Sender: |
|
Date: |
Sun, 4 Dec 2005 08:27:21 -0600 |
Reply-To: |
|
Content-Transfer-Encoding: |
8bit |
Subject: |
|
From: |
|
MIME-Version: |
1.0 |
In-Reply-To: |
|
Organization: |
robertk.com |
Content-Type: |
text/plain; format=flowed; delsp=yes; charset=iso-8859-1 |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
On Sat, 03 Dec 2005 23:56:12 -0600, Brenda Young
<[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> ... what do you think about the argument that the quality of our food
> nowadays is so poor that we can't possibly eat enough to get all the
> nutrients we need? Especially when organic is so hard to find in some
> areas, including mine.
I try to eat organic when possible -- partly for the environmental
benefits, and partly to avoid pesticides, GM foods, and the like -- but as
far as nutrition goes, there's not a lot of difference between organic and
non-organic, at least according to the studies I've read about. So if
you're worried about supplementing, then organic may not make much
difference in that regard.
Personally, the only supplement I use is a vitamin D tablet. I've been
tracking the rest of my diet with a software program that breaks down the
nutrients, and everything but vitamin D is always several hundred percent
of the RDA on a daily basis. So I don't think supplementing is going to
be able to add anything. (After all, most of the organic supplements are
just "concentrated food" anyway -- made largely from the same foods you're
already eating (except maybe seaweed/kelp).)
--
Robert Kesterson
[log in to unmask]
|
|
|