The organic label is ineffective at guaranteeing the absence of toxins; some organic foods even present much worse contamination profiles (notably regarding heavy metals) than conventional foods.

noli's read

The creator raises a very real paradox in our food supply: the organic label certifies environmentally friendly production methods, but does not guarantee the total absence of contaminants. In fact, standard organic regulations do not prevent the natural presence of heavy metals (such as lead or arsenic) in the soil, a point of vigilance highlighted by the Rodale Institute in its technical reports. However, labeling organic as globally useless is scientifically excessive. A vast meta-analysis published in the British Journal of Nutrition (Barański et al., 2014), encompassing 343 studies, demonstrates that organic foods contain on average 50% less cadmium and four times fewer synthetic pesticide residues than their conventional equivalents. Furthermore, a systematic review in Environmental Health (Mie et al., 2017) confirms that an organic diet significantly reduces overall pesticide exposure. Thus, while the absolute absence of pollutants is never guaranteed by a simple label, organic remains statistically a cleaner option for the majority of foods according to current research.

the sources

1. 1Smith-Spangler C et al. 2012
2. 2Baranski M et al. 2014