The two articles you refer to do not provide any substantive argument against this point. The Telegraph article provides absolutely no evidence. In fact, it says that organic proponents should not argue on the basis of nutrition. Fine with me. Of course, it then goes on to insinuate underhanded political motives to the FSA. Please.

The Huffington Post article refers to (but does not properly reference) a few studies that show organics to be higher in antioxidants. In fact, the FSA sponsored study acknowledges this difference. But that wasn’t the metric used in the study. Remember, _systematic_ benefit was what the FSA was after. The HP then goes on to rail against the FSA for not acknowledging the environmental benefits. So what? That wasn’t the question the study was asking.

This is pretty typical ideologically driven press. Don’t like the evidence? Try to change the subject or engage in ad hominem.

I would love to see a well constructed retail level study on the nutritional content of organic versus conventional foods. If there was a statistically significant and clinically relevant finding for organics, I would increase my demand for them. Of course, I’m motivated by evidence. The question is whether organic proponents would reduce their demand in the face of a contrary result.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/foodanddrink/5942078/Ignore-the-FSA-It-is-still-better-to-buy-organic.html

http://www.sciencenews.org/view/generic/id/40876/title/AAAS_Stress_Can_Make_Plants_More_Nutritious

The “natural” pesticides used in organic agriculture are also toxic. There are paradoxical (hormetic) effects at low dosages of many toxins. So it is perfectly plausible for residues to be _better_ for you.

The EPA and FDA regulates pesticides with an eye toward the total tradeoff. I trust them to usually do good science (though they will obviously mess up from time to time).

Now, toxin sensitivity varies a lot from person to person. So if you have a known high sensitivity, organic may well be worth it. But you should still wash your organic produce thoroughly.

Sounds like you have a new entrepreneurial project to delegate Rafe. If you can generate food that the market will buy using that approach, awesome! But just do it with no subsidies or scare mongering.

I would like to see discussion of the diversity of proposed and being-implemented solutions such as vertical farming, cooperative urban farms, integrated sustainable planned urban agriculture, etc.

Imagine the potential with information technology and individual vegetable gardens to have dynamically organized local trade networks in urban environments. You could almost treat home growing like a utility in which you can buy from the grid and sell back to the grid as your personal supply/demand dictates.