Demand for organic milk is partially driven by consumer perceptions that it is more nutritious. However, there is still considerable uncertainty over whether the use of organic production standards affects milk quality. Here we report results of meta-analyses based on 170 published studies comparing the nutrient content of organic and conventional bovine milk. There were no significant differences in total SFA and MUFA concentrations between organic and conventional milk. However, concentrations of total PUFA and n-3 PUFA were significantly higher in organic milk, by an estimated 7 (95 % CI −1, 15) % and 56 (95 % CI 38, 74) %, respectively. Concentrations of α-linolenic acid (ALA), very long-chain n-3 fatty acids (EPA+DPA+DHA) and conjugated linoleic acid were also significantly higher in organic milk, by an 69 (95 % CI 53, 84) %, 57 (95 % CI 27, 87) % and 41 (95 % CI 14, 68) %, respectively. As there were no significant differences in total n-6 PUFA and linoleic acid (LA) concentrations, the n-6:n-3 and LA:ALA ratios were lower in organic milk, by an estimated 71 (95 % CI −122, −20) % and 93 (95 % CI −116, −70) %. It is concluded that organic bovine milk has a more desirable fatty acid composition than conventional milk. Meta-analyses also showed that organic milk has significantly higher α-tocopherol and Fe, but lower I and Se concentrations. Redundancy analysis of data from a large cross-European milk quality survey indicates that the higher grazing/conserved forage intakes in organic systems were the main reason for milk composition differences.

Demand for organic meat is partially driven by consumer perceptions that organic foods are more nutritious than non-organic foods. However, there have been no systematic reviews comparing specifically the nutrient content of organic and conventionally produced meat. In this study, we report results of a meta-analysis based on sixty-seven published studies comparing the composition of organic and non-organic meat products. For many nutritionally relevant compounds (e.g. minerals, antioxidants and most individual fatty acids (FA)), the evidence base was too weak for meaningful meta-analyses. However, significant differences in FA profiles were detected when data from all livestock species were pooled. Concentrations of SFA and MUFA were similar or slightly lower, respectively, in organic compared with conventional meat. Larger differences were detected for total PUFA and n-3 PUFA, which were an estimated 23 (95 % CI 11, 35) % and 47 (95 % CI 10, 84) % higher in organic meat, respectively. However, for these and many other composition parameters, for which meta-analyses found significant differences, heterogeneity was high, and this could be explained by differences between animal species/meat types. Evidence from controlled experimental studies indicates that the high grazing/forage-based diets prescribed under organic farming standards may be the main reason for differences in FA profiles. Further studies are required to enable meta-analyses for a wider range of parameters (e.g. antioxidant, vitamin and mineral concentrations) and to improve both precision and consistency of results for FA profiles for all species. Potential impacts of composition differences on human health are discussed.

The environmental and biodiversity benefits of organic farming are widely recognized, but there is still controversy about the effects of organic production methods on the nutritional composition of food and human health. In the first part of this article therefore, we critically review the evidence that organic farming methods improve the nutritional quality of food crops. Moreover, we summarize our current understanding of how quality gains are linked to the implementation of the “innovations” introduced into conventional crop production during the intensification or “green revolution” of agriculture over the last 100 years. In the second part of the article, we critically review the evidence for the range of health benefits related to organic food consumption. Specifically, we describe and discuss the results from: (i) dietary intervention studies which have found that organic food consumption substantially reduces pesticide exposure in humans and affects feed intake, growth, hormone balances and immune system responsiveness in animal models; (ii) human cohort/epidemiological studies which have reported significant positive associations between organic food consumption and the lower incidence of a range of diseases including obesity, metabolic syndrome, cancer, hypospadias, pre-eclampsia, eczema and middle ear infections in infants; (iii) interactions and trade-offs between diet (e.g., whole-grain, fruit and vegetables and reduced red-meat consumption) and food types (organic versus conventional) concerning public health and future food security. The article also identifies knowledge gaps and highlights the need for (i) long-term, factorial field experiments to understand the relative effects of agronomic and pedoclimatic drivers on crop quality and safety, and (ii) clinical trials and additional human cohort studies to confirm the positive health outcomes linked to organic food consumption. The main conclusions from our review are that there is growing evidence that (i) agricultural intensification has resulted in a reduction in the nutritional quality of food and the sustainability of food production, and (ii) organic farming practices not only improve food quality and human health, but also food security. This is particularly true where current nutritional guidelines (increasing whole-grain, fruit and vegetable products, while reducing red-meat consumption) are implemented.

No abstract