I wonder if anyone in the UK is doing similar research to that being done at the University of Texas where it has been revealed that the trend toward bigger, faster growing crops is resulting in vegetables with lower levels of nutrients.
According to ABC News, six of the 13 major nutrients found in fruits and vegetables have declined substantially in recent decades.
The researcher, Donald Davis, said “It’s a simple inverse relationship: The higher the yield, the lower the nutrients.
He said this happens because slower-growing crops have more time to absorb nutrients from both the sun and the soil.
Yet another point for the Slow Food movement, but one that is bound to get shunted aside by the politicians, bureaucrats, agri-businesses and supermarkets.
Hello stonehead, we are on the same wavelength. I am a big fan of the slow food movement. I made a similar post on my blog about the same topic. http://earthfriendlygardening.wordpress.com/2006/03/01/bigger-is-not-better/
One thing that irritated me about the comments by Donald Davis is that by referring to “farmers” trying to increase their profits, he conjures in the reader’s mind a picture of the typical family farmer. But the people doing this to our food are not rightly called “farmers.” They are “agribusiness,” “big ag,” “big farma,” whatever you want to call them–but they are not farmers.
I came across your blog while looking for other comments on the ABC News story and will have to read more of your posts (when I have time!).
I couldn’t agree more about agri-business - it bears very little resemblance to the sort of self-sufficient farming that we do. We aim to meet most of our needs, and then barter with or sell to friends and neighbours for anything else.
We’re firmly in control of what we eat and we treat our animals and the land with the respect they deserve. And it’s always nice to know that we’re not alone.