The Have's and the Have Not's

Most of the time, when we talk about the "have's and the have not's" we're talking about material possessions and wealth - I'd like to turn that on its head for a moment and talk about when not having something is better.

The debate about the benefits of organic foods has really fired up. From my perspective, it's likely driven by a lot of people who have a vested interest in conventional foods - but setting that aside for a moment, let's just boil this down to a more rational discussion.

Let's say, just for the sake of this discussion, that there is no nutritional difference between organic and conventional foods (I don't personally believe that, but I'm willing to suspend disbelief for a couple of minutes). Does that end the debate? Is that slam dunk for conventionally grown foods? Nope. Not even close.

This is where the "have not's" win handily. Organic food does NOT have chemicals, organic food does NOT have pesticides, organic food is NOT made from genetically modified organisms (GMOs).

But wait, there's more (or, uh, less)!

Organic food not only doesn't have these things, growing organic foods does not involve the use of chemical fertilizers, pesticides, genetically modified organisms so it also keeps all that gunk out of the soil, the water and the air (aka the earth). Think about the multiplier effect in either direction. It's all connected - the debate about nutritional benefits may rage on, but I still prefer the "have not's" kind of food. Better for me, better for this big swirling globe we all call home.

Pesticides and other chemicals HAVE been shown to have an adverse impact on the human body and on the plants and animals of this planet. So, I don't know about you, I would rather go without and go organic - in this case, the have not's have a clear advantage.

New to organic food? Take a look at these best sellers at shopOrganic.com for some great ideas on where to start.

Now, go out there and enjoy your day!