- Published: September 28, 2022
- Updated: September 28, 2022
- University / College: University of Victoria (UVic)
- Level: Undergraduate
- Language: English
- Downloads: 29
Much of the early part of Benbrook’s assessment focuses on comparing the Stanford study with another study that had significantly different conclusions. He points out many errors and ways that the first study, which did find significant benefits to eating nutrients. He argues vociferously that this study is the more valid of the two, and makes many good points along the way.
The main issue with this article, however, is that it does not deal extensively enough with the main problem with the Stanford study: that it did not address the fundamental reasons people eat organic vegetables: health. The Stanford study seemed to define nutrition through the very narrow window of the number of minerals and vitamins present in a piece of food. Yet there are many other ways what a person eats can affect them, such as pesticide intake. While Benbrook’s review did address the idea that the Stanford study failed to examine all aspects of food and health, he did not pay enough attention to that point.