons from these guys. Believe me, until you’ve spent a few evenings listening to successful organic farmers describing the 6-8 crop rotation that each has developed and how each rotation contributes to the timing and quantity of nutrients for the next crop, you can’t possibly have enough respect for how smart they are.

By the way, Dr. Baylis, there is a lot of evidence that shows the yields of organic crops to be comparable to their “conventional” counterparts and when the costs of the inputs are considered, they actually cost less to produce. Please stop repeating what you’ve been told and look.

http://scienceblog.com/community/older/2005/8/200507248.shtml
http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn2351
www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/03/080325101134.htm

Last, in its time DDT was “extensively tested and stringently regulated” and 40 years later there are still measurable quantities in the environment. But then again, this study wouldn’t have considered DDT as an impact on “nutritiion” since it isn’t a major or trace element.

Frankly, I’m surprised to find a study of this quality on Scienceblog.

If it not bacteria than it's chemicals you need to worry that is found on on your produce!!
Take a step towards healthier living! This amazing Sanitizing System from Tersano lets you turn on your faucet and treat your home to an effective sanitizer that safely wipes out germs, odors, stains, mold, mildew and pesticides -- all without chemicals.

EPA registered as a sanitizer for produce and household surfaces and much more…
FDA and USDA approved process for food sanitation
Kills 99.9 % of:
Escherichia coli (E. coli)
Salmonella choloeraesuis (Salmonella)
Staphylococcus aureus (Staph)
GS-37 Approved process as an Environmental Standard as a General-Purpose

The lotus Sanitzing System

...I'm sure the Society of Chemical Industry can be 100% trusted to publish a totally factual article supporting non-organic farming.

That said, they kind of ignored the ecological impact of the farming methods completely. If all the food has the same nutrients (a conclusion I'm NOT willing to grant based on this study, in case that wasn't clear), but two of the three methods damage the ecology in and around the farm itself, I think there's kind of a clear winner *anyway*.

Plus? TASTE. Anybody who's actually compared produce grown with and without chemical additives doesn't need a study to tell them which is better!