The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Nutritional quality of organic food: shades of grey or shades of green?
Open accessAbstract
Consumer concern regarding possible adverse health effects of foods produced using intensive farming methods has led to considerable interest in the health benefits of organically-produced crops and animal products. There appears to be widespread perception amongst consumers that such methods result in foods of higher nutritional quality. The present review concludes that evidence that can support or refute such perception is not available in the scientific literature. A limited number of studies have compared the nutrient compositions of organically- and conventionally-produced crops, with a very small number of studies that have compared animal products (meat, milk and dairy products) produced under the two agricultural systems. Very few compositional differences have been reported, although there are reasonably consistent findings for higher nitrate and lower vitamin C contents of conventionally-produced vegetables, particularly leafy vegetables. Data concerning possible impacts on animal and human health of diets comprising organic or conventional produce are extremely sparse. Data from controlled studies in animal models, particularly within single species, are limited or poorly designed, and findings from these studies provide conflicting conclusions. There are no reports in the literature of controlled intervention studies in human subjects. Comparison of health outcomes in populations that habitually consume organically- or conventionally-produced foods are flawed by the large number of confounding factors that might contribute to any differences reported. If consumer perceptions regarding potential health benefits of organic foods are to be supported, more research of better quality is needed than that which is currently available.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Nutritional quality of organic foods: a systematic review
Dangour, A. D., Dodhia, S. K., Hayter, A., Allen, E., Lock, K., & Uauy, R. (2009) · The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition · doi:10.3945/ajcn.2009.28041 · Cited by 438
Organic Farming and Small-Scale Farmers: Main Opportunities and Challenges
Jouzi, Z., Azadi, H., Taheri, F., Zarafshani, K., Gebrehiwot, K., Van Passel, S., & Lebailly, P. (2017) · Ecological Economics · doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2016.10.016 · Cited by 365
Quality of plant products from organic agriculture
Rembiałkowska, E. (2007) · Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture · doi:10.1002/jsfa.3000 · Cited by 342
Organic food: nutritious food or food for thought? A review of the evidence
Magkos, F., Arvaniti, F., & Zampelas, A. (2003) · International Journal of Food Sciences and Nutrition · doi:10.1080/09637480120092071 · Cited by 329
Brandt, K., Leifert, C., Sanderson, R., & Seal, C. J. (2011) · Critical Reviews in Plant Sciences · doi:10.1080/07352689.2011.554417 · Cited by 253
Metadata
- Authors
- Williams, C. M.
- Venue
- Proceedings of the Nutrition Society
- Publisher
- Cambridge University Press (CUP)
- Published
- 2002-02
- Volume
- 61
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 19-24
- ISSN
- 0029-6651 (ISSN-L)
- 1475-2719
- OpenAlex
- W2151259561
- Cited by
- 282
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 8.59
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Nutritional quality of organic food: shades of grey or shades of green? https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1079/pns2001126
- The paper
- Williams, C. M. (2002). Nutritional quality of organic food: shades of grey or shades of green? Proceedings of the Nutrition Society. https://doi.org/10.1079/pns2001126
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.