In the article on vitamins (WDDTY vol 13 no 9), you refer to organically grown crops and, although you give some encouragement in that respect, by and large you seem to agree with the Food and Drink Federation and Food Standards Agency that there is little difference between organically and conventionally grown food - though they cover their tracks by asking for more research.
Can you find out the facts? Where is the evidence on which these comparisons are based? If comparisons are made with crops grown organically for only two or three years, little difference may be found from conventionally grown crops. If less than five years, depleted soils will not have had enough time to produce a healthy nutritionally adequate crop (see The Living Soil by Eve Balfour).
It isn't just lost minerals - they are there in the soil, but have to be made available to the plants. - Hans Lobstein, Brighton