Study shows: Organic foods not really better for you

The article didn't actually address the potential health risks of pesticide/herbicide residues.  It only stated a narrow "conclusion" that from a nutritional standpoint they could find only small differences between the two.  So perhaps the non-organic produce still contains the nutrients that organic produce does, but it's buried underneath a coating of pesticide residue.  Who funded that study anyway, the agricultural chemical folks?

I like to buy my produce from local growers whenever possible so that it's fresher, and if it also happens to be organically grown so much the better.

I couldn't get the article to come in for me, but I like to buy organic brown eggs..they are just plain fresher, they last longer. As for organic, my back yard is organic for the most part, even though my hubby has his pesticide license for  nursery work..he has an full time inside year around computer job..in an air condtioned office,,,.but,  like when I was into the medical field , we hold all kinds of paperwork/licenses that for the most part we don't use ourselves daily.,,but need to understand it all within the industry.  I think everythng has its place and I can't see farmers adding to their cost with pesticides unless they really think they need them for already having problems to begin with. It's just not cost effective. Much of what they use is because the consumer wants to see what they consider "mouth watering" food at the grocery store. 

I'm with you on this one, Barbara.  The point of organic is "chemical free," not necessarily more nutritious.  And the chemicals aren't just surface residue.   Unfortunately, organically grown veggies and fruits are priced beyond the means of most people.