Six more takedowns of Stanford organic study — and media’s reporting on it

Photo courtesy of

A Stanford study that concluded organic food doesn’t provide greater nutritional benefit than conventionally grown food is taking its licks in the media.

Boulder Weekly’s analysis by Joel Dyer joins a chorus of reviews around the Internet pointing out the various flaws in the study, most glaringly that the reasons people purchase organics isn’t to get more nutrition from their food but to reduce pesticides and toxins.

For more analysis of the study, see the list of responses at Grist.