"Ah, the good old days. When men were men, women were women, and vegetables were vegetables. Although they may be bigger than they were 60 years ago, research has found that vegetables are significantly less nutritious than they used to be.

More from Delish: 5 Healthy Foods You Should Eat Every Day

Little research has been done on the matter, but the studies that have concentrated on the issue of diminishing nutrition in vegetables have found that since 1950 there have been notable changes, reports The Grist. One of the studies, conducted by Donald Davis, a now-retired scientist from the University of Texas at Austin, found that over the years vegetables have lost significant amounts of key nutrients. For example, according to Grist's infographic, which depicts how different vegetables have depleted in nutritional value from 1950-1999, tomatoes have decreased 55% in calcium, 25% in iron, and 17% in ascorbic acid (a type of vitamin C)."

http://www.delish.com/food/rec...-the-1950s?gt1=47001



But is it really the varities or is it the soil?

the only surprise there: this is 2011.
the study was published in 2004.

it's been quite common knowledge among gardeners the "commercial" crops are bred for uniformity, high yield, handling, every tomato turning red on the same day, etc and on and on.

that something's gone lacking....? gosh, whod'da thought (g)

quote:

Originally posted by WikiLeeks:
the only surprise there: this is 2011.
the study was published in 2004.

it's been quite common knowledge among gardeners the "commercial" crops are bred for uniformity, high yield, handling, every tomato turning red on the same day, etc and on and on.

that something's gone lacking....? gosh, whod'da thought (g)

Yes, I realize all that! However, that didn't answer my question...is it the varities and the breeding or is it the soil they are grown in? Or is it a combination of both along with everything that is sprayed on them?
I don't think the research went far enough or explored enough avenues of possiblilities! ?????

quote:

However, that didn't answer my question...is it the varities and the breeding or is it the soil they are grown in? Or is it a combination of both along with everything that is sprayed on them?

My understanding is the answer is yes.

I'd also guess cultural practices -- such as picking tomatoes while still green in order to ship them, and using ethylene to turn them red (though still not ripe)

There is also a study on the nutritional value of broccoli. It became popular in the 50's and the present day varieties, although larger and with more "head" have lost approximately 40% of the nutrition. Organically grown broccoli however has managed to hold on to it's nutrients, loosing less than 20% over time. Is it the soil? Is it the commercial agri practice? My guess is yes and yes. Why the deminishing in the organic as well? Perhaps the use of hybrid seed?

How do they measure the loss of nutrients ?

With a spectroscope ?

Do the instruments need to be
calibrated every month ?

Ya know...I was just googling around about Connecticut tobacco and found these two articles I hadn't read before:

http://www.cigarenvy.com/2005/...1/made-in-the-shade/

http://www.habanos.com/article.aspx?aid=27
(That one most of us need translated...I opened it with Google's Chrome browser which asked me if I wanted in translated...I love that feature!)

The statement from the latter which really reminded me of this thread was:

quote:

The soil and climate have particular characteristics, but the culture methods used here are the same as other tobacco regions of Cuba.

and from the former:

quote:

Just as certain Cuban tobaccos can only be grown in Cuba, so too this prized wrapper tobacco can only be grown to its fullest potential in a two mile wide by seventy-five mile long strip of sandy loam in the Connecticut River Valley between Hartford and West Suffield* in New England.

So if folks who smoke cigars can tell the difference, how come to the USDA a carrot is just a carrot no matter where it's grown?

* My own note: "Sunderland, MA" makes much more sense then West Suffield in that context...Hartford is the southern bound, Sunderland to the north, Ellington to the east, and Suffield to the west.

And then there are the vidalia onions in my area. I don't care for them as they don't keep and a good one, you can eat like an apple...not enough onion bite for me! But since I was raised in the north, I didn't grow up with them either like the folks around here!
And it is definately the soil strutcture that makes them "vidalias".


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vidalia_onion

the question of organic vs. non-organic "value" has not been either properly researched or even defined. researching the topic, "neutral" scientists can't even define how it should be "measured"

a few hundred billion dollars could get a survey of "same crop grown in fifty places by organic and non-organic" for comparison. problem: it's the weather, stupid. repeat the hundreds billions in testing for the next ten years, might find a statistical trend - presuming you can put global warming / climate change on hold for a decade.....

comparing heirloom/open pollinated to hybrids? toss in another hundred billion.

there are many "studies" done in many countries by many "organizations."
it follows an all-too-familiar pattern - the "studies" support the viewpoint(s) of the funding sponsor.

gosh, who'd thought ?

all things are possible - but in the end, the 'government is evil' types will denounce those studies, the organic crowd will denounce the studies sponsor by big-ag, the big-ag crowd will denounce the fringe organic studies.

so if we're going to spend a trillion or two to get at the truth, the first issue is agreeing on who does the testing and how the testing is constructed - so that in the end it represents findings that will be accepted. as true and unbiased.

and then there's the stuff like "Vidalia" onions. grow onions in a very low sulfur soil, you got sweet onions. they do that in the PNW - they're called Walla-Walla. Vidalia is a 'trademark product' - similar to Champagne - it can't be sold as Champagne unless the grapes grew there - the rest of it is "sparkling wine"

Plow to plate..If you are picking your own broccoli from your garden...you're going to get better flavor cooking it up tonight and eating it. It's fresh.
If you are eating store bought broccoli, it was picked, cleaned and shipped from somewhere other than your back yard. Sometimes oranges are still green and get a spray to ripen on the drive up from fla...you live in CT...it's a longer drive and older fruit.
To me taste equils nutrients. My fruits and veggies in season are tasty. Flash frozen and cooked in Jan still tastes better than from the can or the midwinter produce isle. We won't even comment on tomatoes...no contest.

I believe oranges picked green stay green. They dye them, which always makes me laugh at the people looking through the oranges for the one with the best color.

Well, you know GD, that would not surprize me...dyeing foods..In the 70's when I lived in Fla., they sprayed a preservative/ripening agent on the green unripened oranges before shipment.
That's when I became an organic food eater.

I can grow the same type of onion plants as vidalia's but I get a totally different tasting onion than one grown in their area! And mine will keep for a few months.
Yes, fresh in much better! But they have breed out the flavor in strawberries just to get bigger berries....same with some other things too.

Having said that...my dressing turned out green one year at Thanksgiving...seems they had dyed the celery green! And having worked in a retail produce department for a couple of years...red potatoes are another one that they dye. But I've never seen oranges that were dyed.
Lots of things get picked green before they have completed their growing cycle and are gassed to turn certain colors...so of course the nutrients aren't there since they hadn't finished growing yet!
I, personally, still think our soil has a LOT to do with the amount of nutrition in the foods.
When the commercial farmers just keep taking it out of the soil & never putting anything back...????, what's left?

But you are right Wiki, it would take decades & probably trillions of $$ to have an HONEST conclussion!

Did a little research. It seems that dyes are not used on oranges as much today as they once were. The FDA approved dye for oranges is citrus red no. 2, not to be confused with red dye no. 2. When weather conditions in Florida are not right, oranges don't turn orange enough and the dye is used. This happens more on the early crop. They also use etheline gas for ripening.

I know this is an older post, but I have a question...When the nutritional value of say BROCCOLI is measured, and its down 40%...could the nutritional value bee the SAME as before, only the broccoli is 40% bigger, so the nutrients are dispersed in a larger area, making it seem like its less nutritious??? basically, same nutritious value, but more "filler" if you will...what about adding the right nutrients to the soil to compensate for the lack in nutrition, although with the big farms producing just for profit, I don't see this happening.....not trying to stir anything up, just this got my attention....