Nutrional content of aquaponically grown vegetables

[Basil1]

Closest thing I've seen recently was a report that said organic vegetables had no more nutritional value than conventionally grown ones.

I don't/can't believe that report.

Do you have anything to support why you "can't" believe this or is it you "don't" because it doesn't fit your current beliefs?

[rfeiller]

Basil 1 if you can what was the source behind the study and more importantly who funded the study. Thanks

[Basil1]

Basil 1 if you can what was the source behind the study and more importantly who funded the study. Thanks

Can't remember the first one I read but the last one was by Livestrong. Not saying it's a100% true but when an article is not even referenced to look at, how can it be summarily dismissed.

[David - WI]

This one was just in the news; but the body of the story seems to contradict the heading: http://www.nbcnews.com/id/48888214/n...and_nutrition/

[davidstcldfl]

I listened to the link that David-WI provided.



The lady from the collage said that they had reviewed hundreds of reports.
I haven't even finished my morning coffee and I can think of so many variables. Here's just a few...

So who did all of these reports ? Who paid for them to be done ?
How 'fresh' were the veggies when they were tested.
Were they from the same grow zone...at the same time ?
Were they the same vegetable type ?

I mentioned this earlier in this post...Tomatoes for example...some are known to have much higher vitamin C then the next type.

[bsfman]

I listened to the link that David-WI provided.



The lady from the collage said that they had reviewed hundreds of reports.
I haven't even finished my morning coffee and I can think of so many variables. Here's just a few...

So who did all of these reports ? Who paid for them to be done ?
How 'fresh' were the veggies when they were tested.
Were they from the same grow zone...at the same time ?
Were they the same vegetable type ?

I mentioned this earlier in this post...Tomatoes for example...some are known to have much higher vitamin C then the next type.

To me it makes sense that the nutritional content is the same. Plants will extract what they need from available nutrients regardless of whether the source of the nutrients are inorganic or organic, and then put those nutrients into their reproductive efforts (seed bearing fruits, grains, or root propagation). There are other benefits to organic growing however. The primary benefit is soil sustainability and perhaps yield or productivity of the plants and the lack of chemical contamination from certain pesticides. Regarding organic versus inorganic meat: I assume the same thing nutrition wise. The big (and it's a major BIG) advantage to organic meats is that they are free from the accumulation of antibiotics and hormones routinely used in raising non-organic meat animals.

Freshness may be a factor in the vitamin C/tomato thing, David. I would presume that organic fruit and veggies tend to be delivered more often to local markets and harvested closer to maturity than the massively produced crops that are picked green to survive long distance shipping and handling. In the same regard, I would presume inorganic fruit and veggies grown by non-organic gardeners but picked ripe and consumed shortly after would be higher in flavor and vitamin content than store bought inorganic stuff.

Again, improved tilth, soil sustainability, and lack of contaminants are the big advantages to organic foods. The "more nutritional" aspect may indeed be over-hyped.

[urbanfarmer]

Damnit bsfman, let them post the research first!

I held my tongue before saying anything, but you've hit all the major ideas I wanted to address with the research at hand. The freshness of vegetables determines the amount of degradation of phytochemicals that we require as nutrients (vitamins and others). Mineral content would be the same IF all nutrients were available, perhaps? Minerals don't degrade like phytochemicals often do (not all do though). However, perfect osmosis does not occur across the plant root membrane; so, there is the possibility nutrient rich soils can yield more nutritious food. I don't think people realize plants get vitamins from the microorganisms in the soil (in other words the plants don't make it). If the soil is lacking nutrition for the bacteria, then the plant will lack nutrition from the bacteria; thusly, so will we lack nutrition from the plant.

Of course, it's all speculative until we see some hard data! Come on, we want it already!

[davidstcldfl]

Staying on topic, but taking a slight rabbit trail...

I kept thinking about how the folks from Stanford performed this so
called 'Study'....

This is right out of the transcript...
but a new study from stanford university on the health advantages of organic products over their counter-parts. they evaluated 5,000 articles and over 200 studies.

I'm not very impressed..
Here's a major university like Stanford. Students are paying ...what..?..50 + K a year to go there. And the best they can do... is sit down in a group and re-hash someone else's work...?... ..

as Dave clicks on the submit button, he's heard muttering under his breath...

[davidstcldfl]

I stumbled onto the cornucopia institute while reading some articles on farming. They did an egg review, that I found interesting. It's based on 'how' the chickens are rasied.

It would of been nice, if they had the eggs tested in a lab.


When you click below and go to the article, towards the top of the page, look for/click on...View Scorecard Criteria. It will give details on what they based their rating.

http://www.cornucopia.org/organic-egg-scorecard/
.