For all the arguing about what's better for your health -- organic vs. conventional foods -- calorie counts and fat content often seem to be left out of the discussion or ignored. Perhaps they shouldn't, according to a pair of studies about the health misperceptions people have about conventional and organic foods.

Nutritional labels tell us how much fat, salt, sugar and other components go into the making, for example, of the average Oreo cookie. The problem lies, however, when said cookie is labeled as an ORGANIC food. In one study, 114 students read nutrition labels for two sets of Oreos, describing them either as Oreo cookies or Oreo cookies made with organic flour and sugar, then were asked which kind had more or fewer calories in comparison to other brands and if said cookies should be eaten less often or more than others.

Even though I'd prefer to blame their responses on sleep deprivation than a lack of critical thinking skills, more students believed organic Oreos had fewer calories and could be consumed more often than the conventional kind. And, in a second survey about food choices, patients were more forgiving of a female, wanting to lose weight but skipping her after-dinner run, after eating an organic dessert over a generic one.

Organic foods, particularly whole foods, contain fewer pesticides and, generally, healthier ingredients. But those two variables alone don't make them any less fatty than conventional foods. When in doubt, portion sizes DO matter.

LiveScience June 17, 2010