research study about food

An official website of the United States government

Official websites use .gov A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

Secure .gov websites use HTTPS A lock ( Lock Locked padlock icon ) or https:// means you've safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Publications
Account settings
Advanced Search
Journal List

A Systematic Review of Organic Versus Conventional Food Consumption: Is There a Measurable Benefit on Human Health?

Vanessa vigar, stephen myers, christopher oliver, jacinta arellano, shelley robinson, carlo leifert.

Author information
Article notes
Copyright and License information

Correspondence: [email protected] ; Tel.: +61-421612713

Received 2019 Sep 25; Accepted 2019 Dec 13; Collection date 2020 Jan.

Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ).

The current review aims to systematically assess the evidence related to human health outcomes when an organic diet is consumed in comparison to its conventional counterpart. Relevant databases were searched for articles published to January 2019. Clinical trials and observational research studies were included where they provided comparative results on direct or indirect health outcomes. Thirty-five papers met the criteria for inclusion in the review. Few clinical trials assessed direct improvements in health outcomes associated with organic food consumption; most assessed either differences in pesticide exposure or other indirect measures. Significant positive outcomes were seen in longitudinal studies where increased organic intake was associated with reduced incidence of infertility, birth defects, allergic sensitisation, otitis media, pre-eclampsia, metabolic syndrome, high BMI, and non-Hodgkin lymphoma. The current evidence base does not allow a definitive statement on the health benefits of organic dietary intake. However, a growing number of important findings are being reported from observational research linking demonstrable health benefits with organic food consumption. Future clinical research should focus on using long-term whole-diet substitution with certified organic interventions as this approach is more likely to determine whether or not true measurable health benefits exist.

Keywords: health outcomes, organic, organic diet, pesticide-free, sustainable diet

1. Introduction

The global marketplace of organics has grown rapidly over the last few decades and consumer demand for organic products is increasing globally, with approximately 80 billion Euros ($92 billion USD) spent on organic products annually [ 1 ]. A recent report from the Research Institute of Organic Agriculture (FiBL) and IFOAM Organics International, shows a 14.7% increase in organic farmland from 2014 to 2015, totalling 50.9 million hectares, with Australia having the largest amount of agricultural land at 22.7 million hectares [ 2 ]. Organic food items most often consumed in Europe are organic baby foods followed by organic eggs, fruit and vegetables, then dairy products, with organic dairy reaching market shares of around 10 percent of overall sales in some European countries [ 2 ]. In the United States, fruit and vegetables make up the largest areas of organic food sales, followed by dairy products [ 3 ]. The reasons consumers are increasingly choosing organic over conventional food products are varied, including many reasons beside personal health and wellbeing, such as environmental concerns or animal welfare impact. However, the major determinants behind consumer purchase of organic products, is the belief that organic food is healthier or has a superior nutritional profile [ 4 , 5 , 6 ].

Regular consumers of organic food are most likely to be female, health-conscious, physically active, and in the higher brackets of education and income than their non-organic consuming counterparts [ 7 , 8 ]. They are also more likely to have a higher ratio of plant to animal foods, with a strong relationship between vegetarian/vegan consumers and organic consumption [ 7 , 9 ]. This consumer group generally has an increased wholefood dietary intake, as a result of both the general ethos of organic consumers (i.e., preference over processed/ultra-processed foods), and restricted use of additives in organic processed foods. Diet composition between organic and non-organic consumers may, therefore, be quite different.

The notion that organic food may be healthier has some support. Although there appears to be little variation between organic and conventional food products in terms of macro nutritional value (protein, fat, carbohydrate and dietary fibre), other compositional differences have been demonstrated. These include higher antioxidant concentrations (particularly polyphenols) in organic crops [ 10 ]; increased levels of omega-3 fatty acids in organic dairy products [ 11 , 12 , 13 ]; and improved fatty acid profiles in organic meat products [ 14 , 15 ]. These compositional differences are comprehensively discussed in several recent reviews [ 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 ]. There is preliminary evidence to suggest that these compositional differences may have an effect on plasma levels of certain nutrients including magnesium, fat-soluble micronutrients (α-carotene, β -carotene, lutein, and zeaxanthin), and fatty acids (linoleic, palmitoleic, γ-linolenic, and docosapentaenoic acids) [ 20 ]. Any possible clinical effects of such differences need further investigation.

Likely to be of more importance than compositional differences between the two, is what organic foods do not contain. Organic foods have been shown to have lower levels of toxic metabolites, including heavy metals such as cadmium, and synthetic fertilizer and pesticide residues [ 10 , 17 ]. Consumption of organic foods may also reduce exposure to antibiotic-resistant bacteria [ 19 ].

The long-term safety of pesticide consumption through conventional food production has been questioned, with evidence from long-term cohort studies covering areas ranging from possible neurotoxicity to endocrine disruption [ 21 ]. A number of widely used pesticides have been banned retrospectively only when unexpected negative health impacts have been identified [ 22 , 23 ]. From a regulatory perspective, dietary intake of pesticides is not considered to pose a health risk to consumers as long as individual pesticide concentrations in foods are below the Maximum Residue Level (MRL). Surveys conducted by both the European Food Safety Authority and the United States Department of Agriculture show that the vast majority of foods contained individual pesticide levels below the MRL, at 1.7% and 0.59%, respectively, found to exceed the limits. It was also found that 30.1% and 27.5%, respectively, of food samples analysed contained multiple pesticide residues [ 24 , 25 ]. One of the main criticisms of current regulatory pesticide approval processes is that they do not require safety testing of pesticide mixtures or formulations of pesticides [ 23 , 26 , 27 ]. There is considerable controversy about health risks posed by chronic low-level dietary pesticide exposure [ 28 , 29 , 30 ], and whilst lower levels of pesticide residue excretion is consistently observed during organic diet intakes [ 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 ], there is uncertainty around how this may impact the health of the consumer.

The last systematic review into the effect of organic food consumption on health was conducted by Dangour et al. in 2010 [ 35 ], which was limited to strict inclusion criteria of organic interventions, and Smith-Spangler et al. in 2012 [ 19 ], which contained only minimal focus on the human health effects of organic food, and a broader focus on nutritional content of organically and conventionally grown food and food safety. Although there have been other more recent reviews on the effects of organic diet on broader aspects of health [ 16 , 17 , 18 , 21 ], none have been systematic. The literature has expanded since these earlier systematic reviews, with many cohort and cross-sectional studies being published which compare organic versus conventional dietary intake on a range of health outcomes. Dangour et al. (2010) included 12 reports overall, of which eight were human studies (six clinical trials, one cohort study, 1 cross-section study), and four that reported animal or in vitro research. The Smith-Spangler et al. (2012) report was more comprehensive, including 17 human studies (in addition to 223 studies of comparative nutrient/contaminant profiles).

The present systematic review was designed to assess the breadth of evidence related to human health outcomes when an organic diet is consumed in comparison to its conventional counterpart. This review reports results from 35 studies including both clinical trial and observational research and includes substantially more papers than previous systematic reviews on this topic. This review does not include a comparison of nutritional quality between production types, safety of organic food, or human studies where environmental pesticide exposure is the focus.

2.1. Literature Search

This systematic review has been conducted in accordance with the guidelines of the Preferred Reporting Items of Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) statement [ 36 ].

Relevant studies were identified by a systematic search from the Cochrane, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and TOXNET databases for articles published in January 2019. Relevant keywords included terms related to organic dietary intake in combination with words relevant to health outcomes (i.e., asthma, eczema, obesity, diabetes). Search terms were amended slightly for each database. Articles with English titles and abstracts were considered for inclusion. The search strategy was developed by two authors (SM and VV) and was performed by VV in January 2019. Additional publications were identified from the reference lists of obtained articles that were included in the review. Refer to Supplementary Figure S1 (see online Supplementary Material ).

All articles that compared organic versus conventional dietary intake in relation to a direct or an indirect health outcome were included. We did not set out to limit paper inclusion by including a strict definition of organic intake, but accepted all papers that self-identified as representing comparative information on health outcomes from organic versus conventional diets. In doing so, we set out a priori to ensure we obtained a comprehensive snapshot of the available literature in this area.

2.2. Study Eligibility Criteria

2.2.1. population.

Only human feeding studies were included. Studies including infant participants measured from the second trimester of pregnancy were included where the mother gave dietary information during pregnancy.

2.2.2. Intervention

Any clinical trial where organic food items were taken to replace non-organic food items, or observational studies where there was a comparison between organic and non-organic dietary intake were included. This encompassed individual food or drink replacement, through to entire diet substitution. Observational research was accepted where dietary intake was classified according to level of organic food within individual dietary groups or whole diet.

2.2.3. Outcome

Clinical trials were included where they provided comparative results on direct or indirect health outcomes. Cohort studies were included where associations with development of disorder or disease were reported, or if they provided comparisons of biological samples across organic versus conventional dietary intake groups.

2.2.4. Study Designs

Types of studies included were randomised controlled trials (RCT), non-controlled trials, prospective or retrospective cohort studies, case-control studies and cross-sectional studies.

2.2.5. Exclusion Criteria

Articles were excluded if they were not specifically examining the effect of organic dietary intake with conventional dietary intake, or if they did not report on human biomarkers related to health, or disease development. Articles were excluded if they were concerned with occupational exposure to agricultural chemicals or domestic use of pesticides and unrelated to dietary consumption of organic versus non-organic foods.

2.3. Data Extraction

Two reviewers independently reviewed full articles for inclusion based on relevance to the study question and eligibility criteria. One reviewer (VV) extracted data from included studies, which was checked by a separate reviewer (SM). The details are presented in Table 1 and Table 2 , using the following parameters: (i) author and year of publication; (ii) study population including country of origin and key demographic detail; (iii) sample size; (iv) study design and duration of intervention/exposure; (vi) exposure to organic diet and comparator; (vii) outcomes assessed; (viii) results; (ix) organic definition.

Data extraction table—Clinical trials.

Abbreviations: 2-AAS: 2-amino-adipic semialdehyde; AMPA: aminomethylphosphonic acid; BMI: body mass index; C: control group; CKD: chronic kidney disease; Cat: catalase; CS: cabernet sauvignon; DAP: dialkylphosphate; DEP: diethylphosphate; DETP: diethylthiophosphate; DEDTP: diethyldithiophosphate; DMDTP: dimethyldithiophosphate; DMP: dimethylphosphate; DMTP: dimethylthiophosphate; DNA: deoxyribonucleic acid; DXA: dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry; FRAP: ferric reducing ability of plasma; GPx: glutathione peroxidase; GR: glutathione reductase; GSH: glutathione; Hcy: homocysteine; LDL: low density lipoprotein; MDA: malathion; NK: natural killer; NO: non-organic group; O: organic group; OP: organophosphate; ORAC: oxygen radical absorbance capacity; RCT: randomised controlled trial; SOD: superoxide dismutase; TAC: total antioxidant capacity; TAG: triacyglycerol; TBARS: thiobarbituric acid reactive substances; TCPy: 3,5,6-trichloro-2-pyridinol; TE: trolox equivalents; TEAC: trolox equivalents antioxidant capacity; Vit: vitamin; WBC: white blood cell.

Data extraction table - Observational Studies.

Abbreviations: AAR: artficially assisted reproduction; AL: anthroposophic lifestyle; ART: assisted reproductive technology; AMPA: aminomethylphosphonic acid; BMI: body mass index; CL: conventional lifestyle; DAP: dialkylphosphate; DETP: diethylthiophosphate; DMP: dimethylphosphate; DMTP: dimethylthiophosphate; FFQ: food frequency questionnaire; FV: fruits and vegetables; HR: hazard ratio; LOD: limit of detection; NO: non-organic group; O: organic group; OM: otitis media; OS: organic score; PBA: 3-phenoxybenzoic acid; PRBS: pesticide residue burden score; TFA: trans-fatty acid; TVA: trans-vaccenic acid; Vit: vitamin.

2.4. Assessment of Risk of Bias

The Cochrane Risk of Bias Assessment Tool was used to assess likelihood of bias in each clinical trial publication [ 67 ]. The Newcastle–Ottawa Quality Assessment Form for Cohort Studies was used to assess the likelihood of bias in cohort studies, and the Specialist Unit for Review Evidence (SURE) checklist was used for the critical appraisal of cross-sectional studies [ 68 , 69 ]. All assessments were conducted by at least two authors, with differences settled by discussion. Summary tables detailing results of bias assessments are presented in Supplementary Figure S2 .

3.1. Study Selection and Characteristics

The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) flow diagram detailing the article selection process is shown in Figure 1 . Searches identified 4329 potentially relevant articles, of which 4234 were excluded after initial screening of title and/or abstract. The remaining 95 full-text publications were assessed, of which a further 60 publications were excluded.

PRISMA flow diagram of study selection [ 36 ].

Thirty-five papers met the criteria for inclusion in this review. Of these, 15 publications reported on 13 clinical trials—three of which were parallel-arm randomised controlled trials (RCT), with the remaining studies utilising a crossover design. In observational studies, 20 publications reported on 13 cohorts. The studies were all published in English. The majority of the clinical trials were conducted in Europe—Germany (2), Denmark (2), Italy (2), France (1), and Switzerland (1), with other countries including: the United States (2), Turkey (1), Brazil (1), and Australia (1). Observational research studies were on cohorts from the United States, United Kingdom, Norway, France, Denmark, Netherlands, and Sweden.

3.2. Clinical Trials (Single Food/Drink Item Substitution)

Several studies investigated the effect of replacing a single non-organic food or drink item with its organic counterpart. Three of the trials utilised an acute dose setting (red wine, apples or grape juice) in a crossover design [ 40 , 42 , 48 ], while others were based on the daily consumption of the food item (tomatoes and derived purees, carrots or apples) for a period of 2–4 weeks [ 37 , 38 , 39 ]. Those studies looking at nutrient levels (i.e., carotenoids, polyphenols) [ 37 , 38 , 39 ] in biological samples (blood or urine), did not find any significant differences in the levels of these markers as a result of the organic intervention.

Other single-item substitution studies measured antioxidant capacity, or DNA damage in biological samples [ 38 , 39 , 40 , 42 , 48 ]. There were no significant between-group differences in these biomarkers in any of the studies.

3.3. Clinical Trials (Whole Diet Substitution)

Eight crossover trials (reported in nine publications) investigated the effect of whole diet replacement from conventional to organic (or at least >80% in one study) for a time period ranging from 4 or 5 days in children [ 31 , 43 , 44 ] to up to 22 days in adult populations [ 34 , 41 , 45 , 46 , 47 , 49 ].

Four of these trials (two in children and two in adults) measured changes in pesticide excretion through urine [ 31 , 34 , 43 , 44 , 49 ]. All of these trials demonstrated a significant difference in the amount of pesticide metabolites excreted during the different phases of the diet interventions. The reduction was, in most cases, dramatic (up to 90% reduction during organic phase) and occurred within a short time frame of only a few days.

The remaining trials were all conducted in adult populations and measured antioxidant capacity and flavonoid excretion [ 41 ]; carotenoids [ 47 ]; or antioxidant capacity, changes to body composition, lipids and inflammatory markers [ 45 , 46 ].

Similar to the results from clinical trials replacing single food items, individual flavonoid and carotenoid excretion appeared to reflect the content of the foods consumed (i.e., a higher quercetin, carotenoid and kaempferol level was shown in organic produce in comparison to conventional produce given as part of the diets, and this was reflected in the urinary output) [ 41 , 47 ].

Two studies completed by the same research group in Italy looked at the effects of a Mediterranean diet intervention (non-organic phase followed by organic phase). An initial pilot study of 10 people [ 45 ] and a following larger cohort study of 150 people (100 healthy and 50 with chronic kidney disease (CKD)) [ 46 ] provided a two-stage intervention, with a controlled Mediterranean diet (MD) for 14 days followed by the same diet for a further 14 days using organic rather than conventional foodstuffs.

The pilot study found an increased antioxidant effect (from 2.25 to 2.75 mM trolox equivalents) after 14 days MD and after 14 days organic MD, respectively, with no baseline measure provided. The authors also showed a generally higher antioxidant level in the organic foods eaten in comparison to non-organic. In the larger study, in both healthy and CKD patients there was a highly significant effect on body weight reduction and improved body composition seen through dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) and bio-impedance analysis (BIA) between the two time points (end of conventional MD and end of organic MD). Inflammatory markers (hs-CRP, IL-1, IL-6, IFN-γ and homocysteine) all showed a statistically significant decrease between the same time-points for the healthy group, whilst only hs-CRP and homocysteine were significantly decreased in the CKD group.

3.4. Observational cohort studies

From a total of 20 publications including 13 cohorts, seven prospective cohorts were identified, with the majority involving mother/child pairs. These included the Norwegian Mother and Child Cohort Study [ 55 , 56 ]; KOALA Birth Cohort [ 58 , 59 , 60 ]; ALLADIN study [ 61 ]; PELAIGE Mother–Child Cohort [ 62 ] and the EARTH study [ 52 ]. Two adult-only cohorts involved development of cancer incidence in the Million Women Study [ 65 ], and self-reported health factors in the Nutri-Net Santé Cohort Study [ 20 , 53 , 63 , 64 ]. A retrospective case-control study in a mother–child cohort was also included [ 57 ].

Several of the identified studies provided cross-section data only. These include comparisons of organic and conventional diets on sperm quality/content [ 50 , 51 ]; breast milk composition [ 66 ]; and urinary pesticide excretion [ 32 , 33 ].

For ease of reporting, all of the observational studies have been separated into subject areas. Firstly, looking at potential influence on foetal development (effect on sperm, fertility, and birth defects, pre-eclampsia); breast milk studies; development of allergies in children; urinary pesticide excretion; cancer development incidence; and changes in nutritional biomarkers in adults.

3.4.1. Sperm and Fertility

Two investigations examined the association between sperm health in Danish organic farmers. The first compares the organic farmers to non-organic farmers and shows a significantly lower proportion of morphologically normal spermatozoa in the non-organic group, but no significant difference in relation to 14 other semen parameters [ 51 ]. The other compares the organic farmers to a control group of airline pilots, finding a higher sperm concentration among organic farmers (increased by 43.1%, 95% CI 3.2 to 98.8%), with no differences seen in seminal volume, total sperm count, and sperm morphology [ 50 ].

The Environment and Reproductive Health (EARTH) study examined associations between high or low dietary pesticide exposure in a group of women using assisted reproduction technology (ART) at the Massachusetts General Hospital Fertility Center [ 52 ]. They compared pregnancy/birth outcomes from 325 women (contributing 541 ART cycles) against a dietary pesticide score. They found high-pesticide residue fruit and vegetable (FV) intake was inversely associated with probability of clinical pregnancy and live birth per initiated cycle. Compared with women in the lowest quartile of high-pesticide residue FV intake (<1 serving/day), women in the highest quartile (≥2.3 servings/day) had 18% (95%CI 5%–30%) lower probability of clinical pregnancy and 26% (95%CI 13%–37%) lower probability of live birth. High-pesticide residue FV intake was positively associated with probability of total pregnancy loss.

3.4.2. Mother–Child cohorts

The Norwegian Mother and Child Cohort Study (MoBa) investigated associations between an organic diet and conventional diet during pregnancy and the development of pregnancy complications, including pre-eclampsia [ 56 ] and incidence of the rare reproductive abnormalities in infant boys—hypospadias or cryptorchidism [ 55 ]. Women who reported to have eaten organic vegetables ‘often’ or ‘mostly’ ( n = 2493, 8.8% of study-sample) were found to have a lower risk of pre-eclampsia than those who reported ‘never/rarely’ or ‘sometimes’ (OR = 0.76, 95%CI 0.61, 0.96). A lower prevalence of hypospadias with any organic consumption, in particular organic vegetables, was found, with no difference for cryptorchidism. This prospective study included 35,107 mothers of male infants in Norway, with organic food in six food groups assessed by food frequency questionnaires (FFQ) [ 55 ]. Whole diet composition was considered using slightly different methods in each of these analyses; therefore, residual confounding may exist between the results reported. In a smaller case-control study, retrospective data were collected from mothers of 306 infant males who were operated on for hypospadias matched to 306 mothers of healthy infant males in Denmark. No difference was found for total organic consumption, but increased odds for hypospadias were found specifically when non-organic milk/dairy consumption was combined with frequent consumption of high-fat dairy products (adjusted OR = 2.18, 95%CI 1.09, 4.36) [ 57 ].

The PELAIGE study in France ( n = 1505) was a prospective cohort study that examined the incidence of otitis media during early childhood, finding frequent intake of organic diet during pregnancy was associated with decreased risk of having at least one episode of otitis media (OR = 0.69, 95%CI 0.47, 1.00) [ 62 ]. A sub-group analysis measuring pesticide residues in urine, found the presence of dealkylated triazine metabolites was positively associated with recurrent otitis media (OR = 2.12, 95%CI 1.01, 4.47).

The influence of organic food consumption as part of an anthroposophical lifestyle in pregnancy and early childhood has been discussed following two major studies—the KOALA birth cohort in the Netherlands [ 60 , 70 , 71 ], and the ALADDIN birth cohort in Sweden [ 61 ]. In the KOALA cohort ( n = 2764), consumption of organic dairy products was associated with lower eczema risk (OR = 0.64, 95%CI 0.44, 0.93), but there was no association for other food types or overall organic content of diet with the development of eczema, wheeze or atopic sensitisation. No statistically significant associations were observed between organic food consumption and recurrent wheeze (OR = 0.51, 95%CI 0.26, 0.99) during the first 2 years of life [ 60 ]. In the ALADDIN study ( n = 330), a markedly decreased risk of sensitisation during the first 2 years of life was seen in children of anthroposophic families compared with children of non-anthroposophic families with adjusted OR of 0.25 (95%CI 0.10, 0.64, p = 0.004) [ 61 ].

It is important to note that organic food consumption is only one of several food-specific differences that are a key part of the anthroposophic lifestyle (see discussion).

3.4.3. Early Childhood

Minimal changes were seen in breastmilk composition in the KOALA birth cohort study, with increased rumenic acid and a trend for increased trans-vaccenic acid in quartiles of highest organic consumption [ 58 ]. No difference was seen in trans fatty acid content within the same cohort [ 60 ]. An American study examining milk and urine samples of lactating women for glyphosate and aminomethylphosphonic acid (AMPA) did not find any evidence of these chemicals in the breast milk of conventional or organic food consumers [ 66 ].

Similar to the findings in urinary output of pesticides found in clinical trial research, cross-sectional analysis of organophosphorus metabolites in children ( n = 39) show that those consuming organic foods have considerably lower levels of dimethyl metabolites in their urine than those consuming conventional diets (0.03 and 0.17 μmol/L, p < 0.001), respectively [ 33 ].

3.4.4. Adult Research

The Nutri-Net Santé Cohort has analysed data from 62,224 participants enrolled in France, through an internet-based survey, with information on frequency of organic food consumption and repeated anthropometric data. The data was predominantly self-reported. An increase in the organic score was associated with a lower risk of being overweight (OR = 0.77, 95%CI 0.68, 0.86, p < 0.0001). The association remained strong and highly significant, with a reduction in the risk of obesity of 37% after a 3.1-year follow-up [ 63 ]. A cross-section of the cohort ( n = 8174) examined for metabolic syndrome also detailed positive impact of an organic diet with an adjusted prevalence ratio of 0.69 (95%CI 0.61, 0.78) when comparing the third tertile of organic food in the diet with the first one ( p < 0.0001) [ 64 ]. Additionally, a nested case-control study ( n = 300) evaluated pesticide metabolites excreted in the urine within the group, finding significantly lower levels of pesticide metabolites among organic consumers versus conventional consumers, with median concentration levels of investigated metabolites for diethylphosphate (0.196 versus 0.297), dimethylphosphate (0.620 versus 1.382), and total dialkylphosphates (0.12 versus 0.16), p < 0.05 [ 54 ].

A separate prospective cohort study in adults that estimated organophosphate exposure from food frequency records of 4466 multi-ethnic older Americans, measured urinary pesticide excretion in a sub-group ( n = 240) and found that higher levels of estimated dietary organophosphate exposure were associated with higher dialkylphosphate concentrations excreted in the urine ( p < 0.05) [ 32 ].

The Million Women Study in the United Kingdom examined any association with cancer incidence and organic diet over a 9-year follow-up period in 1.3 million women. They found no association for reduced cancer incidence in the group, with the exception of a possibly lower incidence of non-Hodgkin lymphoma [ 65 ].

The Nutri-Net Santé group also investigated associations with cancer incidence in a cohort of 68,946 participants [ 53 ]. The group, followed for a mean of 4.6 years, report that after adjustment for confounders, high organic food scores were linearly and negatively associated with the overall risk of cancer (HR for Q4 vs Q1, 0.75; 95%CI, 0.63–0.88; p for trend = 0.001; absolute risk reduction, 0.6%; HR for a 5-point increase, 0.92; 95%CI 0.88–0.96). Amongst specific cancers, they found a decreased risk of developing non-Hodgkin lymphoma ( p = 0.049) and postmenopausal breast cancer, with no association for other types of cancer. The information on non-Hodgkin lymphoma is similar to that found in the Million Women study; however, the information related to breast cancer was in direct contrast.

A nested matched case-control study of 300 participants (150 low and 150 high organic food consumers) within the Nutri-Net Santé had serum samples analysed for differences in nutritional biomarkers [ 20 ]. No significant differences were found between the 2 groups for α-tocopherol and retinol, cadmium, copper, ferritin or transferrin. Organic consumers exhibited higher plasma concentrations of α-carotene, β -carotene, lutein, and zeaxanthin, whereas no differences were found for other carotenoids ( β -cryptoxanthin and lycopene). Organic consumers had higher levels of magnesium and a lower plasma concentration of iron. Within the fatty acid analysis, organic consumers had lower palmitoleic acid, γ-linolenic acid, and docosapentaenoic acid and higher linoleic acid concentrations. The results of these participants, matched for dietary patterns and other health factors, indicates a possible mild modulation of nutritional levels between organic and non-organic consumers.

3.5. Bias Assessments

The results of bias assessment for cohort studies showed all studies as good or fair, with no studies returning an assessment of poor. Cross-sectional studies were assessed as having a low risk of bias, with the exception of Jensen et al. (1996), which was a short report, with high bias due to missing detail. Within the clinical trials reviewed, the risk of bias was classified as high in several areas, specifically those related to blinding and allocation concealment. Due to the nature of the intervention, in some cases, it was difficult to adequately blind participants (i.e., food packaging, replacement of ‘usual’ diet products). There were, however, several studies [ 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 ] where blinding and randomisation is stated, but the method is not adequately reported and, therefore, they have received an unclear risk of bias in these areas. Many of the studies were not randomised, providing one diet followed by the alternate diet for all participants concurrently.

Significant bias likely to affect the outcomes of the reports was found for two studies conducted by the same research group in Italy [ 45 , 46 ]. In both cases, all participants received a controlled Mediterranean diet (MD) for 14 days followed by the same diet for a further 14 days using organic rather than conventional foodstuffs, with no washout between diet arms. This introduces a significant risk of bias for the validity of the outcomes for the organic diet intervention as it may be a cumulative effect of the MD changes, rather than a specific effect for the organic component of the diet.

Another study with high risk of bias was the study by Goen et al. [ 49 ] as it contained only two people in the treatment group, in an open-label crossover trial, with no washout between diets. Results of bias assessments are shown in Supplementary Figure S2 .

3.6. Quality of included Reviews

No formal grading system was applied to the included articles; however, elements of study quality, including high risk of bias or un-realistic results have been discussed for individual articles throughout the review. Several included articles in this present review were not accepted in the previous systematic review into this topic conducted by Dangour et al. (2010). These include pesticide excretion studies [ 33 , 72 ] and a cross-sectional study on semen analyses [ 51 ], excluded on the basis of being contaminant studies; and a second semen analysis study [ 73 ], excluded as an occupational health study. The rationale for our inclusion of these studies is that although occupational exposure may have been a factor in the Larsen study [ 73 ], the method of calculating pesticide exposure was based entirely on food intake. Pesticide excretion studies were included as this was considered potentially important for health, and these studies are also included in other reviews discussing comparison of organic and conventional food intakes on health, i.e., Smith-Spangler et al. [ 19 ].

4. Discussion

This systematic review reports on a wide range of interventional (15 publications) and observational studies (20 publications/13 cohorts), where the health effects of organic diet consumption (whole diet or partial replacement) are compared to conventional diet consumption. Substantially more papers are included compared to previous systematic reviews on this topic [ 19 , 35 ] with varying levels of bias and quality.

4.1. Clinical Trials

The included clinical trials use a diverse range of methodologies, all involving short-term food substitutions. These range from acute intake of a single dietary item (conventional or organic), to entire diet substitution over a maximum exposure time of 4 weeks, with most of the studies utilising a 2-week intervention period. The majority of the results show no, or minimal, significant differences between organic (O) and non-organic (NO) treatments in the biomarkers selected. In several of these trials, a single food or drink [ 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 42 , 47 , 48 ] was substituted for their organic equivalent. Those studies that also compared the composition of the two food items found there was no difference in the concentration of the nutrient of interest (i.e., lycopene) between O and NO foods [ 37 , 38 , 47 ]. It seems logical, therefore, that a change in participants’ samples would seem unlikely unless there was positive laboratory evidence to demonstrate a specific difference between the NO and O substance that could lead to a biologically plausible difference in vivo.

Similarly, in whole-diet substitution studies, those that examined antioxidant capacity or nutrients in biomarkers, generally did not show between-group differences, which again appeared to be reflective of the laboratory values of these nutrients were measured [ 41 , 47 ]. However, one study did show a significant change in antioxidant capacity [ 45 ]. This study, and a related trial [ 46 ], which was the only trial to assess a direct health outcome, both provided a NO Mediterranean diet intervention for 2 weeks prior to 2 weeks of the same O Mediterranean diet. There are several issues with the methodology of this model, these and the associated high risk of bias are discussed further in Section 3.5 . The reported weight loss and body composition changes in this study appear unrealistic for the 14-day time frame. The authors report a mean weight loss of 5.6 kg, with mean (SD) weight change from the end of NO diet to end of O diet was 85.17 (±13.97) to 79.52 (±10.41), p = 0.0365. The fat loss is reported as 7.18 kg over the two week period from 23.36 (±8.88) to 16.18 (±3.34), p = 0.0054, there was also a non-significant 1.18 kg rise in lean muscle mass, from 53.45 (±6.69) to 54.63 (±6.76) [ 46 ]. Without baseline assessments provided before any dietary intervention in this group, the effect of the organic intervention cannot be relied upon.

Whole-diet substitution trials that measured changes in pesticide excretion showed significant and substantial reductions during the O diet phase [ 31 , 34 , 43 , 44 , 49 ], and are discussed under Section 4.3 .

To date, there are no long-term clinical trials measuring direct health outcomes from organic diet intervention. The short timeframe of currently available clinical trials is a serious limitation in assessing demonstrable health benefits. Additionally, only surrogate markers of health have been applied to the majority of clinical trials, with most trials measuring antioxidant levels or pesticide metabolite excretion.

4.2. Observational Research

Observational research, which has followed cohorts for up to 10 years (Nutri-Net Santé and the Million Women study), has investigated a range of hypotheses regarding organic diet and health. Studies included in this review report positive associations between organic diet consumption and a range of areas, including fertility, birth defects, allergic sensitisation, non-Hodgkin lymphoma and metabolic syndrome.

Findings from two cross-sectional reports on semen parameters detailed mixed findings, and although the majority of tested parameters showed no significant differences, higher sperm concentration in O consumers [ 50 ] and lower normal sperm in NO consumers [ 51 ] offer preliminary data that is worthy of further exploration. In female fertility, very positive associations between low dietary pesticide exposure and successful pregnancy and birth outcomes in women undergoing assisted reproduction have been reported in one study [ 52 ]. Given the declining fertility rates and poorer semen quality being reported worldwide [ 74 ], higher odds of achieving clinical pregnancy and live birth with an organic diet is a significant and important finding. A reduction in risk of birth defects (hypospadias) [ 55 , 57 ], but not cryptorchidism [ 55 ], and reduced risk of pre-eclampsia [ 56 ] add further evidence for organic diet use through pregnancy.

In children, increased risk of recurrent otitis media has been positively associated with pesticide intake [ 62 ], and decreased allergic sensitisation was shown in families following an anthroposophical lifestyle, in comparison to a conventional cohort in the Assessment of Lifestyle and Allergic Disease During Infancy (ALLADIN) study [ 61 ]. Consumption of organic dairy products was associated with lower eczema risk as the only significant positive outcome in a similar study (KOALA) [ 60 , 70 , 71 ]. There are other studies that have supported lower rates of allergic sensitisation from an anthroposophical lifestyle; however, the contribution of organic foods in these studies was not sufficient for them to be included in this review [ 75 , 76 , 77 ]. Specific confounding factors related to anthroposophic studies are discussed in Section 4.4 .

The largest studies reporting on adult populations include the Nutri-Net Santé Cohort Study (France), and the Million Women Study (UK). Both of these studies have investigated associations with cancer risk [ 64 , 65 ], with both finding reduced risk of developing non-Hodgkin lymphoma with increased organic consumption. Other findings between the two studies were similar, with a very small risk reduction (0.6%) for all cancers in France, but no risk reduction in the UK. Postmenopausal breast cancer rates were decreased in high-O consumers [ 64 ], but overall breast cancer risk slightly increased in the alternate study [ 65 ]. Different adjustment variables between the studies may have been partly responsible for the different outcomes reported, i.e., the Million Women Study adjusted for hormone replacement in breast cancer, which the Nutri-Net Santé study did not report.

Other findings from the Nutri-Net Santé study show reductions in overweight and risk of obesity, as well as reduced incidence of metabolic syndrome demonstrated in favor of organic food intake [ 63 , 64 ]. Whilst this was self-reported data, there is evidence from other association studies that supports dysregulation of several key facets involved in metabolic syndrome in association with serum pesticides [ 78 , 79 ].

As with any observational studies, there is difficulty in determining the causality of the associations that have been observed. It is possible that the benefits of organic diets are associated only with long-term consumption, or result from lifestyle factors or dietary patterns, which is much harder to model in prospective clinical trials.

4.3. Pesticide Excretion

One of the major benefits proposed for organic food is the reduction in exposure to chemicals such as pesticides. Pesticide residues are found in differing amounts across predominantly, fruits and vegetables, but also, grain and dairy products, with much lower amounts found in animal products (except liver, which contains high levels) [ 24 ].

The major class of pesticides tested for in the organic food literature reviewed for this paper were the organophosphates, the metabolites of which can be measured in the urine as markers of recent exposure. The most commonly detected metabolites are dimethylphosphate, dimethylthiophosphate, diethylphosphate, and diethylthiophosphate. In some studies, herbicide exposure was also assessed, mainly glyphosate, often assessed through its metabolite aminomethylphosphonic acid. Interventions with organic diets markedly reduced the levels of these compounds, and observational studies in adults and children also show reduced urinary metabolite levels in organic versus conventional diets.

Given that several organophosphorus (OP) insecticides and glyphosate (an OP herbicide and the world’s most widely used agricultural chemical) were recently re-classified by the WHO’s International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) as being “probably carcinogenic” [ 80 ], reduced exposure may potentially benefit health. Results of recent reviews comparing pesticide residues in organic and conventional foods conclude that organic food consumption is one approach to substantially minimise exposure to pesticides [ 17 , 21 ].

The impact of switching to organic food consumption on reducing dietary pesticide exposure may be higher in consumers that follow current dietary guidelines for wholegrain and fruit/vegetable consumption. Foods may also be ‘pesticide-free’ but not ‘organic’. It is well documented that pesticide concentrations in wholegrain and wholemeal products are higher than in polished grains such as white flour products (since the outer bran layers of grains have higher pesticide loads then the endosperm) [ 81 ]. Apart from wholegrain products, fruits and vegetables are the main dietary source for pesticide exposure and recent European monitoring showed that multiple residues and concentrations above the MRL are most frequently found in fruit and vegetables [ 24 ].

4.4. Confounders of Results

Lifestyle factors amongst organic consumers are likely to have an important impact on external validity. Organic consumers tend to be more health conscious, are more likely to be vegetarian or vegan and are more likely to be physically active [ 7 , 8 ].

Epidemiological research has shown consumers of organic food generally have a diet that is higher in plant-based food, lower in animal products, with a higher intake of legumes, nuts, and wholegrains than their conventional food-consuming counterparts. These dietary patterns are likely to have significant health benefits in comparison to what is commonly recognised as the standard Western diet, a diet categorised by highly refined, low-fibre, omnivorous diets low in fruits, vegetables and other plant-based foods [ 82 ]. A wholefood diet (high in fibre and plant matter) also has demonstrable effects on a healthy diverse microbiota, which is linked to overall health [ 83 ]. The organic consumer group may, therefore, not be representative of the general population, i.e., any benefits from organic food consumption may be attributable partly to increased wholefood intake and a healthier lifestyle.

Whole diet composition and diet quality have been measured and adjusted for in different ways in observational research, with varying elements of the diet included as part of the ‘organic intake’ data collected. It is possible that the benefit observed for organic intake may be partly due to the quality and composition of the diet rather than a direct effect of organic food consumption. Additionally, validation of self-reported organic intake in observational studies is lacking.

The included cohorts from anthroposophical backgrounds (ALLADIN and KOALA birth cohorts) adds an additional layer of confounding, as the consumption of organic food forms only a small part of the dietary measures adopted in this group. Anthroposophy includes a strong focus on fermented foods, biodynamic production, use of butter and olive oil as predominant fats, and long-term breastfeeding [ 60 , 61 ]. This is combined with other factors such as reduced levels of antibiotic and medication use and a high proportion of plant foods, which together may impact on the overall health of mothers and babies, and influence the results shown.

4.5. Limitations

In the included studies, there was wide heterogeneity in the definition and application of the term ‘organic’ and the percentage of organic food replacement in the diet. This makes any interpretation on the benefits or otherwise of organic food consumption very difficult. No formal grading system was applied to the included studies. A grading criteria, such as that employed by Dangour et al. (2010), would have been helpful to categorise the research according to quality. The review was limited by the non-inclusion of foreign language databases.

5. Conclusions

A growing number of important findings are being reported from observational research linking demonstrable health benefits to levels of organic food consumption. Clinical trial research has been short-term and measured largely surrogate markers with limited positive results.

Pesticide excretion studies have consistently shown a reduction in urinary pesticide metabolites with an organic diet; however, there is insufficient evidence to show translation into clinically relevant and meaningful health outcomes. There is a need for studies to move beyond simply measuring the reduction in pesticide exposure with organic food, to investigating measurable health benefits.

The finding that organic food consumption substantially reduces urinary OP levels is important information for consumers, who would like to take a precautionary approach and minimise OP-pesticide exposure. Given the current knowledge on the toxicity of these chemicals, it seems possible that ongoing reduced exposure may translate to health benefits.

While findings from this systematic review showed significant positive outcomes from observational studies in several areas, including reduced incidence of metabolic syndrome, high BMI, non-Hodgkin lymphoma, infertility, birth defects, allergic sensitisation, otitis media and pre-eclampsia, the current evidence base does not allow a definitive statement on the long-term health benefits of organic dietary intake. Consumption of organic food is often tied to overall healthier dietary practices and lower levels of overweight and obesity, which are likely to be influential in the results of observational research.

Recommendations for Future Research

Single-food substitution studies have shown no benefits and should not be undertaken without substantive pre-clinical data. Additionally, surrogate markers, i.e., antioxidant levels and pesticide excretion, are insufficient to determine actual benefit to health and ideally should be coupled with measurements related to specific health outcomes. Unlike the current exposure studies which measure changes in days or weeks, longer-term health benefit studies are needed. Specifically, long-term whole-diet substitution studies, using certified organic interventions will provide the most reliable evidence to answer the question of whether an organic diet provides true measurable health benefits.

Additional research options may include further evaluation of biological data collected through previous large cohort studies, such as the Nutri-Net Santé study [ 84 ], and the MoBa biobank [ 85 ], to test hypotheses on organic diet and health.

Supplementary Materials

The following are available online at https://www.mdpi.com/2072-6643/12/1/7/s1 , Figure S1: Medline search strategy, Figure S2: Risk of bias summary tables.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, S.M. and C.L.; methodology, S.M. and V.V.; data curation, V.V.; writing—original draft preparation, V.V.; S.M.; C.O.; J.A.; S.R.; writing—review and editing, V.V.; C.O. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

A grant from the Pro Vice-Chancellor (Research) at Southern Cross University partially funded this study.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest. The research team are associated with a research centre in organic food, and have remained mindful to ensure this review was objective, transparent and reproducible.

1. IFOAM . Consolidated Annual Report of IFOAM-Organics International. IFOAM; Bonn, Germany: 2018. [ Google Scholar ]
2. Willer H., Lernoud J. The World of Organic Agriculture. Statistics and Emerging Trends. Research Institute of Organic Agriculture (FiBL) & IFOAM-Organics International; Frick, Switzerland: 2017. [ Google Scholar ]
3. USDA U.S. Organic Food Sales by Category: 2005-14E. [(accessed on 31 July 2018)]; Available online: https://www.ers.usda.gov/topics/natural-resources-environment/organic-agriculture/organic-market-overview/
4. Apaolaza V., Hartmann P., D’Souza C., López C.M. Eat organic–Feel good? The relationship between organic food consumption, health concern and subjective wellbeing. Food Qual. Prefer. 2018;63:51–62. doi: 10.1016/j.foodqual.2017.07.011. [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
5. Hoefkens C., Verbeke W., Aertsens J., Mondelaers K., Van Camp J. The nutritional and toxicological value of organic vegetables. Br. Food. J. 2009;111:1062–1077. doi: 10.1108/00070700920992916. [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
6. van de Vijver L.P.L., van Vliet M.E.T. Health effects of an organic diet-Consumer experiences in the Netherlands. J. Sci. Food Agric. 2012;92:2923–2927. doi: 10.1002/jsfa.5614. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
7. Baudry J., Méjean C., Péneau S., Galan P., Hercberg S., Lairon D., Kesse-Guyot E. Health and dietary traits of organic food consumers: Results from the NutriNet-Santé study. Br. J. Nutr. 2015;114:2064–2073. doi: 10.1017/S0007114515003761. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
8. Eisinger-Watzl M., Wittig F., Heuer T., Hoffmann I. Customers purchasing organic food-Do they live healthier? Results of the German National Nutrition Survey II. Eur. J. Nutr. Food Saf. 2015;5:59–71. doi: 10.9734/EJNFS/2015/12734. [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
9. Simões-Wüst A.P., Moltó-Puigmartí C., van Dongen M.C., Dagnelie P.C., Thijs C. Organic food consumption during pregnancy is associated with different consumer profiles, food patterns and intake: The KOALA Birth Cohort Study. Public Health Nutr. 2017;20:2134–2144. doi: 10.1017/S1368980017000842. [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
10. Barański M., Średnicka-Tober D., Volakakis N., Seal C., Sanderson R., Stewart G.B., Benbrook C., Biavati B., Markellou E., Giotis C., et al. Higher antioxidant and lower cadmium concentrations and lower incidence of pesticide residues in organically grown crops: A systematic literature review and meta-analyses. Br. J. Nutr. 2014;112:794–811. doi: 10.1017/S0007114514001366. [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
11. Benbrook C.M., Butler G., Latif M.A., Leifert C., Davis D.R. Organic Production Enhances Milk Nutritional Quality by Shifting Fatty Acid Composition: A United States–Wide, 18-Month Study. PLoS ONE. 2013;8:e82429. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0082429. [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
12. Palupi E., Jayanegara A., Ploeger A., Kahl J. Comparison of nutritional quality between conventional and organic dairy products: A meta-analysis. J. Sci. Food Agric. 2012;92:2774–2781. doi: 10.1002/jsfa.5639. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
13. Srednicka-Tober D., Baranski M., Seal C., Sanderson R., Benbrook C., Steinshamn H., Gromadzka-Ostrowska J., Rembialkowska E., Skwarlo-Sonìta K., Eyre M., et al. Higher PUFA and n-3 PUFA, conjugated linoleic acid, [...]-tocopherol and iron, but lower iodine and selenium concentrations in organic milk: A systematic literature review and meta- and redundancy analyses. Br. J. Nutr. 2016;115:1043–1060. doi: 10.1017/S0007114516000349. [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
14. Ribas-Agusti A., Diaz I., Sarraga C., Garcia-Regueiro J.A., Castellari M. Nutritional properties of organic and conventional beef meat at retail. J. Sci. Food Agric. 2019;99:4218–4225. doi: 10.1002/jsfa.9652. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
15. Srednicka-Tober D., Baranski M., Seal C., Sanderson R., Benbrook C., Steinshamn H., Gromadzka-Ostrowska J., Rembialkowska E., Skwarlo-Sonìta K., Eyre M., et al. Composition differences between organic and conventional meat: A systematic literature review and meta-analysis. Br. J. Nutr. 2016;115:994–1011. doi: 10.1017/S0007114515005073. [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
16. Barański M., Rempelos L., Iversen P.O., Leifert C. Effects of organic food consumption on human health; the jury is still out! Food Nutr. Res. 2017;61:1287333. doi: 10.1080/16546628.2017.1287333. [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
17. Brantsæter A.L., Ydersbond T.A., Hoppin J.A., Haugen M., Meltzer H.M. Organic food in the diet: Exposure and health implications. Annu. Rev. Public Health. 2017;38:295–313. doi: 10.1146/annurev-publhealth-031816-044437. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
18. Hurtado-Barroso S., Tresserra-Rimbau A., Vallverdu-Queralt A., Lamuela-Raventos R.M. Organic food and the impact on human health. Crit. Rev. Food Sci. Nutr. 2017;59:704–714. doi: 10.1080/10408398.2017.1394815. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
19. Smith-Spangler C., Brandeau M.L., Hunter G.E., Clay Bavinger J., Pearson M., Eschbach P.J., Sundaram V., Liu H., Schirmer P., Stave C., et al. Are organic foods safer or healthier than conventional alternatives?: A systematic review. Ann. Intern. Med. 2012;157:348–366. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-157-5-201209040-00007. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
20. Baudry J., Ducros V., Druesne-Pecollo N., Galan P., Hercberg S., Debrauwer L., Amiot M.J., Lairon D., Kesse-Guyot E. Some Differences in Nutritional Biomarkers are Detected Between Consumers and Nonconsumers of Organic Foods: Findings from the BioNutriNet Project. Curr. Dev. Nutr. 2018;3:nzy090. doi: 10.1093/cdn/nzy090. [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
21. Mie A., Andersen H.R., Gunnarsson S., Kahl J., Kesse-Guyot E., Rembiałkowska E., Quaglio G., Grandjean P. Human health implications of organic food and organic agriculture: A comprehensive review. Environ. Health. 2017;16:111. doi: 10.1186/s12940-017-0315-4. [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
22. European Environment Agency . Late Lessons from Early Warnings: Science, Precaution, Innovation. European Environment Agency; Copenhagen, Danmark: 2013. [ Google Scholar ]
23. Mesnage R., Antoniou M.N. Ignoring adjuvant toxicity falsifies the safety profile of commercial pesticides. Front. Public Health. 2018;5:361. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2017.00361. [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
24. EFSA The 2016 European Union report on pesticide residues in food. EFSA J. 2018;16:5348. doi: 10.2903/j.efsa.2018.5348. [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
25. United States Department of Agriculture . Pesticide Data Program: Annual Summary. United States Department of Agriculture; Washington, DC, USA: 2017. pp. 1–203. [ Google Scholar ]
26. Lydy M., Belden J., Wheelock C., Hammock B., Denton D. Challenges in regulating pesticide mixtures. Ecol. Soc. 2004;9:1. doi: 10.5751/ES-00694-090601. [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
27. Rizzati V., Briand O., Guillou H., Gamet-Payrastre L. Effects of pesticide mixtures in human and animal models: An update of the recent literature. Chem. Biol. Interact. 2016;254:231–246. doi: 10.1016/j.cbi.2016.06.003. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
28. Mostafalou S., Abdollahi M. Pesticides: An update of human exposure and toxicity. Arch. Toxicol. 2017;91:549–599. doi: 10.1007/s00204-016-1849-x. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
29. Tago D., Andersson H., Treich N. Pesticides and health: A review of evidence on health effects, valuation of risks, and benefit-cost analysis. Adv. Health Econ. Health Serv. Res. 2014;24:203–295. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
30. WHO Pesticide Residues in Food–2016: Toxicological Evaluations; Proceedings of the Joint Meeting of the FAO Panel of Experts on Pesticide Residues in Food and the Environment and the WHO Core Assessment Group on Pesticide Residues; Geneva, Switzerland. 9–13 May 2016. [ Google Scholar ]
31. Bradman A., Quirós-Alcalá L., Castorina R., Schall R.A., Camacho J., Holland N.T., Barr D.B., Eskenazi B. Effect of organic diet intervention on pesticide exposures in young children living in low-income urban and agricultural communities. Environ. Health Perspect. 2015;123:1086–1093. doi: 10.1289/ehp.1408660. [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
32. Curl C.L., Beresford S.A.A., Fenske R.A., Fitzpatrick A.L., Lu C., Nettleton J.A., Kaufman J.D. Estimating pesticide exposure from dietary intake and organic food choices: The Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (MESA) Environ. Health Perspect. 2015;123:475–483. doi: 10.1289/ehp.1408197. [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
33. Curl C.L., Fenske R.A., Elgethum K. Organophosphorus pesticide exposure of urban and suburban preschool children with organic and conventional diets. Environ. Health Perspect. 2003;111:377–382. doi: 10.1289/ehp.5754. [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
34. Oates L., Cohen M., Braun L., Schembri A., Taskova R. Reduction in urinary organophosphate pesticide metabolites in adults after a week-long organic diet. Environ. Res. 2014;132:105–111. doi: 10.1016/j.envres.2014.03.021. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
35. Dangour A.D., Lock K., Hayter A., Aikenhead A., Allen E., Uauy R. Nutrition-related health effects of organic foods: A systematic review. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 2010;92:203–210. doi: 10.3945/ajcn.2010.29269. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
36. Moher D., Liberati A., Tetzlaff J., Altman D.G., Group T.P. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement. Ann. Intern. Med. 2009;151:264–269. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-151-4-200908180-00135. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
37. Caris-Veyrat C., Amiot M.J., Tyssandier V., Grasselly D., Buret M., Mikolajczak M., Guilland J.C., Bouteloup-Demange C., Borel P. Influence of organic versus conventional agricultural practice on the antioxidant microconstituent content of tomatoes and derived purees; consequences on antioxidant plasma status in humans. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2004;52:6503–6509. doi: 10.1021/jf0346861. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
38. Stracke B.A., Rufer C.E., Bub A., Briviba K., Seifert S., Kunz C., Watzl B. Bioavailability and nutritional effects of carotenoids from organically and conventionally produced carrots in healthy men. Br. J. Nutr. 2009;101:1664–1672. doi: 10.1017/S0007114508116269. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
39. Stracke B.A., Rufer C.E., Bub A., Seifert S., Weibel F.P., Kunz C., Watzl B. No effect of the farming system (organic/conventional) on the bioavailability of apple (Malus domestica Bork, cultivar Golden Delicious) polyphenols in healthy men: A comparative study. Eur. J. Nutr. 2010;49:301–310. doi: 10.1007/s00394-009-0088-9. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
40. Briviba K., Stracke B.A., Rufer C.E., Watzl B., Weibel F.P., Bub A. Effect of consumption of organically and conventionally produced apples on antioxidant activity and DNA damage in humans. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2007;55:7716–7721. doi: 10.1021/jf0710534. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
41. Grinder-Pedersen L., Rasmussen S.E., Bugel S., Jorgensen L.V., Dragsted L.O., Gundersen V., Sandstrom B. Effect of diets based on foods from conventional versus organic production on intake and excretion of flavonoids and markers of antioxidative defense in humans. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2003;51:5671–5676. doi: 10.1021/jf030217n. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
42. Akçay Y.D., Yıldırım H.K., Güvenç U., Sözmen E.Y. The effects of consumption of organic and nonorganic red wine on low-density lipoprotein oxidation and antioxidant capacity in humans. Nutr. Res. 2004;24:541–554. doi: 10.1016/j.nutres.2004.04.004. [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
43. Lu C., Toepel K., Irish R., Fenske R.A., Barr D.B., Bravo R. Organic diets significantly lower children’s dietary exposure to organophosphorus pesticides. Environ. Health Perspect. 2006;114:260–263. doi: 10.1289/ehp.8418. [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
44. Lu C., Barr D.B., Pearson M.A., Waller L.A. Dietary intake and its contribution to longitudinal organophosphorus pesticide exposure in urban/suburban children. Environ. Health Perspect. 2008;116:537–542. doi: 10.1289/ehp.10912. [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
45. Di Renzo L., Di Pierro D., Bigioni M., Sodi V., Galvano F., Cianci R., La Fauci L., De Lorenzo A. Is antioxidant plasma status in humans a consequence of the antioxidant food content influence? Eur. Rev. Med. Pharmacol. Sci. 2007;11:185–192. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
46. De Lorenzo A., Noce A., Bigioni M., Calabrese V., Della Rocca D.G., Di Daniele N., Tozzo C., Di Renzo L. The effects of Italian Mediterranean organic diet (IMOD) on health status. Curr. Pharm. Des. 2010;16:814–824. doi: 10.2174/138161210790883561. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
47. Søltoft M., Bysted A., Madsen K.H., Mark A.B., Bügel S.G., Nielsen J., Knuthsen P. Effects of organic and conventional growth systems on the content of carotenoids in carrot roots, and on intake and plasma status of carotenoids in humans. J. Sci. Food Agric. 2011;91:767–775. doi: 10.1002/jsfa.4248. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
48. Toaldo I.M., Cruz F.A., da Silva E.L., Bordignon-Luiz M.T. Acute consumption of organic and conventional tropical grape juices (Vitis labrusca L.) increases antioxidants in plasma and erythrocytes, but not glucose and uric acid levels, in healthy individuals. Nutr. Res. 2016;36:808–817. doi: 10.1016/j.nutres.2016.04.010. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
49. Goen T., Schmidt L., Lichtensteiger W., Schlumpf M. Efficiency control of dietary pesticide intake reduction by human biomonitoring. Int. J. Hyg. Environ. Health. 2017;220:254–260. doi: 10.1016/j.ijheh.2016.11.008. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
50. Jensen T.K., Giwercman A., Carlsen E., Scheike T., Skakkebaek N.E. Semen quality among members of organic food associations in Zealand, Denmark. Lancet. 1996;347:1844. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(96)91669-4. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
51. Juhler R.K., Larsen S.B., Meyer O., Jensen N.D., Spano M., Giwercman A., Bonde J.P. Human semen quality in relation to dietary pesticide exposure and organic diet. Arch. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 1999;37:415–423. doi: 10.1007/s002449900533. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
52. Chiu Y.H., Williams P.L., Gillman M.W., Gaskins A.J., Minguez-Alarcon L., Souter I., Toth T.L., Ford J.B., Hauser R., Chavarro J.E., et al. Association between pesticide residue intake from consumption of fruits and vegetables and pregnancy outcomes among women undergoing infertility treatment with assisted reproductive technology. JAMA Intern. Med. 2018;178:17–26. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2017.5038. [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
53. Baudry J., Assmann K.E., Touvier M., Allès B., Seconda L., Latino-Martel P., Ezzedine K., Galan P., Hercberg S., Lairon D., et al. Association of frequency of organic food consumption with cancer risk: Findings from the nutrinet-santé prospective cohort study. JAMA Intern. Med. 2018;178:1597–1606. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2018.4357. [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
54. Baudry J., Debrauwer L., Durand G., Limon G., Delcambre A., Vidal R., Taupier-Letage B., Druesne-Pecollo N., Galan P., Hercberg S., et al. Urinary pesticide concentrations in French adults with low and high organic food consumption: Results from the general population-based NutriNet-Santé. J. Expo. Sci. Environ. Epidemiol. 2019;29:366–378. doi: 10.1038/s41370-018-0062-9. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
55. Brantsæter A.L., Torjusen H., Meltzer H.M., Papadopoulou E., Hoppin J.A., Alexander J., Lieblein G., Roos G., Holten J.M., Swartz J., et al. Organic food consumption during pregnancy and hypospadias and cryptorchidism at birth: The Norwegian Mother and Child Cohort Study (MoBa) Environ. Health Perspect. 2016;124:357–364. doi: 10.1289/ehp.1409518. [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
56. Torjusen H., Brantsæter A.L., Haugen M., Alexander J., Bakketeig L.S., Lieblein G., Stigum H., Næs T., Swartz J., Holmboe-Ottesen G., et al. Reduced risk of pre-eclampsia with organic vegetable consumption: Results from the prospective Norwegian Mother and Child Cohort Study. BMJ Open. 2014;4:6143. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2014-006143. [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
57. Christensen J.S., Asklund C., Skakkebaek N.E., Jorgensen N., Andersen H.R., Jorgensen T.M., Olsen L.H., Hoyer A.P., Moesgaard J., Thorup J., et al. Association between organic dietary choice during pregnancy and hypospadias in offspring: A study of mothers of 306 boys operated on for hypospadias. J. Urol. 2013;189:1077–1082. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2012.09.116. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
58. Rist L., Mueller A., Barthel C., Snijders B., Jansen M., Simões-Wüst A.P., Huber M., Kummeling I., von Mandach U., Steinhart H., et al. Influence of organic diet on the amount of conjugated linoleic acids in breast milk of lactating women in the Netherlands. Br. J. Nutr. 2007;97:735–743. doi: 10.1017/S0007114507433074. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
59. Mueller A., Steinhart H., Thijs C., Rist L., Simoes-Wust A.P., Huber M. Trans fatty acids in human milk are an indicator of different maternal dietary sources containing trans fatty acids. Lipids. 2010;45:245–251. doi: 10.1007/s11745-010-3390-7. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
60. Kummeling I., Thijs C., Huber M., van de Vijver L.P.L., Snijders B.E.P., Penders J., Stelma F., van Ree R., van den Brandt P.A., Dagnelie P.C. Consumption of organic foods and risk of atopic disease during the first 2 years of life in the Netherlands. Br. J. Nutr. 2008;99:598–605. doi: 10.1017/S0007114507815844. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
61. Stenius F., Swartz J., Lilja G., Borres M., Bottai M., Pershagen G., Scheynius A., Alm J. Lifestyle factors and sensitization in children-the ALADDIN birth cohort. Allergy. 2011;66:1330–1338. doi: 10.1111/j.1398-9995.2011.02662.x. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
62. Buscail C., Chevrier C., Serrano T., Pele F., Monfort C., Cordier S., Viel J.F. Prenatal pesticide exposure and otitis media during early childhood in the PELAGIE mother-child cohort. Occup. Environ. Med. 2015;72:837–844. doi: 10.1136/oemed-2015-103039. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
63. Kesse-Guyot E., Baudry J., Assmann K.E., Galan P., Hercberg S., Lairon D. Prospective association between consumption frequency of organic food and body weight change, risk of overweight or obesity: Results from the NutriNet-Santé Study. Br. J. Nutr. 2017;117:325–334. doi: 10.1017/S0007114517000058. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
64. Baudry J., Lelong H., Adriouch S., Julia C., Allès B., Hercberg S., Touvier M., Lairon D., Galan P., Kesse-Guyot E. Association between organic food consumption and metabolic syndrome: Cross-sectional results from the NutriNet-Santé study. Eur. J. Nutr. 2017;57:2477–2488. doi: 10.1007/s00394-017-1520-1. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
65. Bradbury K.E., Balkwill A., Spencer E.A., Roddam A.W., Reeves G.K., Green J., Key T.J., Beral V., Pirie K. Organic food consumption and the incidence of cancer in a large prospective study of women in the United Kingdom. Br. J. Cancer. 2014;110:2321–2326. doi: 10.1038/bjc.2014.148. [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
66. McGuire M.K., McGuire M.A., Price W.J., Shafii B., Carrothers J.M., Lackey K.A., Goldstein D.A., Jensen P.K., Vicini J.L. Glyphosate and aminomethylphosphonic acid are not detectable in human milk. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 2016;103:1285–1290. doi: 10.3945/ajcn.115.126854. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
67. Higgins J.P.T., Altman D.G., Gøtzsche P.C., Jüni P., Moher D., Oxman A.D., Savović J., Schulz K.F., Weeks L., Sterne J.A.C. The Cochrane Collaboration’s tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. BMJ. 2011;343:d5928. doi: 10.1136/bmj.d5928. [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
68. Specialist Unit for Review Evidence (SURE) Questions to Assist with the Critical Appraisal of Cross-Sectional Studies. [(accessed on 23 January 2019)]; Available online: https://www.cardiff.ac.uk/specialist-unit-for-review-evidence/resources/critical-appraisal-checklists .
69. Wells G., Shea B., O’Connell D., Peterson J., Welch V., Losos M., Tugwell P. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for Assessing the Quality of Nonrandomised Studies in Meta-Analyses. [(accessed on 22 March 2019)]; Available online: http://www.ohri.ca/programs/clinical_epidemiology/oxford.asp .
70. Scheepers L.E.J.M., Penders J., Mbakwa C.A., Thijs C., Mommers M., Arts I.C.W. The intestinal microbiota composition and weight development in children: The KOALA Birth Cohort Study. Int. J. Obes. 2015;39:16–25. doi: 10.1038/ijo.2014.178. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
71. Simoes-Wust A.P., Ischa K., Monique M., Machteld H., Lukas R., Van De Vijver L., Dagnelie P.C., Carel T. Influence of alternative lifestyles on health status and health risk factors in pregnancy and maternity. Eur. J. Integr. Med. 2012;4:182–183. [ Google Scholar ]
72. Lu C., Barr D.B., Pearson M., Bartell S., Bravo R. A longitudinal approach to assessing urban and suburban children’s exposure to pyrethroid pesticides. Environ. Health Perspect. 2006;114:1419–1423. doi: 10.1289/ehp.9043. [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
73. Larsen S.B., Spano M., Giwercman A., Bonde J.P. Semen quality and sex hormones among organic and traditional Danish farmers. ASCLEPIOS Study Group. Occup. Environ. Med. 1999;56:139–144. doi: 10.1136/oem.56.2.139. [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
74. Skakkebaek N.E., Jørgensen N., Andersson A.-M., Juul A., Main K.M., Jensen T.K., Toppari J. Populations, decreasing fertility, and reproductive health. Lancet. 2019;393:1500–1501. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(19)30690-7. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
75. Alfven T., Braun-Fahrlander C., Brunekreef B., von Mutius E., Riedler J., Scheynius A., van Hage M., Wickman M., Benz M.R., Budde J., et al. Allergic diseases and atopic sensitization in children related to farming and anthroposophic lifestyle: The PARSIFAL study. Allergy. 2006;61:414–421. doi: 10.1111/j.1398-9995.2005.00939.x. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
76. Alm J., Swartz J., Lilja G., Scheynius A., Pershagen G. Atopy in children of families with an anthroposophic lifestyle. Lancet. 1999;353:1485. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(98)09344-1. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
77. Flöistrup H., Swartz J., Bergström A., Alm J.S., Scheynius A., van Hage M., Waser M., Braun-Fahrländer C., Schram-Bijkerk D., Huber M., et al. Allergic disease and sensitization in Steiner school children. J. Allergy Clin. Immunol. 2006;117:59–66. doi: 10.1016/j.jaci.2005.09.039. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
78. Lee D.H., Lee I.K., Porta M., Steffes M., Jacobs D.R. Relationship between serum concentrations of persistent organic pollutants and the prevalence of metabolic syndrome among non-diabetic adults: Results from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 1999–2002. Diabetologia. 2007;50:1841–1851. doi: 10.1007/s00125-007-0755-4. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
79. Lee D.-H., Steffes M.W., Sjödin A., Jones R.S., Needham L.L., Jacobs D.R., Jr. Low dose organochlorine pesticides and polychlorinated biphenyls predict obesity, dyslipidemia, and insulin resistance among people free of diabetes. PLoS ONE. 2011;6:e15977. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0015977. [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
80. Guyton K.Z., Loomis D., Grosse Y., El Ghissassi F., Benbrahim-Tallaa L., Guha N., Scoccianti C., Mattock H., Straif K. Carcinogenicity of tetrachlorvinphos, parathion, malathion, diazinon, and glyphosate. Lancet Oncol. 2015;16:490–491. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(15)70134-8. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
81. Kaushik G., Satya S., Naik S.N. Food processing a tool to pesticide residue dissipation–A review. Food Res. Int. 2009;42:26–40. doi: 10.1016/j.foodres.2008.09.009. [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
82. Conlon M.A., Bird A.R. The impact of diet and lifestyle on gut microbiota and human health. Nutrients. 2014;7:17–44. doi: 10.3390/nu7010017. [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
83. De Filippo C., Cavalieri D., Di Paola M., Ramazzotti M., Poullet J.B., Massart S., Collini S., Pieraccini G., Lionetti P. Impact of diet in shaping gut microbiota revealed by a comparative study in children from Europe and rural Africa. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 2010;107:14691–14696. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1005963107. [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
84. Hercberg S., Castetbon K., Czernichow S., Malon A., Mejean C., Kesse E., Touvier M., Galan P. The Nutrinet-Santé Study: A web-based prospective study on the relationship between nutrition and health and determinants of dietary patterns and nutritional status. BMC Public Health. 2010;10:242. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-10-242. [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
85. Ronningen K.S., Paltiel L., Meltzer H.M., Nordhagen R., Lie K.K., Hovengen R., Haugen M., Nystad W., Magnus P., Hoppin J.A. The biobank of the Norwegian Mother and Child Cohort Study: A resource for the next 100 years. Eur. J. Epidemiol. 2006;21:619–625. doi: 10.1007/s10654-006-9041-x. [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

View on publisher site
PDF (767.1 KB)
Collections