Actually food grown without some applied pesticides have their own risks because bacteria, etc. are allowed to thrive on these foods. Pesticides "improve" the health of the consumer by their very function---to prevent harmful bugs, etc. from wreaking havoc on the crops. Any type of farming done over and over again depletes the soil of nutrients regardless of whether it's organic or "standard" farming.
One little known tidbit is that so-called organic farmers will resort to using so called natural pesticides, which are often similar chemicals to the standard pesticides, when they are faced with losing their crops while attempting straight organic farming. The consumer will still pay for the "organic" tag however. These farmers, after all, are in it for the money just like we hold jobs for the money aspect of it. You may not be getting what you think you are getting when you buy "organic".
As for studies, Consumer Reports has done them. And anyone who knows Dr. Edell, who has a national radio show and is highly respected, he thinks it's a bunch of hooey as well. There are sites that attempt to ferret out all of the hype that's thrown about by the media. Quackwatch, Center for Consumer Freedom, Accuracy in Media Reporting are a few. I have not saved most of the things I have found but you all can search for yourselves. I will link you to one article from Quackwatch that I dug up from my personal files----
http://www.quackwatch.org/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/organic.html
There is no proof these foods are more nutritious, taste better, are better for the environment, nothing. And I won't spend extra money on something if I am not getting something back for it. That's just my opinion on it and I certainly am not trying to force anything on anyone. I do think more thought should go into our spending before we just run out and jump on the "flavor of the month" bandwagon because some guy on the nightly news read a cue card that said something was good for us.
I guess we will agree to disagree.