Stanford University published a meta study recently that comes to the conclusion that organic food products don't have a lot more nutrition than conventionally raised food prodcuts.  However, and this a crucial "however," they didn't address the primary feature of organic foods:  that they don't contain pesticides or antibiotics.  On that point, numerous studies are quite clear.  Children who eat organic foods do not have the same levels of pesticide residues in their tissues that children who eat conventional foods.

So the emperor has no clothes.  As an alumna of Stanford, I find that quite embarrassing.  Can university scientists truly be that simplistic and, well, stupid?  I think not.  I imagine it is a matter of toadying to Big Agra because of the enormous sums of money involved, and wanting Big Money to fund their research projects.  They are obviously willing to sell their souls to Big Agra for Big Bucks.  Whether due to stupidity or venality, embarrassing for those of us who still believe in the value of truth and the beauty of scientific study conducted with the goal of seeking truth rather than conducted with the goal of misdirecting the public to improve the bottom line for Big Agra.  What a statement on the downfall of the scientific community in America!  Sold to to the highest bidder.

It used to be that universities were one of the few remaining bulwarks against the overwhelming strangehold of commercial interests on our society.  Sadly, that no longer seems to be the case.  But no matter, those who eat locally grown, naturally produced foods will never go back to corporate food.  The taste is heavenly, and worth the price, not to mention how much better people feel when they eat it.  No contest, not even close.  In fact, I bet if we set up card tables at our local mall, and invited people to blind taste test organic locally grown foods vs corporate produced foods, many of them would never go back to corporate food.  Natural food is just so much more delicious!