Science versus Organic Food

An excellent podcast to get you caught up on the science of organic food. Short version: they're not all they're cracked up to be

DAVE PARKER Flickr (CC BY 2.0)
 
 
 

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

This article was published in Scientific American’s former blog network and reflects the views of the author, not necessarily those of Scientific American


It's possible I listen to more podcasts than is strictly healthy. At present count, I subscribe to 32 - most of these are weekly, but a not-insubstantial portion are daily. For a while, I was being a completest, but since I don't spend as much time doing mindless work at the bench, I've had to start skipping episodes of some shows.

I've got a few favorites (I've listened to every episode of On the Media since about 2005 - it was what started my podcast addiction), but I also occasionally try out new shows to keep it fresh. One recent addition that quickly became must-listen is Science Vs, a show that contends with contentious topics from the standpoint that arguments should be settled by data - a concept I wholly support!

A recent episode is about organic food and, surprise surprise, the science shows it's not all it's cracked up to be. 


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


They address 3 basic questions:

1) Do organic foods taste better?

2) Are organic foods healthier?

3) Are organic foods better for the environment?

The answers? 1) No. 2) No. 3) Ehh... Feel free to listen to get all the details. 

I was a little disappointed that they didn't get into GMOs, though the host, Wendy Zuckerman acknowledges this, and (rightly) suggests that it's just too loaded to get into - hopefully they'll do a standalone episode sometime! (Wendy - if you need someone to chat with on background, feel free to get in touch!). But overall, they do a pretty great job - chatting with farmers, doctors and scientists.

I like learning new things, and I actually learned a fair bit with this episode - and before that they abley tackled gun control and fracking. This is a pretty great start as far as I'm concerned, and a much-needed resource for our public discourse. Plus, the episodes are filled with off-color jokes and terrible (or glorious, depending on your perspective) puns - what more could you want?!

 

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe