The Difference Between Organic Food Vs. Nutritional Food?

How much would you pay for an organic--being maintained with extra care, and containing very little traces of pesticides-- food source that may not have more nutritional values, rather than conventional food? Some experts have found that the difference regarding the nutritional values in organic and conventional food is slim to none. This gives no way for the vast differences in prices for both categories. Organic foods are not worthwhile because of the unknown truancy of the product, as well as the extensive range in prices for both.
It has been maintained that organic foods do give a higher amount of antioxidants, which can help prevent diseases, and can help with future health issues. Rachel Cernansky, the author of Organic Food Starts to Prove Its Worth, stated, “Organic crops contain, on average, 17 percent more antioxidants
In Cernansky’s article, she also stated, “A 2012 study found no real difference between organic and conventional food in terms of nutrition. Its findings appeared in the Annals of Internal Medicine” (6). This evidence proves that with no real difference in nutritional value in the comparison between the two, the logic should be that they are the same price, instead of being vastly different. Customers at a grocery store should not need to pay extra money, just for a label that states something is better for one’s body, when in comparison with the opposite, being conventional, nothing is greater or less. Lisa Herzig, an associate professor of nutrition at Fresno State, reported to David Lazarus, “Buying organic does not necessarily mean there’s more health and nutrition benefits. The pesticide content will be higher with conventional produce, but it’s still at safe levels” (Lazarus 23). This quote shows that even when the amount of the price is completely off for both items, the non-safe thoughts