THE debate over the value of organic food was reignited yesterday by a study suggesting that it could have major health benefits.
A team of scientists found rats fed on organic food were slimmer, slept better, and had stronger immune systems than those which ate conventionally-grown produce.
The researchers admitted they could not explain the results, but they were seized on by pro-organic food campaigners, who said the findings were part of a growing body of evidence that suggested conventionally-grown food was not as healthy.
The Danish team, aided by a Newcastle University scientist, experimenting with 36 rats, fed one group with organic food, anotherwith conventional produce with high levels of fertiliser and pesticide, and a third with minimally-fertilised food.
All the rats were given potatoes, carrots, peas, green kale, apples, and rapeseed oil and the level of nutrients was monitored to make sure they were the same for each group.
The scientists found that the rats fed organically-produced food were measurably healthier, in that they slept better, had stronger immune systems, and were less obese.
Dr Kirsten Brandt, of Newcastle University's school of agriculture helped devise the experiment.
She was careful not to overstate the findings however, she said: "The difference was so big that it is very unlikely to be random.
"We gave the food to the rats and then we measured what they were doing. If we want to understand how and why, we need another study.
"We don't know if they slept better because they were less stressed and had a better immune system. These things may be related or not."
Peter Melchett, policy director of the Soil Association, said previous studies found animals fed organically had greater fertility, produced healthier offspring, and recovered better from illness.
He said when the country was farmed organically in previous centuries, there was a lower cancer rate and fewer people suffered allergies. "It is common sense, and it is good to see science is catching up, " he said.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article