A new medical study by Stanford University suggests organic doesn't necessarily mean healthier.
Researchers at Stanford looked at data from more than 200 studies of food sold in stores as certified organic versus conventionally grown food and concluded that organic food and non-organic food were virtually the same in vitamin content.
"I was absolutely surprised," said Dr. Dena Bravata, a senior research affiliate at Stanford and long-time internist who began the analysis because so many of her patients asked if they should switch.
"There are many reasons why someone might choose organic foods over conventional foods," from environmental concerns to taste preferences, Bravata stressed. But when it comes to individual health, "there isn't much difference."
A local dietitian agreed with the study.
“Nutritionally there's no greater value between organic or inorganic produce,” said Ruth Carey, who supports the findings.
The research also found that although organic foods had less pesticide residue, all the produce studied had pesticide levels that fell below federally-set safety limits.
It is research that Forest Grove organic farmer Amy Love thinks is flawed.
Love says organic fruit and vegetables are picked and sold at the peak of ripeness, and the fresher the food the more nutritious it is.
“You're picking right when it’s ripe… you don't have to pick it green so that it can travel thousands of miles and spray it with ethylene so it will ripen in the store,” said Love.
Love claims truly organic food is healthier for the body simply because is grown without any chemicals.
While this latest study found little evidence of added health benefits of organic food, experts agree long term studies need to be done.