Fruits and vegetables are less nutritious than they used to be • Hacker News Board

Re: Fruits and vegetables are less nutritious than they used to be

#141

Post by antris » Mon, May 02, 2022, 1:39 PM UTC

CuriouslyC wrote: post #115

antris wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is an ecofascist adjacent argument, and is not based on reality. Not much land is needed to feed people, most of it is being used to produce meat and dairy, which is a waste. https://ourworldindata.org/agricultural-land-by-global-diets

You're right. Also, not much space is needed to house people. Everyone can just start living in coffins with breathing tubes. It's so efficient, that when you die they can just wheel you into a hole in the ground and be done with it.

Seriously? You're comparing eating a diet that consists of less dairy & meat and throwing less food away as waste, to living in a coffin? This is not productive at all.

Re: Fruits and vegetables are less nutritious than they used to be

#142

Post by giantg2 » Mon, May 02, 2022, 1:47 PM UTC

specialist wrote: post #130

giantg2 wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, you'd have to resort to fascism to force all people to become vegan.

Slippery slope: removing subsidies for factory farmed meat inevitably leads to vegan fascism. Nice.

That's not at all what I'm saying. It's jumping to conclusions to think that we can just solve problems by using that 80% of production for people food crops vs animal feed. The paradigms are entirely different - from the types of crops the land can produce, to the labor involved in its production, etc. I also believe that the switch to plant based plastics over the coming decades will eat up whatever minor reduction in animal feed occurs. Even with higher prices for animal products you will still have a large market. Which is why you couldn't just remove subsidies and think that 80% number would shrink much.

Re: Fruits and vegetables are less nutritious than they used to be

#143

Post by [deleted] » Mon, May 02, 2022, 1:50 PM UTC

mdp2021 wrote: post #67

collaborative wrote: post #62

The way things are going we'll all end up taking vitamin pills and calling it a day Eating fruit and veg is becoming increasingly pointless. No taste, no nutrients, lots of chems. May as well drink water

> taking vitamin pills Except that it is not the same, it's not a solution...

[deleted]

Re: Fruits and vegetables are less nutritious than they used to be

#144

Post by mdp2021 » Mon, May 02, 2022, 1:51 PM UTC

l33t2328 wrote: post #74

mdp2021 wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> taking vitamin pills Except that it is not the same, it's not a solution...

In what sense is it not the same?

I am not sure that "vitamins in tablets" are as healthy as the natural intake. For sure, that is not what the warnings on some packages recommend.

Re: Fruits and vegetables are less nutritious than they used to be

#145

Post by ldiracdelta » Mon, May 02, 2022, 1:54 PM UTC

nomilk wrote: post #137

They also look better but taste blander.

At least for apples, that's due to the feedback loop from the super market.

1. New variety ( red delicious, gala, fuji, honey crisp)

2. Customer says, "I really like it! Could you make it redder?"

3. Farmer/nursery selects for apple strain that is redder, implicitly deselecting all other characteristics.

4. Customer selects red'est version of variety in the super market and passes up less-red variety.

5. Non-red variety taken out or grafted over in orchards to super-red variety.

6. Customer says, "I don't know why, but I don't like the taste of galas anymore!"

7. goto 1

Re: Fruits and vegetables are less nutritious than they used to be

#146

Post by jjoonathan » Mon, May 02, 2022, 1:55 PM UTC

specialist wrote: post #125

orlp wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Commercial mass-produced tomatoes, bananas and other climacteric fruit are picked heavily unripe, shipped in this more durable state, and in the destination country are rapidly artificially ripened in ethylene gas chambers. The same commercial mass-produced fruits and vegetables also have been cultivated for decades for resistance against disease, size, and shelf life. Taste is often only secondary to those. On one h…

Yes and: > mass-produced MBA-optimized to death Plus counterfeits, knockoffs, gray-market, etc. eg Fake Italian olive oil. I don't know what to call this category, or their purveyors. Inauthentic? Market parasites? The eBay / Amazon (unregulated markets) problem?

"The 80/20 version."

There are times when I'm willing to pay 5x to get something 20% better. Not all the time, though. Moralizing the choice feels like a sales gimmick.

Re: Fruits and vegetables are less nutritious than they used to be

#147

Post by jjoonathan » Mon, May 02, 2022, 2:00 PM UTC

api wrote: post #126

somenameforme wrote: post #57

This is the conclusion of the paper [1] that this article is based upon: "We suggest that any real declines are generally most easily explained by changes in cultivated varieties between 1950 and 1999, in which there may be trade-offs between yield and nutrient content." What National Geographic says scientists say, "Scientists say that the root of the problem lies in modern agricultural processes that increase crop…

Virtually all modern media exists to push a narrative, usually a Right Wing(tm) or Left Wing(tm) narrative. I'm not convinced you can get to the truth by "triangulating" since this assumes at least one party is actually saying something valid.

Blanket cynicism is really easy to manipulate: you don't have to do a good job yourself, you just have to convince the cynic that the other guy is just as bad, which is easy.

"Both Sides" cynicism feels centrist but it actually kills centrism because it turns centrism into a losing media strategy.

Listening to both sides is important to avoid selective information bias, but refusing to pick a winner or, worse, always picking the midpoint is a terrible policy that is responsible for enabling the current degradation in the public discourse.

Re: Fruits and vegetables are less nutritious than they used to be

#148

Post by CuriouslyC » Mon, May 02, 2022, 2:17 PM UTC

specialist wrote: post #130

giantg2 wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, you'd have to resort to fascism to force all people to become vegan.

Slippery slope: removing subsidies for factory farmed meat inevitably leads to vegan fascism. Nice.

The vegan fascists don't want sustainable animal cultivation, they want everyone to choke on soy products produced on land that was once full of diversity but is now a monoculture wasteland.

Re: Fruits and vegetables are less nutritious than they used to be

#149

Post by troyvit » Mon, May 02, 2022, 2:32 PM UTC

somenameforme wrote: post #57

This is the conclusion of the paper [1] that this article is based upon: "We suggest that any real declines are generally most easily explained by changes in cultivated varieties between 1950 and 1999, in which there may be trade-offs between yield and nutrient content." What National Geographic says scientists say, "Scientists say that the root of the problem lies in modern agricultural processes that increase crop…

To be fair, NG doesn't claim that the paper calls it changes in cultivated varieties, it says "Scientists say..."

That's still modern media in a nutshell though. Who are these "scientists" and also "experts" referenced in the next paragraph? They don't go into that but in true NG fashion they have some pretty pictures.

That said, from what I understand producers changed varieties to get veggies that are easier to grow, feed, and ship using using industrial ag processes. And those processes do require more irrigation and -- especially -- fertilization. Sorry I don't have any sources for that right now; I went to school for journalism.

Re: Fruits and vegetables are less nutritious than they used to be

#150

Post by msrenee » Mon, May 02, 2022, 2:32 PM UTC

somenameforme wrote: post #57

This is the conclusion of the paper [1] that this article is based upon: "We suggest that any real declines are generally most easily explained by changes in cultivated varieties between 1950 and 1999, in which there may be trade-offs between yield and nutrient content." What National Geographic says scientists say, "Scientists say that the root of the problem lies in modern agricultural processes that increase crop…

So there's like 4 or 5 different studies cited in that article. The one you're talking about, unless you found the rest of the article and it says something completely different, doesn't reach any conclusions about the cause. It just says that the researchers think the easiest explanation is different cultivars.

That probably has something to do with it. However, plants don't make nutrients out of thin air. They cited samples that found the nutrient content in the soil at "regenerative" farms was much higher than other organic farms. It seems crazy to me to think that soil quality wouldn't be one of the main causes, on top of all the practices to get higher yield out of a smaller area. Which was discussed in the article.