“Scientific studies do not show that organic products are more nutritious and safer than conventional foods.” The absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence

“Scientific studies do not show that organic products are more nutritious and safer than conventional foods.” The absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence. The truth is we have no clue what the long-term effects are for the chemicals we're exposed to -- for all we know, the 50% drop in male sperm count over the last 30 years is related to pesticides. [1] Additionally, there's something a little forceful about the tone of this piece that I find very suspect. If organic pesticides like copper sulfate are dangerous, doesn't this just mean we need even higher standards for organic? > If all of the United States were to go organic, the cost would likely be around $200 billion annually from lower productivity. This is a strange argument. Eating organic hurts the economy? The whole point of the economy is to make our lives high-quality. [1] https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/sperm-count-dropping-in-western-world/ https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/sperm-count-dropp...