August 28, 2025 • 32 mins
Organic food often sounds like a smarter, healthier choice—but is it really worth the extra cost? In this episode, we dig into the scientific evidence behind organic foods, pesticide risks, and whether you're buying better health or just paying for a better-sounding label.
We begin by breaking down the steep price differences between organic and conventional food. According to the USDA, Americans spend roughly $1 trillion annually on food at home, averaging over $3,100 per person. Organic options can increase grocery bills by 50% or more, as LendingTree reports in this price comparison analysis. My own market trip found Fuji apples nearly double in price, and wild-caught salmon more than twice as expensive.
But do organics deliver better health outcomes? Most organic foods contain lower pesticide residues, which 85% of Americans cite as a concern. Yet research shows these lower levels don’t clearly translate to better health. Rodent studies show harm at extremely high pesticide doses, far above what’s found in conventional produce. Human risk data mostly comes from farm workers, not everyday consumers.
A 2023 meta-analysis of 50 studies found that organic diets reduced blood pesticide levels and increased plant-derived phenolics, but showed inconsistent results for antioxidants. Cancer data is also mixed. One observational study found no clear differences across 15 cancer types. Another study of 68,000 participants linked organic food with perhaps a 0.6% lower risk of cancer incidence (JAMA Internal Medicine). However, organic eaters also are more likely health oriented (perhaps exercise more, sleep better), so lifestyle may explain the difference—not the food alone.
I ran the numbers: avoiding one case of cancer might require 150 people to eat organic, costing about $300,000 in additional food expenses to avoid 1 cancer. And since organic prices may lead families to buy less produce overall, there’s a tradeoff. We know from a meta-analysis that increasing fruit and vegetable intake (organic or not) is linked to a 13% reduction in mortality and a 35% drop in cancer risk. That’s a far more impactful move.
If you’re looking for a middle ground, consider using the Environmental Working Group’s Dirty Dozen and Clean 15 lists. While not a neutral source, their rankings can help prioritize which foods might be worth buying organic. Washing produce also helps reduce, but not eliminate, pesticide residues.
Takeaways:
- Organic foods have lower pesticide levels but no clear, consistent health advantage.
- The biggest health gain comes from eating more fruits and vegetables—regardless of whether they’re organic.
- If organic costs limit your produce intake, stick with conventional and focus on volume, variety, and other wellness investments like better sleep or exercise.
As always, I’d love to hear what you think. Does this shift how you shop? Let me know—and share this episode with someone navigating the same choice.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:02):
you're at the market buying some broccoli and peaches
.
The organic versions are moreexpensive, a lot more, and over
in the meat aisle there's theorganic chicken and grass-fed
beef.
They're double the price.
So the question is are youbuying better health or just
(00:25):
paying for a better soundinglabel?
Today we're digging into theevidence about organic foods,
what you get for the extra money, what you don't, and how to
shop smart without going broke.
Let's look at the evidence andfind out.
(00:46):
Hi, I'm Dr Bobby Du Bois andwelcome.
To Live Long and Well, apodcast where we will talk about
what you can do to live as longas possible, about what you can
do to live as long as possibleand with as much energy and
figure that you wish.
(01:07):
Together, we will explore whatpractical and evidence-supported
steps you can take.
Come join me on this veryimportant journey and I hope
that you feel empowered alongthe way.
I'm a physician, ironmantriathlete and have published
several hundred scientificstudies.
(01:29):
I'm honored to be your guide.
Welcome, my dear listeners, toepisode 47.
Do organics really make youhealthier or just poorer?
Everywhere you hear you shouldeat organic fruits and
(01:52):
vegetables, grass-fed meat,free-range chicken and
wild-caught fish.
Sounds good.
Who wants to eat pesticides orother chemicals.
But listeners tell me, whenthey buy what they're supposed
to, the already expensive marketbill skyrockets.
(02:13):
So fact number one the cost oforganic foods are much higher.
But what about the benefits?
So you pay more for organic,but you get more health.
And, most importantly, is thepotential improvement in health
worth that added cost?
(02:34):
Well, what if you boughtconventional, not organic, and
use the saved money for a gymmembership or a heart rate
monitor or a better mattress tosleep well, or lower the
thermostat to get better sleep?
Or you just bought moreconventional fruits and
(02:55):
vegetables?
What would be better?
What should you do?
What does the evidence say?
Now I'm going to share with you, as I always do, what we know
today, what the evidence showsus today.
This could, of course, changein the future, like anything
else I talk about, and my focusfor today is on health health
(03:20):
for ourselves.
I'm not looking atenvironmental impact, I'm not
looking at kindness towardsanimals.
I'm specifically looking at thehealth of us and whether the
costs of organics lead to thebenefits that would justify that
.
Well, of course we got to startwith at least a common
(03:41):
definition of what are organicfruits and vegetables.
They are fruits and vegetablesthat are grown without synthetic
fertilizers and without mostpesticides.
But organics can use pesticides, sort of natural pesticides.
Well, natural sounds like itmust be safe.
(04:02):
Well, sometimes that's the case, sometimes it's not.
There are some organic allowedpesticides that can be
problematic.
So organic does not necessarilymean safe, it just means how
the fruits and vegetables weregrown, and it's quite regulated.
(04:23):
The USDA has a sticker thatyou're allowed to put on to say
certified organic, and it'squite rigorous to get there.
So if the costs were the samebetween organic and non-organic,
it would be a no-brainer.
We would say, oh, let's havethe organic because, sure, less
(04:46):
pesticides would seem to bebetter, but the costs aren't the
same.
So in part one, let's dive intowhat the costs really are and
you can go to the market.
You can test out what I'm aboutto tell you for yourself.
You can test out what I amabout to tell you for yourself.
(05:10):
So the USDA, which is the bodyof the government that focuses
on this type of thing, say thatAmericans spend about a trillion
dollars on food at home, notgoing out to restaurants or
anything, just food we buy forourselves at home.
That amounts to about $3,100per person.
So for a family of four.
(05:30):
Food you buy at the market isabout $1,000 a month, could be
$1,600 a month, could be more,could be less, depending upon
what you actually buy.
And the group LendingTree didsome analysis and they found
that 50% more if you buy organic.
(05:53):
So whatever you're spending amonth on food that's not organic
, you would spend about 50% more.
That's a lot of money,especially when you're spending
already, say, $1,000 a month.
It could be $500, $600 a monthmore if you go down that route.
And it turns out about 15% ofall fruits and vegetables are
(06:20):
organic today, are organic today.
So that's the big picture sortof 50% more in cost.
Of course, I had to do my localATB market field trip, just like
in my bacon episode where Iread labels for you.
So I went and looked atconventional fruits and
vegetables and other things andthe prices, fruits and
(06:42):
vegetables and other things andthe prices.
So if you want to buy Fujiapples, that turns out to be my
favorite.
I like the crisp, I like thesweetness, so sure I go for the
Fujis.
If you buy the conventional, itwas $1.42 a pound.
However, if you bought theorganic, it was $2.70 a pound.
(07:03):
Brussels sprouts were about 30%more expensive.
So $5 for conventional, $8 fororganic All-purpose flour $3
versus $6.
So double the price for theall-purpose flour, okay.
So then I went to the meat aisle, got to look at those too
(07:25):
Ground beef $6 for conventional,about $9 for organic Ribeye
steak, $23 for conventional, $29for organic, and chicken was
about $5 a pound versus $9 apound.
Then when I went to the seafoodcounter, wild-caught versus
(07:46):
farm-raised.
Farm-raised salmon was $8 apound and the wild-caught was
about $17.
So the costs are real to buyorganic.
Thousands and thousands ofdollars more, perhaps $3,000 to
$6,000 or more if you go theroute of organic and wild-caught
(08:08):
and grass-fed.
So that's real dollars and hardto argue with that.
You might argue it's a littlebit less, a little bit more, but
it really is more expensive.
Now let's get to where it's notso obvious.
Part two what are the benefitsof organic or, conversely, the
(08:30):
harms from eating conventional?
So if you poll Americans, 85%of us say well, they're
concerned about pesticides.
So the concept of pesticidesand harm is pretty ubiquitous in
our culture.
But it turns out most fruitsand veggies either don't have
(08:54):
any pesticide residue or reallynot very much of it.
But it is true that organics dohave less pesticide residue,
but does it matter, and how muchdoes it matter from a health
standpoint?
Well, let's start with the typeof study.
I'm usually not very excitedabout those done in rodents,
(09:18):
mice or rats.
So if you look at studies inrodents, they show that there is
harm if you give them highdoses of pesticides, and this is
doses that are way higher thanwhat we would ever be exposed to
, because there are limits tohow much residue is allowable in
(09:43):
the pesticides we eat.
The EPA has safety thresholdsand they're generally met.
Also, keep in mind, pesticidelevels in conventional foods
vary a lot by individual food,which I'm going to come back to
(10:05):
a little bit later, which aremaybe safer, which are maybe
less safe and by country oforigin.
Some countries use lots ofpesticides of the worst type and
others use less.
So there is no simple, simpleanswer.
Okay, but that's rodents, andI'm not sure what to make out of
rodent data.
Well, there is human data.
There are human data that saysthat being exposed to pesticides
(10:29):
is problematic, and these datacome from farm workers.
Now, farm workers are sprayingthe chemicals, so they're being
exposed to huge quantities ofthis.
Okay, quite, a bit differentthan you or me who are just
eating the foods, and in thefarm workers, they found an
(10:49):
increased risk of a number ofdiseases Alzheimer's,
parkinson's, cancer, fertility,maybe kids that are exposed when
their parent comes home andtheir clothes are all full of
the pesticides Maybe anincreased risk as well, or
higher risk.
But what about non-farm workers, like most all of us?
(11:15):
Well, the studies are notperfect, but let me share with
you what I came across.
There's multiple meta-analysesand remember, a meta-analysis is
taking a whole group of studies, combining them analytically
and trying to come up with aricher answer than any one study
(11:37):
might suggest.
So there's a 2023 meta-analysis.
I'll have the link for you, asalways, and the other
interesting links in the shownotes.
And in this study, there were 50individual publications in it,
so 23 were observational, 27were interventional, sort of
(11:59):
like a clinical trial.
Okay, the first thing that theytalked about were biomarkers or
blood tests, so you measure theblood of people and you do
something with what they'reeating organic versus
non-organic and so they tookpeople that were typically not
eating organic and in some casesit was tomatoes, other cases it
(12:24):
was apples, and they switchedout what they were eating.
So they might have been eatingconventional and they gave them
organic and after a period oftime, what they found is that in
blood samples, the organiceaters had lower levels of
(12:45):
pesticides.
In their blood they had higherlevels of phenolics.
These are chemicals that are in.
These are chemicals that are infruits and vegetables.
These are what are felt to bethe good parts of the fruits and
vegetables.
They looked at totalantioxidants.
We hear a lot aboutantioxidants.
(13:05):
Well, the data there wasinconsistent.
So in the blood for those whoeat organic, or at least in
these studies, there were lowerlevels of pesticides.
They also found in a lot ofthese studies this was the
observational studies thatpeople's BMI, their weight, was
(13:30):
lower when they ate organic.
Now you might say well, how doeseating organic make you lose
weight?
Probably doesn't have anythingto do with the organic food per
se.
It's that people who areinterested in eating organic
foods are interested in theirhealth.
They probably ate more healthyin general.
Their lifestyle may have beenmore healthy in general.
(13:50):
Well, when we turn to the dataon allergies or reproductive
functions, sperm count, thosekinds of things, the data are
really conflicting.
There's no clear answer thatorganics are safer.
(14:11):
Now let's get to the one areathat folks tend to focus on with
organics versus not andpesticides, and that is cancer.
Now I should point out thereare no intervention studies.
They don't randomize people toeither eat conventional versus
(14:32):
organic you might argue thatcould be unethical.
Conventional versus organic youmight argue that could be
unethical.
So this is all based onobservational studies, meaning
you ask what people eat and youfollow them in time and you say
well, I wonder who was healthier, those that ate organic or
those that didn't.
So here's a typical study thatwas in this meta-analysis and
(14:54):
that is an observational one,and they found overall there was
no difference in cancer rates,cancer occurrence whether you
ate organic or not.
They looked at 15 cancer types.
One showed a worse impact forthose that ate conventional, 14
showed no impact and in onecancer there was even a
(15:17):
suggestion that eatingconventional had less cancer.
So it's kind of a wash fromthis study.
Well, there was a second studythat was interesting and that
was one where they had 68,000people and they gave them
(15:38):
questionnaires and thesequestionnaires asked about what
they ate and there were 16products.
Did you never eat that?
Did you occasionally eat that?
Did you eat it most of the time.
What did they find that?
(15:59):
Did you eat it most of the time?
What did they find?
They found that in people whohad higher organic food intake
they appeared to have lowercancer rates.
So they compared the people whoate the most organic to the
least organic and what theyfound was there was a 1.3%
incidence of cancer.
So the number of people who gotcancer during the observation
(16:22):
period, versus 1.9% in thepeople who ate conventional or
0.6 fewer cancers if you ateorganic.
So let's put those numbers intoperspective.
If a thousand people ateorganic versus not the organic
people would have six fewercases of cancer in that 1,000.
(16:48):
Now that might sound worrisome.
Look here, dr Bobby.
The organic eaters had fewercancers.
But who are the people who eatorganic?
These are people who care abouttheir health.
So organic eaters tend to bemore likely to be vegetarian,
(17:08):
eat less meat, less likely tosmoke.
They tend to be younger andthinner, and perhaps they
exercise more, Perhaps theyslept more.
You can't just say that organicpeople eaters are the exact
same as the people who eatconventional.
Clearly they're differentbecause they bought the organic.
They might have had more money.
(17:29):
Money correlates with health.
So, yes, there might be a slightincrease in this one study.
What caused it?
Was it the organic food versusnot?
Or was it something else?
Okay, what's my reading of thedata?
My reading of the data?
There is no compelling,reproducible, clear health issue
(17:55):
by eating conventional fruitsand vegetables.
That's my take.
Could there be slightdifferences?
Absolutely.
Could we learn new data in theyears to come?
Absolutely, okay.
The all-important part threewhat does this all mean?
The all-important part threewhat does this all mean?
(18:19):
Because we need to balance thereal evidence on the cost
differences and the possibleconcerns about the benefits
issue.
Okay, like I did with thealcohol study, where there was
conflicting data on cancer study, where there was conflicting
data on cancer, I went through ascenario where we said well,
(18:39):
let's believe that the studiesthat showed a difference in
cancer are real and let's seewhat that means for us.
So, as I mentioned, in thatstudy the one study that did
show differences, not the otherone that didn't there was a
difference between, in athousand people, 13 cancers
versus 19 cancers, so six peoplefewer would have experienced
(19:07):
cancer out of a thousand peoplewho ate organic versus
conventional.
Now there's something callednumber needed to treat.
So you just sort of.
Take the thousand people andthe six fewer cancers and you
come up with 150 or 160.
What does that number mean forus?
So let's say it's 150.
(19:28):
So 150 people would need to eatorganic foods and paying added
costs to reduce one cancer.
And I said eating organic isperhaps $2,000 a person more
expensive.
(19:48):
So if you do the math, thatmeans to avoid one case of
cancer would cost you $300,000.
And let me point out that thesedata are not death from cancer,
it's just having cancer.
Now, none of us want cancer, weall want to avoid it.
(20:09):
But is it worth it to spend$300,000 to avoid one case?
So this is one way to look atthe numbers and just keep this
one in the mind.
But if you buy organic, it canbe a problem for your pocketbook
and your overall health from acompletely different angle.
(20:32):
So let me go through that.
So this is different than the$300,000.
If you buy organic, you mightactually eat fewer fruits and
vegetables, and we know fruitsand I went to the market the
other day buy some blueberries.
(20:54):
My wife likes blueberries andshe would like organic.
Okay, so I went looked.
The blueberries were $9 for acontainer.
For the organic ones it was alarge container, but it was $9.
So do I buy one container?
Do I buy two containers?
(21:15):
Do I buy two containers?
Do I buy three containers?
Well, I couldn't spend $27 onblueberries.
I could probably afford $27 forblueberries, but I couldn't
justify it for myself or for mydear wife Gail.
So I bought two things ofblueberries $18 worth of
(21:35):
blueberries.
So I, who can afford to buyorganic exclusively if I wish to
, I don't buy as much when I'mlooking at the organic versus
the non-organic because theprices just seem so high.
So keep this in mind Buyingorganic, you might cut back on
(21:58):
how much you bought.
Now here's the rub Fruits andvegetables any type of fruits
and vegetables, I'm talkingconventional reduce your
potential risk of mortality.
So there was a meta-analysisthat looked at how much fruits
and vegetables people had.
(22:19):
It wasn't organic, non-organic,just fruits and vegetables and
they compared people who hadfive servings a day versus two
servings a day, and in thosewith five servings a day, there
was a reduction in mortality by13%, a reduction in cancer by
35%.
Oh my God, dr Bobby, eatingfruits and vegetables clearly is
(22:43):
important for us.
Okay, just like I said earlier,these are observational studies
.
So eating more fruits andvegetables can be confounded,
because people who eat morefruits and vegetables maybe
their weight is lower becausethey're not having as much fat,
maybe they exercise more becausethey're health conscious.
(23:05):
Now the studies do try toadjust for that, but you can't
really perfectly do that.
So if we believe these datathat eating more fruits and
vegetables are good for you andif you buy organic you might buy
(23:27):
less, this potentially leads usto a problem and we're just
going to dive into that problemnow.
So studies have shown that 80%of people in the United States
don't get the recommended numberof servings per day of fruits
and vegetables Fully 80%,meaning the vast majority of us
(23:52):
don't eat enough fruits andvegetables and in this case,
obviously most of these peopleare eating conventional.
So there was a wonderfulmodeling study where they took
all the data and tried to figureout what might it mean for a
population of people, and theyposited what if half of all
(24:14):
Americans ate one more fruit andvegetable a day?
Because, again, 80% of usaren't getting it.
So they posited we're not goingto solve this for everybody,
but let's say half of Americansget more fruits and vegetables
per day.
They modeled and found 20,000fewer cancer cases might result.
(24:35):
That's a big number for justhaving a bit more fruits and
vegetables.
But, dr Bobby, if 20,000 peopleeat more fruits and vegetables
that are conventional, they'regoing to be exposed to more
pesticides That'll cause morecancer.
So they modeled that too, andof half of the United States ate
(25:00):
more fruits and vegetables,they found maybe 10 more people
might get cancer.
So 20,000 fewer cancer cases byeating more fruits and
vegetables.
Yeah, a bit more cancer cases,10 of them from the pesticides.
Pretty easy trade-off.
More fruits and vegetables aregood for you.
(25:22):
Perhaps it might be a smalltiny increasing in cancers, but
way over in the direction offewer cancer cases by eating
more fruits and vegetables.
And as I said earlier, even Ibuy less fruits and vegetables
when I buy organic.
So for the average person, ifyou buy organic you may well buy
(25:48):
fewer fruits and vegetables andthere'll be more harm from not
getting the right number offruits and vegetables than,
potentially, the harmsassociated with the pesticides.
Okay, part four Is there amiddle ground?
Is there a way to say well,don't just buy all organic or
all conventional.
(26:09):
So, as I've said, the organicscost more, they may have fewer
pesticides and the health harmsare not obvious, but can we try
to lower the ones there might be?
Now, I'm not saying this groupI'm about to tell you about is a
fair and balanced one.
They're not.
(26:29):
The environmental working groupis organically, is pro-organic,
it's an advocacy group.
The environmental working groupis organically, is pro-organic,
it's an advocacy group.
It's not a science-based,objective group.
They're pushing a certain setof messages, but they've done
some analyses, looking at whichfoods have more pesticide
residues, which have fewer.
(26:51):
So, although on balance they'renot a group I would go to for
scientific answers, when itcomes to sort of going through
the data and saying which foodsseem to be more problematic than
others, I think it's areasonable place to look.
And they've come up withsomething called the dirty dozen
(27:11):
, meaning the vegetables andfruits that tend to have more
pesticide residues, and thenthere's the clean 15, the ones
that tend to have fewer.
All right, so what's the dirtydozen?
So if you're going to say well,Dr Bobby, I am still concerned,
even though your data is prettydarn compelling, and $300,000
(27:35):
to avoid one cancer seems likesomething that doesn't make
sense, maybe I'll buy a fewthings organic and most things
not organic.
So what are the things that inthis group's mention are the
ones that tend to have morepesticide residues for
conventional.
So that would be spinach,strawberries, kale, grapes,
(27:59):
peaches, cherries, nectarines,pears, apples, blackberries,
blueberries and even potatoes.
Then there's the clean 15.
Now the clean 15 typically havea peel or a shell or something
that might keep the sprayed onpesticides out.
So, like pineapple, corn,avocados, onions, bananas,
(28:26):
things like that, tend to have apeel where you can take it out
of the peel and in theiranalysis, they tend to have
fewer chances for havingpesticide residue.
And, of course, you can washthem and wash off at least some
of the pesticide residue.
It doesn't eliminate them, butit might help.
(28:48):
So if you want to take a middleground and eat some organic,
some not organic, this would bea set of lists that you might
find helpful.
Okay, let's wrap up Looking atthe data.
Pesticide residues are higher inconventional foods, but the
(29:12):
health impact of that somewhathigher residue isn't so clear.
Now, if the prices were thesame, sure, let's all buy
organic.
They may be more blemished.
There may be other reasons whyyou don't like to buy organic,
but from a health standpoint, ifthe prices were the same,
buying organic would absolutelymake sense.
(29:34):
But the prices are not the sameand they're not a little bit
different.
As we've said, it's about 50%more.
Already, americans don't getenough fruits and vegetables.
So if we were to say everybodyeat organic, likely they would
eat fewer fruits and vegetablesbecause the organic stuff is
(29:55):
more expensive.
And I gave you that number of$300,000 to avoid a cancer.
Obviously this is an exactnumber.
It's just an estimate basedupon some of the data.
Okay, so you're a family offour.
Do you buy organic and spend$6,000 more?
Do you continue to buyconventional and maybe try to
(30:18):
boost your fruits and vegetableintake?
So, as I mentioned earlier,that's about a $6,000 difference
for a family.
That's a lot of money.
Perhaps, instead of buyingorganic, take that $6,000 and
buy a gym membership for thefamily or get better mattresses
(30:40):
to sleep on so you get bettersleep, or any of a number of
things.
So that real money $6,000 ayear might lead to more health
if you didn't buy organic butbought other ways of improving
your health.
So there are risks, there arebenefits, there are costs.
(31:04):
There's different ways to lookat this.
I would really like to know whatyou think.
So do tell me what you're doing, what you think you might do
after listening to my episodeand, as always, if you like my
episode, please, please letothers know about it.
(31:24):
It makes me very happy to seemore people learning about this.
So until next time, as always,I hope you live long and well.
Thanks so much for listening toLive Long and Well with Dr
Bobby.
If you liked this episode,please provide a review on Apple
(31:47):
or Spotify or wherever youlisten.
If you want to continue thisjourney or want to receive my
newsletter on practical andscientific ways to improve your
health and longevity, pleasevisit me at
drbobbilivelongandwellcom.
That's, doctor, as in D-R Bobby.
(32:10):
Live long and wellcom.
you're at the market buying some broccoli and peaches
.
The organic versions are moreexpensive, a lot more, and over
in the meat aisle there's theorganic chicken and grass-fed
beef.
They're double the price.
So the question is are youbuying better health or just
(00:25):
paying for a better soundinglabel?
Today we're digging into theevidence about organic foods,
what you get for the extra money, what you don't, and how to
shop smart without going broke.
Let's look at the evidence andfind out.
(00:46):
Hi, I'm Dr Bobby Du Bois andwelcome.
To Live Long and Well, apodcast where we will talk about
what you can do to live as longas possible, about what you can
do to live as long as possibleand with as much energy and
figure that you wish.
(01:07):
Together, we will explore whatpractical and evidence-supported
steps you can take.
Come join me on this veryimportant journey and I hope
that you feel empowered alongthe way.
I'm a physician, ironmantriathlete and have published
several hundred scientificstudies.
(01:29):
I'm honored to be your guide.
Welcome, my dear listeners, toepisode 47.
Do organics really make youhealthier or just poorer?
Everywhere you hear you shouldeat organic fruits and
(01:52):
vegetables, grass-fed meat,free-range chicken and
wild-caught fish.
Sounds good.
Who wants to eat pesticides orother chemicals.
But listeners tell me, whenthey buy what they're supposed
to, the already expensive marketbill skyrockets.
(02:13):
So fact number one the cost oforganic foods are much higher.
But what about the benefits?
So you pay more for organic,but you get more health.
And, most importantly, is thepotential improvement in health
worth that added cost?
(02:34):
Well, what if you boughtconventional, not organic, and
use the saved money for a gymmembership or a heart rate
monitor or a better mattress tosleep well, or lower the
thermostat to get better sleep?
Or you just bought moreconventional fruits and
(02:55):
vegetables?
What would be better?
What should you do?
What does the evidence say?
Now I'm going to share with you, as I always do, what we know
today, what the evidence showsus today.
This could, of course, changein the future, like anything
else I talk about, and my focusfor today is on health health
(03:20):
for ourselves.
I'm not looking atenvironmental impact, I'm not
looking at kindness towardsanimals.
I'm specifically looking at thehealth of us and whether the
costs of organics lead to thebenefits that would justify that
.
Well, of course we got to startwith at least a common
(03:41):
definition of what are organicfruits and vegetables.
They are fruits and vegetablesthat are grown without synthetic
fertilizers and without mostpesticides.
But organics can use pesticides, sort of natural pesticides.
Well, natural sounds like itmust be safe.
(04:02):
Well, sometimes that's the case, sometimes it's not.
There are some organic allowedpesticides that can be
problematic.
So organic does not necessarilymean safe, it just means how
the fruits and vegetables weregrown, and it's quite regulated.
(04:23):
The USDA has a sticker thatyou're allowed to put on to say
certified organic, and it'squite rigorous to get there.
So if the costs were the samebetween organic and non-organic,
it would be a no-brainer.
We would say, oh, let's havethe organic because, sure, less
(04:46):
pesticides would seem to bebetter, but the costs aren't the
same.
So in part one, let's dive intowhat the costs really are and
you can go to the market.
You can test out what I'm aboutto tell you for yourself.
You can test out what I amabout to tell you for yourself.
(05:10):
So the USDA, which is the bodyof the government that focuses
on this type of thing, say thatAmericans spend about a trillion
dollars on food at home, notgoing out to restaurants or
anything, just food we buy forourselves at home.
That amounts to about $3,100per person.
So for a family of four.
(05:30):
Food you buy at the market isabout $1,000 a month, could be
$1,600 a month, could be more,could be less, depending upon
what you actually buy.
And the group LendingTree didsome analysis and they found
that 50% more if you buy organic.
(05:53):
So whatever you're spending amonth on food that's not organic
, you would spend about 50% more.
That's a lot of money,especially when you're spending
already, say, $1,000 a month.
It could be $500, $600 a monthmore if you go down that route.
And it turns out about 15% ofall fruits and vegetables are
(06:20):
organic today, are organic today.
So that's the big picture sortof 50% more in cost.
Of course, I had to do my localATB market field trip, just like
in my bacon episode where Iread labels for you.
So I went and looked atconventional fruits and
vegetables and other things andthe prices, fruits and
(06:42):
vegetables and other things andthe prices.
So if you want to buy Fujiapples, that turns out to be my
favorite.
I like the crisp, I like thesweetness, so sure I go for the
Fujis.
If you buy the conventional, itwas $1.42 a pound.
However, if you bought theorganic, it was $2.70 a pound.
(07:03):
Brussels sprouts were about 30%more expensive.
So $5 for conventional, $8 fororganic All-purpose flour $3
versus $6.
So double the price for theall-purpose flour, okay.
So then I went to the meat aisle, got to look at those too
(07:25):
Ground beef $6 for conventional,about $9 for organic Ribeye
steak, $23 for conventional, $29for organic, and chicken was
about $5 a pound versus $9 apound.
Then when I went to the seafoodcounter, wild-caught versus
(07:46):
farm-raised.
Farm-raised salmon was $8 apound and the wild-caught was
about $17.
So the costs are real to buyorganic.
Thousands and thousands ofdollars more, perhaps $3,000 to
$6,000 or more if you go theroute of organic and wild-caught
(08:08):
and grass-fed.
So that's real dollars and hardto argue with that.
You might argue it's a littlebit less, a little bit more, but
it really is more expensive.
Now let's get to where it's notso obvious.
Part two what are the benefitsof organic or, conversely, the
(08:30):
harms from eating conventional?
So if you poll Americans, 85%of us say well, they're
concerned about pesticides.
So the concept of pesticidesand harm is pretty ubiquitous in
our culture.
But it turns out most fruitsand veggies either don't have
(08:54):
any pesticide residue or reallynot very much of it.
But it is true that organics dohave less pesticide residue,
but does it matter, and how muchdoes it matter from a health
standpoint?
Well, let's start with the typeof study.
I'm usually not very excitedabout those done in rodents,
(09:18):
mice or rats.
So if you look at studies inrodents, they show that there is
harm if you give them highdoses of pesticides, and this is
doses that are way higher thanwhat we would ever be exposed to
, because there are limits tohow much residue is allowable in
(09:43):
the pesticides we eat.
The EPA has safety thresholdsand they're generally met.
Also, keep in mind, pesticidelevels in conventional foods
vary a lot by individual food,which I'm going to come back to
(10:05):
a little bit later, which aremaybe safer, which are maybe
less safe and by country oforigin.
Some countries use lots ofpesticides of the worst type and
others use less.
So there is no simple, simpleanswer.
Okay, but that's rodents, andI'm not sure what to make out of
rodent data.
Well, there is human data.
There are human data that saysthat being exposed to pesticides
(10:29):
is problematic, and these datacome from farm workers.
Now, farm workers are sprayingthe chemicals, so they're being
exposed to huge quantities ofthis.
Okay, quite, a bit differentthan you or me who are just
eating the foods, and in thefarm workers, they found an
(10:49):
increased risk of a number ofdiseases Alzheimer's,
parkinson's, cancer, fertility,maybe kids that are exposed when
their parent comes home andtheir clothes are all full of
the pesticides Maybe anincreased risk as well, or
higher risk.
But what about non-farm workers, like most all of us?
(11:15):
Well, the studies are notperfect, but let me share with
you what I came across.
There's multiple meta-analysesand remember, a meta-analysis is
taking a whole group of studies, combining them analytically
and trying to come up with aricher answer than any one study
(11:37):
might suggest.
So there's a 2023 meta-analysis.
I'll have the link for you, asalways, and the other
interesting links in the shownotes.
And in this study, there were 50individual publications in it,
so 23 were observational, 27were interventional, sort of
(11:59):
like a clinical trial.
Okay, the first thing that theytalked about were biomarkers or
blood tests, so you measure theblood of people and you do
something with what they'reeating organic versus
non-organic and so they tookpeople that were typically not
eating organic and in some casesit was tomatoes, other cases it
(12:24):
was apples, and they switchedout what they were eating.
So they might have been eatingconventional and they gave them
organic and after a period oftime, what they found is that in
blood samples, the organiceaters had lower levels of
(12:45):
pesticides.
In their blood they had higherlevels of phenolics.
These are chemicals that are in.
These are chemicals that are infruits and vegetables.
These are what are felt to bethe good parts of the fruits and
vegetables.
They looked at totalantioxidants.
We hear a lot aboutantioxidants.
(13:05):
Well, the data there wasinconsistent.
So in the blood for those whoeat organic, or at least in
these studies, there were lowerlevels of pesticides.
They also found in a lot ofthese studies this was the
observational studies thatpeople's BMI, their weight, was
(13:30):
lower when they ate organic.
Now you might say well, how doeseating organic make you lose
weight?
Probably doesn't have anythingto do with the organic food per
se.
It's that people who areinterested in eating organic
foods are interested in theirhealth.
They probably ate more healthyin general.
Their lifestyle may have beenmore healthy in general.
(13:50):
Well, when we turn to the dataon allergies or reproductive
functions, sperm count, thosekinds of things, the data are
really conflicting.
There's no clear answer thatorganics are safer.
(14:11):
Now let's get to the one areathat folks tend to focus on with
organics versus not andpesticides, and that is cancer.
Now I should point out thereare no intervention studies.
They don't randomize people toeither eat conventional versus
(14:32):
organic you might argue thatcould be unethical.
Conventional versus organic youmight argue that could be
unethical.
So this is all based onobservational studies, meaning
you ask what people eat and youfollow them in time and you say
well, I wonder who was healthier, those that ate organic or
those that didn't.
So here's a typical study thatwas in this meta-analysis and
(14:54):
that is an observational one,and they found overall there was
no difference in cancer rates,cancer occurrence whether you
ate organic or not.
They looked at 15 cancer types.
One showed a worse impact forthose that ate conventional, 14
showed no impact and in onecancer there was even a
(15:17):
suggestion that eatingconventional had less cancer.
So it's kind of a wash fromthis study.
Well, there was a second studythat was interesting and that
was one where they had 68,000people and they gave them
(15:38):
questionnaires and thesequestionnaires asked about what
they ate and there were 16products.
Did you never eat that?
Did you occasionally eat that?
Did you eat it most of the time.
What did they find that?
(15:59):
Did you eat it most of the time?
What did they find?
They found that in people whohad higher organic food intake
they appeared to have lowercancer rates.
So they compared the people whoate the most organic to the
least organic and what theyfound was there was a 1.3%
incidence of cancer.
So the number of people who gotcancer during the observation
(16:22):
period, versus 1.9% in thepeople who ate conventional or
0.6 fewer cancers if you ateorganic.
So let's put those numbers intoperspective.
If a thousand people ateorganic versus not the organic
people would have six fewercases of cancer in that 1,000.
(16:48):
Now that might sound worrisome.
Look here, dr Bobby.
The organic eaters had fewercancers.
But who are the people who eatorganic?
These are people who care abouttheir health.
So organic eaters tend to bemore likely to be vegetarian,
(17:08):
eat less meat, less likely tosmoke.
They tend to be younger andthinner, and perhaps they
exercise more, Perhaps theyslept more.
You can't just say that organicpeople eaters are the exact
same as the people who eatconventional.
Clearly they're differentbecause they bought the organic.
They might have had more money.
(17:29):
Money correlates with health.
So, yes, there might be a slightincrease in this one study.
What caused it?
Was it the organic food versusnot?
Or was it something else?
Okay, what's my reading of thedata?
My reading of the data?
There is no compelling,reproducible, clear health issue
(17:55):
by eating conventional fruitsand vegetables.
That's my take.
Could there be slightdifferences?
Absolutely.
Could we learn new data in theyears to come?
Absolutely, okay.
The all-important part threewhat does this all mean?
The all-important part threewhat does this all mean?
(18:19):
Because we need to balance thereal evidence on the cost
differences and the possibleconcerns about the benefits
issue.
Okay, like I did with thealcohol study, where there was
conflicting data on cancer study, where there was conflicting
data on cancer, I went through ascenario where we said well,
(18:39):
let's believe that the studiesthat showed a difference in
cancer are real and let's seewhat that means for us.
So, as I mentioned, in thatstudy the one study that did
show differences, not the otherone that didn't there was a
difference between, in athousand people, 13 cancers
versus 19 cancers, so six peoplefewer would have experienced
(19:07):
cancer out of a thousand peoplewho ate organic versus
conventional.
Now there's something callednumber needed to treat.
So you just sort of.
Take the thousand people andthe six fewer cancers and you
come up with 150 or 160.
What does that number mean forus?
So let's say it's 150.
(19:28):
So 150 people would need to eatorganic foods and paying added
costs to reduce one cancer.
And I said eating organic isperhaps $2,000 a person more
expensive.
(19:48):
So if you do the math, thatmeans to avoid one case of
cancer would cost you $300,000.
And let me point out that thesedata are not death from cancer,
it's just having cancer.
Now, none of us want cancer, weall want to avoid it.
(20:09):
But is it worth it to spend$300,000 to avoid one case?
So this is one way to look atthe numbers and just keep this
one in the mind.
But if you buy organic, it canbe a problem for your pocketbook
and your overall health from acompletely different angle.
(20:32):
So let me go through that.
So this is different than the$300,000.
If you buy organic, you mightactually eat fewer fruits and
vegetables, and we know fruitsand I went to the market the
other day buy some blueberries.
(20:54):
My wife likes blueberries andshe would like organic.
Okay, so I went looked.
The blueberries were $9 for acontainer.
For the organic ones it was alarge container, but it was $9.
So do I buy one container?
Do I buy two containers?
(21:15):
Do I buy two containers?
Do I buy three containers?
Well, I couldn't spend $27 onblueberries.
I could probably afford $27 forblueberries, but I couldn't
justify it for myself or for mydear wife Gail.
So I bought two things ofblueberries $18 worth of
(21:35):
blueberries.
So I, who can afford to buyorganic exclusively if I wish to
, I don't buy as much when I'mlooking at the organic versus
the non-organic because theprices just seem so high.
So keep this in mind Buyingorganic, you might cut back on
(21:58):
how much you bought.
Now here's the rub Fruits andvegetables any type of fruits
and vegetables, I'm talkingconventional reduce your
potential risk of mortality.
So there was a meta-analysisthat looked at how much fruits
and vegetables people had.
(22:19):
It wasn't organic, non-organic,just fruits and vegetables and
they compared people who hadfive servings a day versus two
servings a day, and in thosewith five servings a day, there
was a reduction in mortality by13%, a reduction in cancer by
35%.
Oh my God, dr Bobby, eatingfruits and vegetables clearly is
(22:43):
important for us.
Okay, just like I said earlier,these are observational studies
.
So eating more fruits andvegetables can be confounded,
because people who eat morefruits and vegetables maybe
their weight is lower becausethey're not having as much fat,
maybe they exercise more becausethey're health conscious.
(23:05):
Now the studies do try toadjust for that, but you can't
really perfectly do that.
So if we believe these datathat eating more fruits and
vegetables are good for you andif you buy organic you might buy
(23:27):
less, this potentially leads usto a problem and we're just
going to dive into that problemnow.
So studies have shown that 80%of people in the United States
don't get the recommended numberof servings per day of fruits
and vegetables Fully 80%,meaning the vast majority of us
(23:52):
don't eat enough fruits andvegetables and in this case,
obviously most of these peopleare eating conventional.
So there was a wonderfulmodeling study where they took
all the data and tried to figureout what might it mean for a
population of people, and theyposited what if half of all
(24:14):
Americans ate one more fruit andvegetable a day?
Because, again, 80% of usaren't getting it.
So they posited we're not goingto solve this for everybody,
but let's say half of Americansget more fruits and vegetables
per day.
They modeled and found 20,000fewer cancer cases might result.
(24:35):
That's a big number for justhaving a bit more fruits and
vegetables.
But, dr Bobby, if 20,000 peopleeat more fruits and vegetables
that are conventional, they'regoing to be exposed to more
pesticides That'll cause morecancer.
So they modeled that too, andof half of the United States ate
(25:00):
more fruits and vegetables,they found maybe 10 more people
might get cancer.
So 20,000 fewer cancer cases byeating more fruits and
vegetables.
Yeah, a bit more cancer cases,10 of them from the pesticides.
Pretty easy trade-off.
More fruits and vegetables aregood for you.
(25:22):
Perhaps it might be a smalltiny increasing in cancers, but
way over in the direction offewer cancer cases by eating
more fruits and vegetables.
And as I said earlier, even Ibuy less fruits and vegetables
when I buy organic.
So for the average person, ifyou buy organic you may well buy
(25:48):
fewer fruits and vegetables andthere'll be more harm from not
getting the right number offruits and vegetables than,
potentially, the harmsassociated with the pesticides.
Okay, part four Is there amiddle ground?
Is there a way to say well,don't just buy all organic or
all conventional.
(26:09):
So, as I've said, the organicscost more, they may have fewer
pesticides and the health harmsare not obvious, but can we try
to lower the ones there might be?
Now, I'm not saying this groupI'm about to tell you about is a
fair and balanced one.
They're not.
(26:29):
The environmental working groupis organically, is pro-organic,
it's an advocacy group.
The environmental working groupis organically, is pro-organic,
it's an advocacy group.
It's not a science-based,objective group.
They're pushing a certain setof messages, but they've done
some analyses, looking at whichfoods have more pesticide
residues, which have fewer.
(26:51):
So, although on balance they'renot a group I would go to for
scientific answers, when itcomes to sort of going through
the data and saying which foodsseem to be more problematic than
others, I think it's areasonable place to look.
And they've come up withsomething called the dirty dozen
(27:11):
, meaning the vegetables andfruits that tend to have more
pesticide residues, and thenthere's the clean 15, the ones
that tend to have fewer.
All right, so what's the dirtydozen?
So if you're going to say well,Dr Bobby, I am still concerned,
even though your data is prettydarn compelling, and $300,000
(27:35):
to avoid one cancer seems likesomething that doesn't make
sense, maybe I'll buy a fewthings organic and most things
not organic.
So what are the things that inthis group's mention are the
ones that tend to have morepesticide residues for
conventional.
So that would be spinach,strawberries, kale, grapes,
(27:59):
peaches, cherries, nectarines,pears, apples, blackberries,
blueberries and even potatoes.
Then there's the clean 15.
Now the clean 15 typically havea peel or a shell or something
that might keep the sprayed onpesticides out.
So, like pineapple, corn,avocados, onions, bananas,
(28:26):
things like that, tend to have apeel where you can take it out
of the peel and in theiranalysis, they tend to have
fewer chances for havingpesticide residue.
And, of course, you can washthem and wash off at least some
of the pesticide residue.
It doesn't eliminate them, butit might help.
(28:48):
So if you want to take a middleground and eat some organic,
some not organic, this would bea set of lists that you might
find helpful.
Okay, let's wrap up Looking atthe data.
Pesticide residues are higher inconventional foods, but the
(29:12):
health impact of that somewhathigher residue isn't so clear.
Now, if the prices were thesame, sure, let's all buy
organic.
They may be more blemished.
There may be other reasons whyyou don't like to buy organic,
but from a health standpoint, ifthe prices were the same,
buying organic would absolutelymake sense.
(29:34):
But the prices are not the sameand they're not a little bit
different.
As we've said, it's about 50%more.
Already, americans don't getenough fruits and vegetables.
So if we were to say everybodyeat organic, likely they would
eat fewer fruits and vegetablesbecause the organic stuff is
(29:55):
more expensive.
And I gave you that number of$300,000 to avoid a cancer.
Obviously this is an exactnumber.
It's just an estimate basedupon some of the data.
Okay, so you're a family offour.
Do you buy organic and spend$6,000 more?
Do you continue to buyconventional and maybe try to
(30:18):
boost your fruits and vegetableintake?
So, as I mentioned earlier,that's about a $6,000 difference
for a family.
That's a lot of money.
Perhaps, instead of buyingorganic, take that $6,000 and
buy a gym membership for thefamily or get better mattresses
(30:40):
to sleep on so you get bettersleep, or any of a number of
things.
So that real money $6,000 ayear might lead to more health
if you didn't buy organic butbought other ways of improving
your health.
So there are risks, there arebenefits, there are costs.
(31:04):
There's different ways to lookat this.
I would really like to know whatyou think.
So do tell me what you're doing, what you think you might do
after listening to my episodeand, as always, if you like my
episode, please, please letothers know about it.
(31:24):
It makes me very happy to seemore people learning about this.
So until next time, as always,I hope you live long and well.
Thanks so much for listening toLive Long and Well with Dr
Bobby.
If you liked this episode,please provide a review on Apple
(31:47):
or Spotify or wherever youlisten.
If you want to continue thisjourney or want to receive my
newsletter on practical andscientific ways to improve your
health and longevity, pleasevisit me at
drbobbilivelongandwellcom.
That's, doctor, as in D-R Bobby.
(32:10):
Live long and wellcom.
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Cardiac Cowboys
The heart was always off-limits to surgeons. Cutting into it spelled instant death for the patient. That is, until a ragtag group of doctors scattered across the Midwest and Texas decided to throw out the rule book. Working in makeshift laboratories and home garages, using medical devices made from scavenged machine parts and beer tubes, these men and women invented the field of open heart surgery. Odds are, someone you know is alive because of them. So why has history left them behind? Presented by Chris Pine, CARDIAC COWBOYS tells the gripping true story behind the birth of heart surgery, and the young, Greatest Generation doctors who made it happen. For years, they competed and feuded, racing to be the first, the best, and the most prolific. Some appeared on the cover of Time Magazine, operated on kings and advised presidents. Others ended up disgraced, penniless, and convicted of felonies. Together, they ignited a revolution in medicine, and changed the world.
The Joe Rogan Experience
The official podcast of comedian Joe Rogan.