stanford-organic-food-study

As a public health scientist and as a public citizen, and I have come to the conclusion that for the health of our families, the health of the environment, and the health of the people who work to put food on our dinner tables, we should stick with organic.
According to Rosie Mestel at The Los Angeles Times, the study was followed by "days of heated reaction," and activists have now launched a petition drive demanding that the researchers retract their "fatally flawed" study. Then she neatly proceeds to dismantle the petition.
This organic nonsense has to stop. I'd like to request that those who don't know agriculture cease stoking a divisive debate that misses the heart of the problem: We're not sure how we should grow food, and thus we're not sure how to eat.
This week's controversy surrounding a Stanford study claiming to have established that organic food is no more nutritious than non-organic illustrates the pitfalls of talking about food issues in a consumer frame.
The study, published today in Annals of Internal Medicine, is covered everywhere. But a dozen major news outlets' headlines have missed the point.