Is it me or does the 'Organic' Claim really not hold that much significance anymore??

According to an article on the BBC's website, the Food Standards Agency has released a report, published in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, which claims to have found no differences in most nutrients in organically or conventionally grown crops, including in vitamin C, calcium, and iron. The same was true for studies looking at meat, diary and eggs. Differences that were detected, for example in levels of nitrogen and phosphorus, were most likely to be due to differences in fertilizer use and ripeness at harvest and are unlikely to provide any health benefit, the report concluded.

Read the following story in the Natural Products Industry Insider E-Zine: FORT WORTH, Texas— FXsupplements.com settled charges of deceptive trade practices with the Texas Attorney General’s (AG) office, agreeing to amend its marketing and sales practices and provide consumer refunds; the defendants denied liability in the settlement. The Arlington, Texas-based company used “negative option” ordering strategies to sign up customers to automatically receive its Acai Berry Maxx dietary supplements—and pay the full price—after signing up for a free trial. Further, the AG was concerned about marketing claims related to the supplement’s ability to provide high levels of antioxidants to address levels of toxins in the body.

Anybody else confused/concerned/angered/annoyed by all the new antioxidant products out there? How about all the so-called claims they are making? Is there good science behind it or is it just deceptive marketing such as the one above?