Fats are shown to be qualitatively different in animals which are afforded range space and fed their natural feed than which are fed in CAFO's.
The fat in local protein is way, way better than factory-farmed meat. By which I mean, it tastes much better. The fat from the pork chop of a responsibly raised pig tastes like bacon; the fat from a supermarket pork chop tastes like melting plastic.
Buy local/humane protein. Just do it for real reasons.
As an heuristic, taste is supposed to be a measure of nutritional quality. Sure it can be cheated, but when something natural tastes better than something adulterated, I'm pretty confident you can rely on that hint.
(1) Supplies your intuition about whether organic food is healthier than conventional but no facts to back that up. The world is usually counterintuitive.
(2) Suggests with a straight face that palatability is a good proxy for healthfulness, a measure that suggests health food stores should stock up on Doritos.
(2) I explicitly noted the caveat that taste may be cheated. Now, taste was developed by evolution, and is cheated by the food industry, not (normally) nature. So I wouldn't trust taste of Doritos (artificial) over natural foods, but if I actually like vegetable soup better, I'm not going to look up what's the latest trend on nutrition to assume my choice is healthier.
It's the ratio of Omega 3 to Omega 6 fatty acids that's different. Grass-fed beef is well documented to have a higher Omega 3:6 ratio than grain-fed beef.
It will spend the day milling around in the same area with its friends and then lay down in its own excrement for a nap. How is this qualitatively different from a CAFO operation?