Guest essay by Kip Hansen – February 14, 2023
In a new feature in the latest “entertainment” magazine, national geography, there is an interesting passage titled “Fruits and vegetables are less nutritious than before“. It may be available to US subscribers only, but may also found here.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Some of you may be confused when you hear NatGeo (affectionately referred to as) referred to as the “entertainment for you” magazine. You might think it’s a “quasi-scientific journal” from National Geographic Society.
Unfortunately, you will most likely be wrong:
“In September 2015, the National Geographic Society transferred the magazine to National Geographic Partners, of which 21st Century Fox hosted 73% interest rate control. In December 2017, a deal was announced for Disney to acquire 21st Century Fox, including an interest in National Geographic Partners. The acquisition was completed in March 2019. NG Media Publishing Unit has been transformed into Disney Publishers Worldwide.”
The Society recounts the story as follows: “This joint venture combines National Geographic’s global TV channels, publications, media and products and allows us to return a portion of the proceeds of these properties to fund the company’s business. our nonprofit.” And while I’m sure this venture business very beneficial to the Association, not knowing how much (if any) of the joint venture they own and how much control (if any) over the content and messaging they have.
Disney publishing house is a subsidiary of Disney Parks, Experiences and Productsitself is a subsidiary of Walt Disney Company it is “an American entertainment, mass media, and multinational corporation.” [ Wiki ] There is no science there.
All that said, like PBS Nature programming, the national geography The brand hires the best nature photographers and videographers in the world, and they make absolutely exquisite work – often unbelievably beautiful. Much of that great work is tainted by unscientific over-dubbing of nature, its animals and plants, and many of the best-watched video services in my opinion. when the sound is off.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Now, back to the vegetables!
The NatGeo puzzle pieces carries a subtitle of “There is growing evidence that many whole foods today do not contain as many vitamins and nutrients as they did 70 years ago, potentially posing a risk to human health.” We can categorize that statement as “mostly wrong“.
It is true that some studies have found that some modern vegetables and grains have lower ratios of certain nutrients (including specific vitamins, minerals, proteins and carbohydrates) compared to stored samples from the 1950s. The differences are generally small and not common for all vegetables, fruits or grains.
But, let me get to the bottom of this first, and then explain why these hyped stories don’t do much.
The best overall assessment was in a study published in 2004 in the journal Journal of the American College of Nutrition (Episode 23, 2004 – problem 6) titled: “USDA Food Composition Data Changes for 43 Garden Crops, 1950 to 1999“. [ .pdf file here ].
Excerpt:
“We compared USDA nutrient content data published in 1950 and 1999 for 13 nutrients and water in 43 garden crops, mainly vegetables. After adjusting for differences in moisture, we calculate the nutrient content ratio, R (1999/1950), for each food and nutrient.”
“Result: By group, 43 foods showed clear, statistically reliable (R < 1) declines for 6 nutrients (protein, Ca, P, Fe, riboflavin and ascorbic acid), but There were no statistically reliable changes for the other 7 nutrients. Average reductions ranged from 6% for protein to 38% for riboflavin. When assessed for each food and nutrient, the R value is often indistinguishable from 1 with current data.”
And finally:
“conclude: We suggest that any actual decline is most often explained by changes in crop varieties between 1950 and 1999, where there may be a trade-off between yield and nutrient content. nutrition.“
Now, some details:
A study of wheat establish: “…there has been a global trend in altered wheat grain quality, characterized by an increase in unstructured carbohydrates and a poor overall protein and mineral nutrient content over the past 166 years. This trend has been particularly prominent since the 1960s and is related to introduction of higher yielding short-straw varieties….”. They tried very hard to link the small change to the increase in CO .2 and higher temperatures, but eventually found a change to like short straw as a possible cause. Short straw varieties are less prone to breakage (broken is when the seeds, like wheat and rice, fall to the ground from the stem and are therefore lost at harvest). This chart from the study shows the relationship between the introduction of short-straw wheat varieties and yield:
The introduction of the short straw variety began in 1968 (the dashed line in the chart is drawn in 1950, not 1968) and by the 1990s yields had essentially more than doubled. It seems that cultivars grown from the late 90s to the early part of this century achieved a 1000-seed weight of 28-42 grams. This is an indication of kernel size. In 2010, the average harvest yield was estimated at 5 tons/ha (1 hectare equals about 2.5 sao).
IN a study of Australian vegetables Over time, the authors found that results could not be compared with older results due to changes in measurement techniques – the case of apples and oranges: “In summary, this range review provides a comprehensive assessment of iron content variability in Australian vegetables and legumes. The report highlights the lack of data on iron content over the past 100 years, most of which were collected between 1980 and 2018. Based on the limited data available and due to differences in sampling techniques, analysis and the possibility of differences in location and growing season, no definitive temporary trends can be established.
There are a number of other studies mentioned in the NatGeo section – some promoting biological farming techniques, some alarming in nature and intent.
And one more thing: The main concern seems to be that if too many people eat only grains and vegetables (becoming “vegetarians”), and don’t eat meat, they will become malnourished, especially in poorest countries. Of course, the poorest of all nations have suffered from the effects of malnutrition – vegetarian or not. And for concerns about vitamin or mineral deficiencies, the striking fact is that all of these problems can be corrected or prevented with a single daily “AZ Vitamin and Mineral Supplement” tablet. can be provided for less than ½ US cent per day (0.0037 Euro per day). That cost is US bulk wholesale – on a larger scale, as a national programme, the costs will be significantly lower.
That wholesale price is $1.61 per person per year. (Lower than the price of a candy bar in the US) In India, where much interest is concentrated, a bottle of Coca Cola costs about $0.46 (0.43 Euro).
In the real world, this kind of interference is possible. For example, in the mid-2000s, my wife and I organized a student nutrition program along the border of the Dominican Republic and Haiti – working with the Dominican federal Department of Education. The program provides deworming pills (made for the local program) to every elementary school student, followed by specially formulated “daily vitamins for poor children”. [ see this .pdf file for a formulation ] give us through Non-profit organization Vitamin Angels for shipping costs from the manufacturer in the United States covered by our organization, LDS Humane Services. The cost of the program is minimal for several years of medicines and vitamins for thousands of children – and consists mainly of the hard work of Department of Education staff and hundreds of low-paid but dedicated teachers. .
Bottom line:
1. The vitamin and mineral composition of vegetables and grains is determined by many factors but mainly by the exact cultivar grown and local factors of soil condition/composition and growing conditions .
2. There is a natural trade-off between yield – which includes fruit and seed size as well as total yield – and specific vitamin and mineral content that can be measured as a percentage or content per weight quantity.
3. Other trade-offs arise from (please ignore the pun) the need of today’s farmers to grow produce that can be packaged, stored, shipped, and available at stores products while preserving their appearance and freshness. Most of this is down to genetics – going back to point 1.
4. A vegan diet can be nutritionally good if taken care of and Vitamin and mineral supplements are provided.
5. Benefits of rich food – grains, vegetables and fruits – far outweigh any small drop in vitamin or mineral content in any fruit, vegetable, whole grain or other food.
6. The science that today’s fruits and vegetables are “less nutritious” is partly true, but it may well be just the result of different measurement techniques.
Nothing to worry about.
# # # # #
Author’s comments:
It is my opinion that the data is collected for one purpose, in this case for government health authorities to determine recommended diets (such as USDA’s MyPlate) has been reused by so-called “health advocates” for another scare campaign.
There’s nothing wrong with our food supply. At the same time, we can all have a better, healthier diet, but in the long run, diet is probably not the single most important determinant of health or longevity. .
When my wife and I have young children, we are very careful about what they eat, which makes sense – but most importantly, we see them eat. much of a many kinds of food. Most of which we have developed or raised ourselves.
I’m grown up now, and my wife has to encourage me to eat.
The best piece of advice I’ve ever heard in this regard was from one of my childhood merchant captains after studying dietary issues for years: “Eat your chow!”
Remember to start your comment with the name of the person you’re talking to, when not just making general comments. This makes for better conversations.
Thanks for reading.
# # # # #
Related
