Compare
Organic vs conventional
Not “organic is better”, but how much better, on how many samples, at what price — and whether the data is good enough to say.
Biggest measured gaps
Where switching to organic changes the residue picture most, in index points.
- 🍓Strawberries96 → 13−83
- 🍧Frozen berries87 → 22−65
- 🍷Grapes73 → 11−62
- 🍎Apples77 → 16−61
- 🍇Blackberries74 → 16−58
- 🍐Pears74 → 22−52
Smallest measured gaps
Where the conventional figure is already so low there is little left to reduce.
What the comparison can and cannot tell you
The table above compares two sample sets drawn from the same monitoring program. That is a strong basis for saying how much residue evidence differs between the organic and conventional supply of a given crop. It is a weak basis for saying anything about health outcomes, because the residue levels involved sit far below the thresholds where effects have been characterised.
Why sample count matters more than the headline number
Organic sample sets are routinely an order of magnitude smaller than conventional ones — a few dozen against several hundred. A commodity with 44 organic samples can produce a detection rate that swings several points on a handful of results. This site weights the priority score down when confidence is limited, and refuses to rank at all below 50 conventional samples.
Organic is a process standard, not a residue guarantee
Certified organic prohibits most synthetic pesticides but permits a defined list of approved substances, and does not prevent drift from neighbouring farms or persistence of compounds banned decades ago. This is why organic samples show detections at all rather than a clean zero.
For food-by-food answers, start with thefoods worth buying organic ranking, or read is organic worth it?