|Posted on Saturday, January 08, 2005 - 8:15 am: || |
You ain't gonna believe this. I don't believe it myself.
Check out iron in tomatoes for example. Non-organic tomatoes 1 ppm iron; organic 1938 ppm. That means organic tomatoes have approximately two thousand times as much iron as non-organic tomatoes. You believe that?
If all this stuff is on the level and no BS, then there gotta be some health benefits from organic (or health hazards from non-organic).
A word of warning: Most things labelled "organic" are not.
Maybe Roy or somebody can track down 2 things:
1. Is this stuff scientifically credible? Or is it BS?
2. If it's on the level, then how can I get my grubby hands on more information (more foods and more nutrients)? I might be brewing an idea.
|Posted on Saturday, January 08, 2005 - 8:59 am: || |
Apparently that article is BS.
But the fact remains that cucumbers grown in superior soil taste better than cucumbers grown in inferior soil. How could that be if there is no difference of chemistry?
|Posted on Saturday, January 08, 2005 - 9:17 am: || |
This is what really happened:
Nothing to do with organic and inorganic. Those are just marketing words. But we have evidence that nutrition begins not with food but with the soil that it is grown in. Much as I suspected, because of the difference in taste.
Notice the difference between the highs and the lows. Soil is the foundation. No matter how "good" your diet is, if it ain't grown in good soil it might be nutritionally inadaquate for health.
|Posted on Monday, March 06, 2006 - 3:39 pm: || |
poker casino poker 424
|Posted on Friday, July 07, 2006 - 5:14 pm: || |
Kansst du mir ein Speisekarte zeigen ?qmn
|Posted on Saturday, March 13, 2010 - 8:45 am: || |
I don't know if anyone will be as surprised as I was when I read this from the usda.gov website re: The National List of Allowed and Prohibited Substances [for organics]. The link was provided from a Dr. Mercola article. It's interesting and I hope many of you get a chance to read this.