Jean-Louis Tu wrote:

> I was wondering if organic fruits had a higher vitamin content than non
> organic ones, and if there are some tables of analyzes available
> somewhere.

You have asked a tremendously tough question.  Roberta gave a very good
answer, but I would offer a few comments that may shine a different light.
Please keep in mind that "tables" are tables of averages by their very
nature.  Using a refractometer implies checking a very specific item of
produce.

Have you seen the old Firman Bear Report from Rutgers?  It has been
misinterpreted as "organic vs. in-organic," whereas it really should have
signified a comparison of  "enriched soil vs. depleted soil."  At any rate,
it gave quite high marks to enriched soil in all categories of mineral
content.  However, it gave dramatic testimony as far as iron goes: 1938
parts per million for the rich soil vs. but a single part for the poor
soil.  This should give you an idea of the true range of values possible.
If you haven't seen the Bear report, I think I can dig it up on the 'Net.

My personal belief is that the very highest Brix foods will always have
many multiples of life-essence substances when compared to average Brix
(what is on store shelves everyday).  However, I don't have lab tests to
prove this.  Interestingly, I've never met anyone who thought lab tests
were all that important---once they taste something really good.
Subjective as it may be, they know, that's *know*, that, say, a
full-flavored, wonderful aroma, high-Brix peach is truly life-giving
whereas a typical 10 Brix store peach actually saps energy from them.

Dr. Carey Reams (1904-1985), a farm consultant, who formalized Brix=Quality
as I understand it, had an agricultural testing lab in the Orlando area
during the 30's, 40's, 50's, and 60's.  Although I am not sure why, he took
up medical testing for doctors.  Possibly it was because foods grown under
his supervision developed a reputation for healing.  At any rate, he
insisted his fruit and vegetable analyses always indicated that the Brix of
*biologically* grown produce tended to be roughly 50% sugar with the
remaining 50% consisting of vitamins, minerals, amino acids, proteins,
taste factors, and other life substances.  OTOH, at least in the case of
citrus, the Florida Department of Agriculture openly publishes that the
Brix of conventionally grown (that's with NPK fertilizers) citrus tends to
be 75% sugar and only 25% life-needed substances.  What I take from that is
that  the better taste of, say, a 12 Brix organic orange vis-a-vis the
lesser taste of a 12 Brix conventional orange is to be expected.  Dr.
Reams' spent the last 20 years of his life in a struggle with the
AMA---including being jailed on several occasions for practicing medicine
without a license.  His true offense: he made sickened, depleted, people
better by feeding them highly mineralized foods.  Our current
depletion-oriented farming seems determined to produce an unlimited supply
of patients needy of the Reams approach to healing (which is still
practiced all over the world).

Now, saying all that, and also trying to factor in what Roberta had to say:
my opinion is that organic production tends to be better, that's higher
quality, on the whole.  Certainly, the best 10% of organic growers grow
food of higher quality than all but a select few of the conventional
growers.

My little farmette is *not* certified organic, nor is it "conventional."  I
knew where I wanted to go the day I understood that higher Brix signaled
better taste AND that high enough Brix meant the insects went away.  I'm
very fond of the term "ecological."  Certainly, there is no place for
poison here.

Regards,
Rex Harrill