This is an archived article that was published on sltrib.com in 2012, and information in the article may be outdated. It is provided only for personal research purposes and may not be reprinted.
- Eating for other people's health - By George Pyle | The Salt Lake Tribune
My father was not a religious man. He did not say grace before meals. He would, though, frequently pause to contemplate his favorite dessert.
"I don't know why the Good Lord couldn't have made pecan pie and ice cream a health food," he would declare, mournfully, before downing it.
Maybe that's why he wasn't religious. Too many design flaws.
The issue of what does and does not qualify as a health food is always an interesting and fluid one. ...
... The latest in this to-and-fro was last week's release of a study that concluded that foods properly labeled as "organic" are not appreciably more nutritious than the more common, and often considerably less expensive, foods that do not qualify for such a designation. ...
... But, as The Atlantic online noted the other day, "That isn't the point." ...
- Happy cows, healthy food - By Nicholas D. Kristof | The New York Times
YAMHILL, Ore. — Food can be depressing. If it's tasty, it's carcinogenic. If it's cheap, animals were tortured.
But this, miraculously, is a happy column about food! It's about a farmer who names all his 230 milk cows, along with his 200 heifers and calves, and loves them like children. ...
- Organic Food vs. Conventional: What the Stanford Study Missed - Robyn O'Brien | The Huffington Post
- Is organic food worth it? - Baltimore Sun Editorial
- Thinking outside the processed-foods box — health and safety advantages of organic food - Bangor (Maine) Daily News
- What's in a label? Conflicting studies over organic food - By S.E. Smith | Think Progress
- Why I'm still going to buy organic - By Terry Boyd | The Christian Science Monitor
- Media coverage misleading on Stanford's organic vs. conventional food study - By Joel Dyer | Boulder Weekly