This subject deserves careful discussion because I have heard similar narratives multiple times. I am going to sound a bit cranky, but I find this approach to food (aka Nutritionism) less than satisfying. “Nutritionism” considers particular foods as mere vehicles for “nutrients”, and is a piecemeal rather than holistic view of why we eat what we eat. To a greater or lesser degree, it plays fast and loose with science in the service of what amounts to an ideology (or belief system). We eat to stay alive and grow, eating many classes of materials in varying amounts. In human diets through most of evolutionary time, some essential compounds have been needed only in very small amounts and have been so reliably present in our food that our bodies have lost the ability to synthesize them, instead getting them from our food. We call these vitamins, and above a certain minimum, getting more of them does not improve our health. Therefore, in the context of this essay, the relevant question is, do the fruits and veggies of Big Ag, when part of a reasonable diet, lead to vitamin or mineral deficiencies? I would also add that many of our foods are fortified with vitamins and minerals, so a second question would be, does it matter where the vitamins (or minerals) come from? In other words, is a vitamin from a tomato different from the same vitamin in a pill? I think these are topics worth consideration.
I was curious about the data behind this essay, so I read the references and looked at the data. From my reading of these sources, I am skeptical about the subsequent interpretation in the articles that followed. Indeed, even the authors of the original articles seem skeptical. For example, in the article about iron in Australian veggies, the abstract states, “The majority of vegetables had similar iron content between two or more timepoints. … no definitive conclusions could be established.” In the British wheat study, after 1950 both the yield and grain size approximately doubled over pre-1950 values, largely because the starch content increased. Therefore, protein and mineral concentrations (not necessarily amounts) decreased as the grain size and yield increased. For the USDA study of 43 veggies between 1999-1950: the abstract reports decline for 6 nutrients but no decline for 7 others, and states, “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.” The derivative articles do not mention the skepticism expressed in the original research articles, nor the possible complexities of meaningful interpretation.
I have gardened in the past and loved it. I also understand that the scale and methods of big agriculture are off-putting in many ways. But it seems to me that the success of Big Ag has been to bring production up and prices down. I doubt that the family farm, as pleasing as it seems, can replace that for most Americans.
Call me a curmudgeon if you must, but why add “nutrient anxiety” to an activity that can be about pleasure and life in full. In describing a reasonable diet, Michael Pollan said it well: eat a variety of foods, eat moderately, and eat largely plants. I say, do that and you won’t have to give much thought to how much of vitamin x is in food y.
Thank you for your thoughtful comment, Walter! I agree that, all in all, we mostly benefit from Big Ag since we couldn't feed the world's population without it. The threatening famine due to Ukraine's inability to ship grain from Odessa because of the war is a prime example (although they are able to export more grain via roads than they'd initially thought, which might hold off the worst of the crisis). It may be that one of the consequences of Big Ag's tactics is that we have to take oral vitamins to achieve our daily needs, though I've had many people tell me, "If you eat a healthy balanced diet, you don't need to take vitamins." Maybe that used to be the case, but there is some evidence (acknowledging your point about the inconsistency in the data) that fresh fruits and vegetables are not enough. But mostly, it seems to me, I have an explanation for why small crop, homegrown varieties tend to taste better. For me, at least, the information doesn't create "nutrient anxiety" but instead gives me the information I need to choose my fruits and veggies wisely, while knowing that not everyone has that luxury. And if things work out, perhaps my garden will be healthy enough next year to keep me from even buying others' homegrown varieties!
Because we have lost our connection to the land. The food has become disassociated by planes, trains and trucks. Ask a kid in an urban setting where food comes from- their answer will shock you - McDonald’s
It's true! Nowadays we take schoolchildren on field trips to farms to see where and how food is grown -- less than 100 years ago, most children in schools would go home to help out on the farm. Our world is changing quickly.
Another great post! While not a vegetable gardener, I have always been a big composter by example from my grandfather who generated a bountiful small vegetable garden behind his city home with the help of composting. I have noticed that my landscape plants do not seem to benefit from the compost until the second year after applying as a mulch or tilling in. Now I think I understand why since the soil may have not been able to develop the beneficial underground fungi until the later on after application. I agree with your observation that the plants in North Georgia don't appreciate the higher temperatures we've been having. Keep up the great writing.
Thanks for sharing this information about the compost pile - that makes sense, that the beneficial fungi haven't had a chance to establish until the second year. I've not ever really thought about that connection. Composting is a long-game!
That's so funny, I was raised on an Iowa farm, black top soil 18 inches deep and we could raise anything and it was so good. I agree eating what you raised is special, but not special enough when there's only 1 person eating it. LOL Keep up the great letters, I might not always comment but I always read and enjoy them.
Although I have raised large gardens in my past, when I had room to store canned product and 4 children to eat it, I am with you on gardening today. For one or two people the Farmers Market is a better value for fresh produce. Types of soil plays a large part also. In Florida we could grow anything in the sand, but it had few nutrients and little taste. Here in NC the heavy clay soil makes gardening depressing to say the least. I too tried the "bucket" gardening with little success. It's the local Farmers Markets for me!
Good to know it's not just my black thumb! I can keep houseplants alive (only the hardiest ones who don't mind neglected watering) but there's something special about raising food from scratch and eating it yourself... But, as Andrew has said multiple times this summer, if we were farmers, we'd have starved by now.
Another great write up! The most essential aspect of any food growing is genetics. If you plant seed with inferior genetics you'll never grow tasty, nutrient dense food. Aim to grow varieties popular with market gardeners in the 1950s. After that point the focus shifted from flavour and quality to yield and shelf life.
So that brings up the heirloom tomatoes that were so tasty - can we save those seeds to plant next year? In the back of my mind I'm thinking I've heard heirloom tomatoes aren't hybrids, so you can replant their seeds, but is that always true? Also, since I got these tomatoes from a friend of a friend, I'm not positive they're heirloom, but they were exceedingly ugly - is that proof enough that they're heirloom?
The definition of heirloom is that you can save the seeds. They come out true to type. There are modern heirlooms that have only been developed in the last decade and obviously much older heirlooms as well. Whilst growing heirloom vegetables will put you on the right track, it's not as simple as that. You need to select heirloom varieties that have the qualities that you are after. That could mean disease resistance, flavour, nutrient density, yield, timing of ripening, colour, this list goes on! I'll be writing about this in part 22 of my Vegetable Patch From Scratch series: https://leafrootfruit.substack.com/p/a-vegetable-patch-from-scratch-series
I do remember hearing that a few years ago when we had a string of days over 100 here in North Georgia. It apparently needs to get down to a certain (cooler) temperature at night for gardens to do well, and that wasn't happening. It makes me worry for the future...
This subject deserves careful discussion because I have heard similar narratives multiple times. I am going to sound a bit cranky, but I find this approach to food (aka Nutritionism) less than satisfying. “Nutritionism” considers particular foods as mere vehicles for “nutrients”, and is a piecemeal rather than holistic view of why we eat what we eat. To a greater or lesser degree, it plays fast and loose with science in the service of what amounts to an ideology (or belief system). We eat to stay alive and grow, eating many classes of materials in varying amounts. In human diets through most of evolutionary time, some essential compounds have been needed only in very small amounts and have been so reliably present in our food that our bodies have lost the ability to synthesize them, instead getting them from our food. We call these vitamins, and above a certain minimum, getting more of them does not improve our health. Therefore, in the context of this essay, the relevant question is, do the fruits and veggies of Big Ag, when part of a reasonable diet, lead to vitamin or mineral deficiencies? I would also add that many of our foods are fortified with vitamins and minerals, so a second question would be, does it matter where the vitamins (or minerals) come from? In other words, is a vitamin from a tomato different from the same vitamin in a pill? I think these are topics worth consideration.
I was curious about the data behind this essay, so I read the references and looked at the data. From my reading of these sources, I am skeptical about the subsequent interpretation in the articles that followed. Indeed, even the authors of the original articles seem skeptical. For example, in the article about iron in Australian veggies, the abstract states, “The majority of vegetables had similar iron content between two or more timepoints. … no definitive conclusions could be established.” In the British wheat study, after 1950 both the yield and grain size approximately doubled over pre-1950 values, largely because the starch content increased. Therefore, protein and mineral concentrations (not necessarily amounts) decreased as the grain size and yield increased. For the USDA study of 43 veggies between 1999-1950: the abstract reports decline for 6 nutrients but no decline for 7 others, and states, “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.” The derivative articles do not mention the skepticism expressed in the original research articles, nor the possible complexities of meaningful interpretation.
I have gardened in the past and loved it. I also understand that the scale and methods of big agriculture are off-putting in many ways. But it seems to me that the success of Big Ag has been to bring production up and prices down. I doubt that the family farm, as pleasing as it seems, can replace that for most Americans.
Call me a curmudgeon if you must, but why add “nutrient anxiety” to an activity that can be about pleasure and life in full. In describing a reasonable diet, Michael Pollan said it well: eat a variety of foods, eat moderately, and eat largely plants. I say, do that and you won’t have to give much thought to how much of vitamin x is in food y.
I wish you better gardening success next year!
Thank you for your thoughtful comment, Walter! I agree that, all in all, we mostly benefit from Big Ag since we couldn't feed the world's population without it. The threatening famine due to Ukraine's inability to ship grain from Odessa because of the war is a prime example (although they are able to export more grain via roads than they'd initially thought, which might hold off the worst of the crisis). It may be that one of the consequences of Big Ag's tactics is that we have to take oral vitamins to achieve our daily needs, though I've had many people tell me, "If you eat a healthy balanced diet, you don't need to take vitamins." Maybe that used to be the case, but there is some evidence (acknowledging your point about the inconsistency in the data) that fresh fruits and vegetables are not enough. But mostly, it seems to me, I have an explanation for why small crop, homegrown varieties tend to taste better. For me, at least, the information doesn't create "nutrient anxiety" but instead gives me the information I need to choose my fruits and veggies wisely, while knowing that not everyone has that luxury. And if things work out, perhaps my garden will be healthy enough next year to keep me from even buying others' homegrown varieties!
Because we have lost our connection to the land. The food has become disassociated by planes, trains and trucks. Ask a kid in an urban setting where food comes from- their answer will shock you - McDonald’s
It's true! Nowadays we take schoolchildren on field trips to farms to see where and how food is grown -- less than 100 years ago, most children in schools would go home to help out on the farm. Our world is changing quickly.
so true.
Another great post! While not a vegetable gardener, I have always been a big composter by example from my grandfather who generated a bountiful small vegetable garden behind his city home with the help of composting. I have noticed that my landscape plants do not seem to benefit from the compost until the second year after applying as a mulch or tilling in. Now I think I understand why since the soil may have not been able to develop the beneficial underground fungi until the later on after application. I agree with your observation that the plants in North Georgia don't appreciate the higher temperatures we've been having. Keep up the great writing.
Thanks for sharing this information about the compost pile - that makes sense, that the beneficial fungi haven't had a chance to establish until the second year. I've not ever really thought about that connection. Composting is a long-game!
That's so funny, I was raised on an Iowa farm, black top soil 18 inches deep and we could raise anything and it was so good. I agree eating what you raised is special, but not special enough when there's only 1 person eating it. LOL Keep up the great letters, I might not always comment but I always read and enjoy them.
Although I have raised large gardens in my past, when I had room to store canned product and 4 children to eat it, I am with you on gardening today. For one or two people the Farmers Market is a better value for fresh produce. Types of soil plays a large part also. In Florida we could grow anything in the sand, but it had few nutrients and little taste. Here in NC the heavy clay soil makes gardening depressing to say the least. I too tried the "bucket" gardening with little success. It's the local Farmers Markets for me!
Good to know it's not just my black thumb! I can keep houseplants alive (only the hardiest ones who don't mind neglected watering) but there's something special about raising food from scratch and eating it yourself... But, as Andrew has said multiple times this summer, if we were farmers, we'd have starved by now.
Another great write up! The most essential aspect of any food growing is genetics. If you plant seed with inferior genetics you'll never grow tasty, nutrient dense food. Aim to grow varieties popular with market gardeners in the 1950s. After that point the focus shifted from flavour and quality to yield and shelf life.
So that brings up the heirloom tomatoes that were so tasty - can we save those seeds to plant next year? In the back of my mind I'm thinking I've heard heirloom tomatoes aren't hybrids, so you can replant their seeds, but is that always true? Also, since I got these tomatoes from a friend of a friend, I'm not positive they're heirloom, but they were exceedingly ugly - is that proof enough that they're heirloom?
The definition of heirloom is that you can save the seeds. They come out true to type. There are modern heirlooms that have only been developed in the last decade and obviously much older heirlooms as well. Whilst growing heirloom vegetables will put you on the right track, it's not as simple as that. You need to select heirloom varieties that have the qualities that you are after. That could mean disease resistance, flavour, nutrient density, yield, timing of ripening, colour, this list goes on! I'll be writing about this in part 22 of my Vegetable Patch From Scratch series: https://leafrootfruit.substack.com/p/a-vegetable-patch-from-scratch-series
For now, you'll have to make do with my guide to growing tomatoes. It lists some of my favourite varieties to grow: https://www.leafrootfruit.com.au/how-to-grow-great-tomatoes-in-melbourne/
Hope that makes it a bit clearer for you. The dilution effect is a fascinating, yet frightening phenomenon. We should all be growing our own food!
We had similar results with our summer barden in SW FL. i think the heat really stressed our plants early. We used what we thought was good soil.
I do remember hearing that a few years ago when we had a string of days over 100 here in North Georgia. It apparently needs to get down to a certain (cooler) temperature at night for gardens to do well, and that wasn't happening. It makes me worry for the future...