Looks Great, Less Nutritious?

At 60 and having been brought up among farmers and mother's gardens I reflect more than most upon the look of what I saw over those years. Mother always used the broccoli stalks in later years saying there was more goodness there than in the beautiful heads, so I peeled and steamed them and learned to eat the tougher cores. Now, I read a study of tomatoes, broccoli and more and find that our nutritional input has halved from the same sized vegetables. Not unexpected but am incensed enough at this point to rally against the AG Business ways to our stomachs.

In Michael Pollan's books -- The Omnivore's Dilemma & In Defense of Food -- he mentions that fruits and veggies have not been bred or selected for nutritional value over the course of recent years. In addition to looks being a factor, growers and distributors wanted produce that would last well during shipment. Over the last five decades or so, food increasingly has been shipped longer distances. What mattered was how it looked when it reached where it was going, which could be Massachusetts for produce grown in Chile. A strain of green beans that would look good for four weeks made better economic sense than one that would only last a week. Therefore, marketing methods factor into this analysis along with soil depletion and use of chemical fertilizers and pesticides. Until we start eating produce grown locally using sustainable farming practices, we will be getting less nutrition than we pay for, and more unknowns than we want or need.

Really really great post. It is very useful for me. I am always willing to learn these kind of things. Thanks for sharing such an awesome information .

christmas gift ideas