Look for the USDA Organic seal, and find a local farmer who can attest to healthy living conditions for his poultry.

RODALE NEWS, EMMAUS, PA—Organic eggs are no healthier than factory-farmed eggs and are thus not worth the extra costs, concludes an article running in a recent issue of Time magazine. But the article's author is missing some major benefits of organic eggs—such as the fact that they're higher in omega-3 fatty acids, are free of antibiotic residues, and contain no arsenic, which is added to factory-farmed chicken-feed to prevent infections and spur growth.

The article was based on a new U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) study finding that different production methods—factory-farmed, cage-free, and free-roaming—all met the same quality standards. Yet, the author's conclusions that organic eggs are no healthier than conventional, and that the way they're raised is dangerous and not worth the added cost, run far afield of the research, misinterpreting the study's primary finding.

---

More advice about eggs:
Egg carton claim de-scrambler: How Egg Carton Claims Relate to Salmonella Risks
Latest on the August egg recall: Egg Recall Expanded to Two Farms and Over 30 Brands of Eggs
Raise your own egg-layers: What's the Best Chicken for You?
Whip up a soufflé: Soufflé-Making Tips and 5 Great-Tasting Recipes

---

Here's how Time missed the boat and gave rotten egg advice:

#1: The test used in the USDA study is a measure of egg quality, not nutrition. The study used something called the Haugh unit, a scale between 0 to 110 that basically lets producers know whether or not the egg is stale (the lower the number, the lower the quality). To measure Haugh unit, an egg is broken onto a flat surface, where the height of the yolk and thickness of the egg white are measured, says Alissa Maloberti, director of egg product marketing at the American Egg Board. Fresh eggs have taller upstanding yolks and more compact whites, while older eggs have runner yolks and thinner whites. The Time article made the assumption that Haugh unit is somehow indicative of nutritional value, when in fact, the USDA's definition of Haugh unit mentions nothing about an egg's nutritional content. "It's more of a visual test to gauge the sample quality," says Maloberti. "It has no bearing on nutritional value at all." While it is true that organic eggs and factory-farmed eggs are on par with levels of protein and other vital nutrients, studies have found that organic eggs are far higher in heart-healthy omega-3 fatty acids. Recent findings from Penn State University revealed that organically raised chicken eggs had three times more of these healthy fats than their confined counterparts, along with 40 percent more vitamin A and twice as much vitamin E.

#2: "Free-roaming" and "cage-free" aren't the same as "organic." The USDA study didn't specify organic as one of the production methods they studied, but the author continually refers to "organic" eggs as though the authors had. Unlike "USDA Organic," "free-range" and "cage-free" are unsubstantiated claims that aren't verified by independent third parties—any producer can slap those labels on a carton of eggs without any evidence that his or her chickens roam free or live outside cages. To find out which labels to trust, and which to ignore, read our story on how to find the healthiest eggs.