Preliminary findings (publicity?) from an EU-funded Quality Low Input Food project report (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/health/article2753546.ece) claim that 'organic' fruit and vegetables contain 40% more antioxidants than 'non-organic' varieties. The leader of this programme (Professor Carlo Leifert of Newcastle University's Tesco Centre for Organic Agriculture) also claims that 'organic' milk contains 60% more antioxidants and 'healthy fatty acids' than traditionally sourced material. This finding is apparently at variance with the Food Standards Agencies expressed view (that may be in the process of being changed) that the 'organic' varieties had no real health benefits (as well as being unaffordable by sections of the population). The devil may be in the detail. Antioxidants are in deed claimed to be a healthy addition to the diet as they neutralise free radicals thought (largely on the basis of laboratory tests with rats) to be implicated in aging and cancer. The difficulty is that the jury still seems to be out (see earlier posting on berries) on whether adding antioxidants to the human diet incurs any major benefits (especially if the material is cooked?).
No comments:
Post a Comment