61
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Human health implications of organic food and organic agriculture: a comprehensive review

      review-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          This review summarises existing evidence on the impact of organic food on human health. It compares organic vs. conventional food production with respect to parameters important to human health and discusses the potential impact of organic management practices with an emphasis on EU conditions. Organic food consumption may reduce the risk of allergic disease and of overweight and obesity, but the evidence is not conclusive due to likely residual confounding, as consumers of organic food tend to have healthier lifestyles overall. However, animal experiments suggest that identically composed feed from organic or conventional production impacts in different ways on growth and development. In organic agriculture, the use of pesticides is restricted, while residues in conventional fruits and vegetables constitute the main source of human pesticide exposures. Epidemiological studies have reported adverse effects of certain pesticides on children’s cognitive development at current levels of exposure, but these data have so far not been applied in formal risk assessments of individual pesticides. Differences in the composition between organic and conventional crops are limited, such as a modestly higher content of phenolic compounds in organic fruit and vegetables, and likely also a lower content of cadmium in organic cereal crops. Organic dairy products, and perhaps also meats, have a higher content of omega-3 fatty acids compared to conventional products. However, these differences are likely of marginal nutritional significance. Of greater concern is the prevalent use of antibiotics in conventional animal production as a key driver of antibiotic resistance in society; antibiotic use is less intensive in organic production. Overall, this review emphasises several documented and likely human health benefits associated with organic food production, and application of such production methods is likely to be beneficial within conventional agriculture, e.g., in integrated pest management.

          Related collections

          Most cited references202

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Antibiotic resistance-the need for global solutions.

          The causes of antibiotic resistance are complex and include human behaviour at many levels of society; the consequences affect everybody in the world. Similarities with climate change are evident. Many efforts have been made to describe the many different facets of antibiotic resistance and the interventions needed to meet the challenge. However, coordinated action is largely absent, especially at the political level, both nationally and internationally. Antibiotics paved the way for unprecedented medical and societal developments, and are today indispensible in all health systems. Achievements in modern medicine, such as major surgery, organ transplantation, treatment of preterm babies, and cancer chemotherapy, which we today take for granted, would not be possible without access to effective treatment for bacterial infections. Within just a few years, we might be faced with dire setbacks, medically, socially, and economically, unless real and unprecedented global coordinated actions are immediately taken. Here, we describe the global situation of antibiotic resistance, its major causes and consequences, and identify key areas in which action is urgently needed. Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            N : P ratios in terrestrial plants: variation and functional significance

            Nitrogen (N) and phosphorus (P) availability limit plant growth in most terrestrial ecosystems. This review examines how variation in the relative availability of N and P, as reflected by N : P ratios of plant biomass, influences vegetation composition and functioning. Plastic responses of plants to N and P supply cause up to 50-fold variation in biomass N : P ratios, associated with differences in root allocation, nutrient uptake, biomass turnover and reproductive output. Optimal N : P ratios - those of plants whose growth is equally limited by N and P - depend on species, growth rate, plant age and plant parts. At vegetation level, N : P ratios <10 and >20 often (not always) correspond to N- and P-limited biomass production, as shown by short-term fertilization experiments; however long-term effects of fertilization or effects on individual species can be different. N : P ratios are on average higher in graminoids than in forbs, and in stress-tolerant species compared with ruderals; they correlate negatively with the maximal relative growth rates of species and with their N-indicator values. At vegetation level, N : P ratios often correlate negatively with biomass production; high N : P ratios promote graminoids and stress tolerators relative to other species, whereas relationships with species richness are not consistent. N : P ratios are influenced by global change, increased atmospheric N deposition, and conservation managment. Contents Summary 243 I Introduction 244 II Variability of N : P ratios in response to nutrient  supply 244 III Critical N : P ratios as indicators of nutrient  limitation 248 IV Interspecific variation in N : P ratios 252 V Vegetation properties in relation to N : P ratios 255 VI Implications of N : P ratios for human impacts  on ecosystems 258 VII Conclusions 259 Acknowledgements 259 References 260.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Comparing the yields of organic and conventional agriculture.

              Numerous reports have emphasized the need for major changes in the global food system: agriculture must meet the twin challenge of feeding a growing population, with rising demand for meat and high-calorie diets, while simultaneously minimizing its global environmental impacts. Organic farming—a system aimed at producing food with minimal harm to ecosystems, animals or humans—is often proposed as a solution. However, critics argue that organic agriculture may have lower yields and would therefore need more land to produce the same amount of food as conventional farms, resulting in more widespread deforestation and biodiversity loss, and thus undermining the environmental benefits of organic practices. Here we use a comprehensive meta-analysis to examine the relative yield performance of organic and conventional farming systems globally. Our analysis of available data shows that, overall, organic yields are typically lower than conventional yields. But these yield differences are highly contextual, depending on system and site characteristics, and range from 5% lower organic yields (rain-fed legumes and perennials on weak-acidic to weak-alkaline soils), 13% lower yields (when best organic practices are used), to 34% lower yields (when the conventional and organic systems are most comparable). Under certain conditions—that is, with good management practices, particular crop types and growing conditions—organic systems can thus nearly match conventional yields, whereas under others it at present cannot. To establish organic agriculture as an important tool in sustainable food production, the factors limiting organic yields need to be more fully understood, alongside assessments of the many social, environmental and economic benefits of organic farming systems.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                axel.mie@ki.se
                HRAndersen@health.sdu.dk
                Stefan.Gunnarsson@slu.se
                jok@nexs.ku.dk
                e.kesse@eren.smbh.univ-paris13.fr
                ewa_rembialkowska@sggw.pl
                gianluca.quaglio@europarl.europa.eu
                PGrandjean@health.sdu.dk
                Journal
                Environ Health
                Environ Health
                Environmental Health
                BioMed Central (London )
                1476-069X
                27 October 2017
                27 October 2017
                2017
                : 16
                : 111
                Affiliations
                [1 ]ISNI 0000 0004 1937 0626, GRID grid.4714.6, Karolinska Institutet, Department of Clinical Science and Education, ; Södersjukhuset, 11883 Stockholm, Sweden
                [2 ]ISNI 0000 0000 8578 2742, GRID grid.6341.0, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences (SLU), Centre for Organic Food and Farming (EPOK), ; Ultuna, Sweden
                [3 ]ISNI 0000 0001 0728 0170, GRID grid.10825.3e, University of Southern Denmark, Department of Public Health, ; Odense, Denmark
                [4 ]ISNI 0000 0000 8578 2742, GRID grid.6341.0, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences (SLU), Department of Animal Environment and Health, ; Skara, Sweden
                [5 ]ISNI 0000 0001 0674 042X, GRID grid.5254.6, University of Copenhagen, Department of Nutrition, Exercise and Sports, ; Frederiksberg, Denmark
                [6 ]Research Unit on Nutritional Epidemiology (U1153 Inserm, U1125 INRA, CNAM, Université Paris 13), Centre of Research in Epidemiology and Statistics Sorbonne Paris Cité, Bobigny, France
                [7 ]ISNI 0000 0001 1955 7966, GRID grid.13276.31, Warsaw University of Life Sciences, Department of Functional & Organic Food & Commodities, ; Warsaw, Poland
                [8 ]GRID grid.466652.5, Scientific Foresight Unit (Science and Technology Options Assessment [STOA]), Directorate-General for Parliamentary Research Services (EPRS), European Parliament, ; Brussels, Belgium
                [9 ]ISNI 000000041936754X, GRID grid.38142.3c, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Department of Environmental Health, ; Boston, USA
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8053-3541
                Article
                315
                10.1186/s12940-017-0315-4
                5658984
                29073935
                4a436f49-94c0-46f1-a9c3-3e9f3f5f8912
                © The Author(s). 2017

                Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

                History
                : 22 May 2017
                : 2 October 2017
                Funding
                Funded by: FundRef http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100000784, European Parliament;
                Categories
                Review
                Custom metadata
                © The Author(s) 2017

                Public health
                agricultural crops,antibiotic resistance,food safety,nutrients,organic food,pesticide residues

                Comments

                Comment on this article