LIZZI Walton (Letters May 18) rather overstates the case for organic food.

Suggesting that non-organic food is “saturated in chemicals” or “pumped full of growth hormones and antibiotics” is just wrong.

The use of growth hormones, or the importation of treated meat, has been banned in the EU since the 1980s (though TTIP could put that at risk ).

Excessive antibiotic use is still an issue in intensive chicken production but not in all non-organic methods.

And while there are always bad producers talk of “saturated in chemicals” is just hyperbole.

Organic farmers are also permitted to use some pretty nasty chemicals.

The Newcastle research referred to was not new research but a meta study of previous papers and has been widely dismissed as faulty in its methodology and conclusions.

For example many of the papers reviewed are regarded as poor quality but may nevertheless have skewed the results.

And no evidence is presented to indicate that even if correct the results have any nutritional significance.

So whilst all evidence is welcome it is grossly misleading to present this as definitive.

I have no objection to organic produce and, unlike biodynamic, I am quite happy to buy it if it appears to be of better quality than the alternative.

But there is no need to imply an imaginary virtue which is far from proven.

Jim Watson

Selsley