The article below appeared in the Journal of Family Health Care 13, (1) 6-8.

Organic babyfoods have swept into the supermarkets in recent years and some stores now only stock organic babyfoods. Are they as good as some mothers perceive? Judy More takes a critical look at what organic means and the new commercial organic babyfood market.

What does organic mean?

In its widest sense organic farming aims to produce food of good nutritional quality whilst avoiding the use of agrochemicals and minimising damage to the environment  and wildlife. The natural farming methods used are based on crop rotation and good animal husbandry. Natural fertilisers such as compost and farm manure are used to enrich the soil, artificial fertilisers not being allowed. Wild life habitats are created for birds, bats and beetles which feed on the insect pests which would otherwise damage crops. Only a very small number of pesticides are allowed – most of which are compounds that occur naturally. Other pesticides, herbicides and genetically modified organisms are banned.

For a farm to label itself and its products ‘organic’ there are a number of sets of regulations which must be adhered to. The Soil Association, with Prince Charles as their patron, is probably the best known of the 10 bodies (Table 1) which are entitled, by the Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA), to certify a farm and its products as ‘organic’.  These certification bodies are all registered with the UK Register of Organic Foods Standards (UKROFS) and the regulations they set vary slightly but all have to at least incorporate the minimum legal requirement of  ‘organic’ as set by a European Union Regulation.

Table 1

Once certified by one of these bodies as ‘organic’, the farm is subject to regular inspections, usually annually, to retain this certification. Any processing, packaging and labelling is also subject to regulations. The logo of the certification body is then displayed on all their approved products.

As 75% of organic produce sold in Britain is grown abroad and imported, these certification bodies also inspect the production and processing methods of produce coming in from countries as far a field as Argentina and Australia. They usually achieve this by coming to an arrangement with an organic certification body in the exporting country that uses the same regulations that they do.

Why choose organic food?

Although Sir John Krebs of the Food Standards agency said recently ‘there is not enough information available at present to be able to say that organic foods are significantly different in terms of their safety and nutritional content to those produced by conventional farming’, sales of organic food are increasing and many are prepared to pay the higher price for it(1). ‘It tastes better’ and ‘It’s better for you are the most common reasons for purchasing it (2).

The Soil Association, in particular, disputes Sir John’s view and has recently produced a report (1) in which they conclude ‘existing research reveals significant differences between organically and non-organically grown food. These differences’ they claim ‘relate to food safety, primary nutrients, secondary nutrients and health outcomes demonstrated by feeding trials’.

Pesticides, antibiotics and artificial food additives are the substances in non-organic food which they claim can make it unsafe for human health.

‘Primary nutrients’ include the essential vitamins and minerals and studies are cited where Vitamin C and some trace minerals have been shown to be higher in organically produced food compared to non-organically produced food.

The ‘secondary nutrients’ are the phytocompounds found in plants and include flavanoids and antioxidants. Many have already been shown to have anticancer effects. They are also thought to increase the capacity of the plant to withstand attack from pests and diseases.

It is largely a personal decision whether we, as health professionals, stick to statements such as Sir John’s above or alternatively advise our clients to exercise more caution in choosing their food as the Soil Association urges. The Soil Association does have the advantage of having had previous claims subsequently substantiated: in the mid 1980’s it banned the use of animal protein in feed for organic livestock. Those, including government agencies who said there was no evidence for doing this, were proved devastatingly wrong when, a few years later, BSE hit the non-organic herds fed on feeds containing animal protein.

The debate over how harmful pesticides are to our health continues. Although thousands of tonnes of pesticides are applied to non-organic foods annually in the UK it is very difficult to prove that pesticide residues, in general, are harmful to health. Good population based studies would be very expensive and difficult to control. Another problem is that many pesticide residues persist in the environment and have accumulated in the air, water and soil. Many accumulate in the fatty tissues of human bodies. This means control groups of people with no pesticide levels at all are now virtually impossible to find.

As many of these chemicals are new, having only been synthesised in the last few decades, we are all essentially guinea pigs. Concerns for infants and children may be more real as the chemical loads on their developing organs and systems may be more deleterious than for fully grown adults. Animal based studies suggest this(3). Studies linking pesticide or synthetic chemical exposure to children with an increased incidence of cancer (4), hormone disruption (5) and impaired cognitive function (6) have been published. In utero exposure of the foetus to these chemicals may be the most damaging(7).

Organic weaning foods

The uncertainty over safety of food containing pesticide residues has meant that many mothers are opting to wean babies on organic food to reduce any possible long term effects from the ingestion of pesticides. It is simple enough to substitute organic for non-organic produce when buying ingredients for home prepared baby foods as long as parents are prepared to pay about 30% more for organic produce.

Sales of commercially produced organic weaning foods have dramatically increased and are now 37% of sales of all commercial weaning foods. All major babyfood companies now offer an organic choice and in some stores only organic baby foods are available.

Although organic infant formulae are available they represent only 1% of sales of all infant formulae.

Differences between organic and non-organic babyfoods:

Pesticides
Pesticide residues in organic babyfood are zero except for any environmental contamination. Organic babyfood manufacturers check their products very carefully and so it is unlikely that their products will have any discernible levels. Much tighter regulations on the pesticide levels allowable in non-organic babyfoods were expected to be introduced in July 2002. They have been delayed. However the babyfood companies are mostly complying with the expected restrictions that any individual pesticide residue must not exceed 0.01mg/kg or one part per million which is very low. In addition, certain pesticides will need to be non-detectable which effectively means they are banned from use in the production of food intended for inclusion in babyfood. These new regulations will also apply to infant formula and follow-on formula.

Supplementation and iron content
Organic baby foods cannot be supplemented with any additives except those required to be added by law. The most important consequence of this is that iron supplementation is not permitted in organic foods. Non organic savoury baby foods and cereals are traditionally supplemented with iron (as ferrous sulphate) to increase the iron content and contribute towards the prevention of iron deficiency anaemia. As both organic and non-organic weaning foods are made to roughly the same recipes organic savoury foods are on average lower in iron than non-organic baby foods as shown in Table 2.

Whether this matters or not depends on the rest of the diet. However a baby being fed only commercially prepared foods would lose about 20% of their daily iron requirement by being changed from non-organic to organic baby foods (1.2mg iron /day represents 20% of the Estimated Average Requirement of 6 mg /day for an infant of 6-12 months).

Table 2
Iron content or savoury babyfoods

Source: average of manufacturer’s figures

One could hypothesise that babies who are weaned onto entirely organic commercial baby foods may be at increased risk of iron deficiency anaemia. However there are no studies to prove or disprove this.

Price
Despite the higher costs of production of organic food the price difference between organic and non-organic babyfood is only a few pence per jar/can.

The Future for Organic Food
With the proposed new subsidies for organic farmers and moves within Europe for the Common Agricultural Policy to change, the price difference between organic and non-organic produce may reduce and make organic food more affordable for larger sections of the population.

References:

1. Soil Association 2001 Organic farming, food quality and human health. A review of the evidence. Price £12.00 can be ordered from the Soil Association Tel 0117 914 2446 www.soilassociation.org
2. MORI Poll ,2001, Organics and the political agenda, Feb 15-20
3. Eskenazi B, Bradman A, Castorina R. exposures of Children to Organophosphate Pesticieds and Their Potential Adverse Health Effects.  Environ Health Perspect 1999;107(3):409-418
4. 12. Meinert R Schuz J Kaletsch U et al. Leukemia and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma in childhood and exposure to pesticides: results of a register-based case-control study in Germany.American Journal of Epidemiology 2000; 151 (7): 639-646
5. Colon I Caro D Bourdony CJ Rosario O Identification of phthalate esters in the serum of young Puerto Rican girls with premature breast development. Environmental Health Perspectives 2000; 108(9): 895-900
6. Guillette EA, Meza MM, Aguilar MG, Soto AD, Garcia IE. An anthropological approach to the evaluation of pre-school children exposed to pesticides in Mexico. Environ Health Perspect 1998;106(6):347-353
7. Garry VF, Schreinmachers D, Harkers ME, Griffith J. Pesticide applicators, biocides and birth defects in rural Minnesota. Environ Health Perspect 1996;104:394-399

See other articles written by Judy More.

Contact Judy to discuss your individual concerns.