Big VIC
Mecca V.I.P.
VIP
- Joined
- May 20, 2007
- Messages
- 5,412
- Points
- 38
Organic means fewer chemicals, not fewer calories!
POSTED BY: MONICA REINAGEL, M.S., LD/N | JUNE 28, 2010 | 9:48 AM
"Are organic foods less fattening than regular foods?" It seems like a silly question. Obviously, organic certification describes how foods are produced. It has nothing to do with how much fat, sugar, or calories a food contains. Yet consumers apparently think desserts are less fattening if they're organic, as demonstrated by a recent study at the University of Michigan.
Of course, we're all too smart for that, right? Actually, I suspect we're all a lot more susceptible to the "health halo effect" than we think. When we read about these studies, the subjects' responses seem naive and silly--but that's because we're in on the joke. Had we been the one in the hot seat--and not clued in to the point of the questions, a lot of us would probably reveal the same sort of unconscious bias. For more, see Junk Food in Disguise.
POSTED BY: MONICA REINAGEL, M.S., LD/N | JUNE 28, 2010 | 9:48 AM
"Are organic foods less fattening than regular foods?" It seems like a silly question. Obviously, organic certification describes how foods are produced. It has nothing to do with how much fat, sugar, or calories a food contains. Yet consumers apparently think desserts are less fattening if they're organic, as demonstrated by a recent study at the University of Michigan.
Of course, we're all too smart for that, right? Actually, I suspect we're all a lot more susceptible to the "health halo effect" than we think. When we read about these studies, the subjects' responses seem naive and silly--but that's because we're in on the joke. Had we been the one in the hot seat--and not clued in to the point of the questions, a lot of us would probably reveal the same sort of unconscious bias. For more, see Junk Food in Disguise.