Stanford Study: Organic verses Conventional Food

According to a recent Stanford study, there is very little evidence organic foods are more nutritious or carry fewer health risks than conventional alternatives. Did they really need to waste time and money on this study? Let’s just start with produce. Even if conventionally raised produce can provide the same nutrient profile as organic produce, can a chemically sprayed food possibly NOURISH our bodies same way as organic foods do? What do I mean by this? Conventionally grown produce is loaded with pesticides, insecticides, fungicides and herbicides, all of which have the capacity to dramatically alter our genes, deplete our bodies of vital minerals, antioxidants and nutrients AND not to mention destroy the planet! Do you buy organic purely because you believe it to be more nutritious? Or do you choose organic foods because you want to protect yourself, your family and the planet from harm?

Do you know that pesticides, insecticides and herbicides are fat-soluble? What does that mean to you? It means that your body has a very difficult time breaking them down and instead guess where they go? As far away from major organs as possible. They get stored in you butt, thighs and tummy! The more toxins you have, the more difficult it will be for you to shed stubborn body fat. Oh and can we say HELLO water retention and bloating.

So Stanford, how about this? How about studying the effects of Roundup and other herbicides, pesticides, fungicides and insecticides on optimal human health, development and chronic disease? How about a study that measures the consumption of toxic chemicals and what their effect is on mineral and glutathione depletion, on digestion, on the liver and kidney function, on body fat accumulation, weight loss resistance, neuron development and optimal health?  So the next time someone wants to question your reasoning for buying organic– think Organic for Optimal Health!


Leave a Reply