Pulse Brain · Growing Health Evidence Index
Tier 3 — Observational / field trialPeer-reviewed

Composition differences between organic and conventional meat: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis

Dominika Średnicka-Tober; Marcin Barański; Chris Seal; Roy Sanderson; Charles Benbrook; Håvard Steinshamn; Joanna Gromadzka-Ostrowska; Ewa Rembiałkowska; Krystyna Skwarło-Sońta; Mick Eyre; Giulio Cozzi; Mette Krogh Larsen; Teresa Jordon; Urs Niggli; Tomasz Sakowski; Philip C. Calder; Graham C. Burdge; Smaragda Sotiraki; Alexandros Stefanakis; Halil Yolcu; Sokratis Stergiadis; Eleni Chatzidimitriou; Gillian Butler; Gavin Stewart; Carlo Leifert

Cambridge University Press (CUP) · 2016

Read source ↗ All evidence

Summary

Demand for organic meat is partially driven by consumer perceptions that organic foods are more nutritious than non-organic foods. However, there have been no systematic reviews comparing specifically the nutrient content of organic and conventionally produced meat. In this study, we report results of a meta-analysis based on sixty-seven published studies comparing the composition of organic and non-organic meat products. For many nutritionally relevant compounds (e.g. minerals, antioxidants and most individual fatty acids (FA)), the evidence base was too weak for meaningful meta-analyses. However, significant differences in FA profiles were detected when data from all livestock species were pooled. Concentrations of SFA and MUFA were similar or slightly lower, respectively, in organic compared with conventional meat. Larger differences were detected for total PUFA and n-3 PUFA, which were an estimated 23 (95 % CI 11, 35) % and 47 (95 % CI 10, 84) % higher in organic meat, respectively. However, for these and many other composition parameters, for which meta-analyses found significant differences, heterogeneity was high, and this could be explained by differences between animal species/meat types. Evidence from controlled experimental studies indicates that the high grazing/forage-based diets prescribed under organic farming standards may be the main reason for differences in FA profiles. Further studies are required to enable meta-analyses for a wider range of parameters (e.g. antioxidant, vitamin and mineral concentrations) and to improve both precision and consistency of results for FA profiles for all species. Potential impacts of composition differences on human health are discussed.

Outcomes reported

Pulse Check candidate — DOI captured from a claim that was Outside Catalogue. Context: … British Journal of Nutrition, 115(6), 994– 1011. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007114515005073 Sustain (2023) Half of UK fruit and veg farmers fear closure due to supermarket buying behaviour. https://w …

Theme
Farming systems, soils & land use
Subject
Dietary fats & fatty acids
Study type
Research
Source type
Peer-reviewed research
Status
Published
Geography
United Kingdom
System type
Other
DOI
10.1017/S0007114515005073
Catalogue ID
IRmoq7ksnh-46d2a0
Pulse AI · ask about this record

Dig deeper with Pulse AI.

Pulse AI has read the whole catalogue. Ask about this record, its theme, or how the findings apply to UK farming and policy — every answer cites the underlying studies.