For those of us who wince at the $5.00 half-pint of organic raspberries and sneakily throw the $1.99 package of conventional berries into our carts, a new scientific review may give us some comfort. Researchers from the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine recently published a review of studies conducted over the past 50 years that compared the nutrient content between organic and conventional foods.¹ Comparing 55 studies that were at least "satisfactory quality", researchers found no noted differences between conventional and organic crops with regard to vitamin C, magnesium, calcium, potassium, zinc and copper content. Organic crops did have higher levels of phosphorus, however, and conventionally produced crops had higher levels of nitrogen. No differences in nutrient content were indicated in the livestock studies, according to the review.

Organic food producers argue, however, that organic foods contain higher levels of healthy antioxidants and contain no pesticides, a factor that may be very important to some people, including parents of young children.

Controversy remains around the evidence behind the extra antioxidants in organic produce and whether the levels of pesticides in conventional foods actually cause negative health effects. And others argue that consumers should be more concerned about buying food that is locally grown, fresh to the table, and prepared in a way that doesn't lose all of the nutrients it does have.

So what's the cost-conscious consumer to do? Maybe buy the organic when it's on sale (fresh, frozen, or canned) and buy the conventional (fresh, frozen, or canned) when the price of organic seems outrageous. But certainly don't feel guilty for buying conventional healthy foods like fruits and vegetables! Instead, praise yourself for getting those foods into your cart and onto your plate!

¹ Dangour, A.D. (2009). Nutritional quality of organic foods: a systematic review. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, doi:10.3945/ajcn.2009.28041.