Science deep dive

Over the last half-century, the nutritional density of what we eat has steadily withered away.

Researchers at the University of California, Berkeley in Texas recently looked into the nutrient profiles of 43 different crops, and the takeaway is pretty grim: their nutritional value has been sliding for fifty years.

The whole point of the study was to see how modern industrial farming techniques actually mess with the chemistry of our food. They tracked shifts in the composition of various crops—mostly vegetables, along with things like cantaloupe and strawberries—by comparing data from 1950 against findings from 1999.

They ran comparisons on specific nutrients, including protein, calcium, phosphorus, iron, riboflavin, and vitamin C, looking at both individual items and broader food groups.

What they found was that compared to the mid-century levels, by 1999, the nutritional punch of these foods had dropped anywhere from 6% for proteins up to a staggering 38% for riboflavin.

The authors pointed out that the decline in magnesium, zinc, vitamin B6, vitamin E, and dietary fiber is likely just as worrying, though since they weren't actually measuring those specific nutrients back in 1950, it remains a heavy suspicion rather than a proven fact.

Source: Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics 2004. 23, Num. 6

Two billion people are living on a nutritional deficit

A recent report from the World Economic Forum, presented during their meeting in Davos, Switzerland, suggests that a third of the global population isn't getting the vitamins and minerals they actually need.

When you're missing those essential micronutrients, everything starts to slide—cognitive development stalls, immune systems fail, and we see higher rates of birth defects. It basically condemns two billion people to live far below what their bodies and minds are truly capable of achieving.

So, how do we fix this mess?

We could look at fortifying the food supply—things like adding iron to flour, Vitamin A to sugar, or iodine to table salt—or leaning on supplements, but honestly, the only real way out of this cycle is through proper education.

👋

darkbison81 said:Back to the endless waiting game for that article to finally drop. 🙂
By the way, those two aren't actually the authors behind that specific article, are they?

I sent an email over to the source in Germany, so once that link or reply hits my inbox, I'll let you all know. 🙂

You hit the nail on the head—those two weren't actually the ones behind that study. 😉

Here’s the latest shot from Friday, April 15th, '05—captured by mistybear4.
😎

Man, I can't even get to the actual article—I try to hit this link but it just keeps blocking me...

Does anyone here have a subscription to those science journals? Maybe we could all chip in and somehow split a PDF or something...

Jose Miller3 said:Unfortunately, I can't get past the paywall. I hit this link and it just blocks me...

Does anyone here have an academic subscription? Maybe we could pool resources and share the PDF?

My university has a subscription, but even they aren't letting me in—probably because someone isn't keeping up with the bills. 😉
If any of you manage to grab the article, please let me know...🙏

Jose Miller3 said:Unfortunately, I can't get into the full article. Every time I try to click here, it just hits a paywall and blocks me...

None of us have a subscription to that one either.

mistybear4 said:I sent an email directly to the source over in Germany. As soon as they get back to me with a link or the actual file, I'll let you guys know... 🙂

Fair enough.
But looking at that citation you posted (Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics, Vol. 23, No. 6, 669-682 (2004)), that's actually an American study, not that German one mentioned earlier...
Do you happen to have a specific reference for the German study (maybe it's in a journal we actually have access to)? Or, if you manage to snag the PDF for this American one, could you share it?

darkbison81 said:We don't even have a subscription for that.

Fair enough.
But that reference you cited (Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics, Vol. 23, No. 6, 669-682 (2004)) is actually an American study, not that German one mentioned at the start of our conversation...
Do you happen to have a citation for the German study (maybe in a journal we actually subscribe to)? Or perhaps you have a PDF of this American one handy?

You're right, it's just a single article I threw in to try and paint a broader picture of how nutrient density has shifted over the years... 🙂

My biggest hurdle is that my English isn't quite where it needs to be yet, which makes working through these books I managed to track down a real struggle, let alone trying to translate everything I find online. 🙂

I always tell myself that if there's a good enough reason to find something, you'll eventually find a way... just because everything isn't sitting on a silver platter doesn't mean it doesn't exist if you're persistent enough. Though, most people usually aren't. 😢 )

mistybear4 said:Recent studies out of Germany have confirmed that the vitamin and mineral content in our fruits and veggies is steadily dropping:
I’m really curious—after seeing this data, do you guys honestly think you’re getting enough micronutrients from the produce you can find at the grocery store? Or are you starting to realize that supplements are pretty much mandatory if you want to make sure your body actually gets what it needs?

Look, let me try to explain what we're actually looking for here. You're claiming these studies in Germany showed something specific... but for us to take that seriously, we need to see the actual peer-reviewed papers. That's just how science works—you don't just take "news reports" at face value, you go straight to the source. I tried digging up the study you mentioned, but unfortunately, none of us on this forum can access it. We just want to read that specific paper (or maybe another one you could point us toward) regarding this topic. Once we can vet the data ourselves, then we'll form our own opinions, you know?...

mistybear4 said:My biggest hurdle right now is that my English isn't quite where it needs to be yet. It makes working through the books I’ve managed to pick up a real struggle, let alone trying to parse everything I find online... 🙂

Look, nobody is asking you to translate entire books or transcribe articles—that would be an exhausting amount of busywork and totally unnecessary. All we need is for you to provide the original source or the link to the article itself.
Unfortunately, that one reference you shared is from a journal that neither I, nor Jose Miller3, nor Frank Alvarez8 can access (at least not currently—maybe Frank will have better luck down the road...), and I doubt most others here could track it down either, given how limited access to these types of publications can be.
As for the second study you mentioned, you didn't include a reference, but if I understood correctly, you were writing over in Germany, so you should be able to pull those stats together.

Since you're the one bringing this info to the table and asking us to consider or adopt it, the responsibility falls on you to provide the necessary data. 🙂

We’ve done our best on this end to verify things, but as you can see, we've hit a wall...

I really hope you're working on your English. As you're starting to realize, all the serious research is published in peer-reviewed international journals, and English is the universal standard. If you want to be able to gather raw, primary data, mastering the language is pretty much non-negotiable.

Jose Miller3 said:Look, let me try to clarify what we’re actually looking for from you. You keep claiming that certain studies out of Germany showed specific results. If you want us to take you seriously, we need to see the actual peer-reviewed papers behind those claims. That’s just how science works: you don't rely on some news headline; you go straight to the primary source. I tried digging up one of the papers you referenced, but unfortunately, none of us here on the forum can get access to it. All we want is to read that specific study—or maybe you could point us toward another one on the subject—so we can vet it ourselves. Once we've read the data, then we'll form our own opinions, you get me?

Well, looks like she beat me to the punch. 😬

darkbison81 said:Man, you totally beat me to it... 😬

But honestly, that's only because your explanation was way more thorough and detailed than mine!

Jose Miller3 said:but that's only because your explanation was longer and more detailed!

Mine was just rambling on, whereas you actually gave a concise breakdown of what we need to do. 😁

Jose Miller3 said:Look, let me try to explain what we're actually asking for here. You claim some studies out of Germany showed certain results, but if you want us to take you seriously, we need to see the actual peer-reviewed papers. That's just how science works—you don't rely on news headlines; you go straight to the source. I tried looking for that specific paper you mentioned, but unfortunately, none of us on this forum can access it. We just want to read that study, or maybe one you can point us toward, so we can form our own conclusions, you know?

"if you want us to believe you"
so, am I really supposed to break my back hunting down documents just to earn your trust? .. 😕
The idea that everyone here backs up every single claim with hard evidence is charming, really, but let's be realistic... 🤔

I’m happy enough to dig through the archives to find this stuff, but I’m certainly not going to deal with any kind of pressure to produce it instantly. You can all have your opinions right now; there's plenty of talk about produce quality, and anyone who has eaten an apple lately knows they taste nothing like they did ten years ago, so drawing a conclusion isn't exactly rocket science. 😉

Since I'm the one who brought the data to the table, I'll do my best to track down the original text or a working link so you guys can finally "believe" me. 🙂

PS: I've also heard about a twenty-year study from Switzerland regarding the impact of Omega-3 on health, but I haven't been able to locate the primary document either—though that doesn't mean the findings aren't true, and I'm not losing sleep over it. 🙂

I don't trust my own taste buds when we're debating the actual chemical makeup of food. 🙂 Besides, whether certain fruits or vegetables are actually "good" for someone is incredibly subjective...

Look, if you want to argue something that isn't common knowledge—like saying the sun shines during the day, which anyone can verify without a peer-reviewed study—you have to back it up with actual data. Just like how many studies have been cited for decades and don't necessarily need a link to the original paper, you still need to provide substance. Unfortunately, the numbers you threw out in your first post don't mean much to us until we can actually weigh their value and determine if they're even true.

If we’re just talking hypothetically:
Assuming your data is right and people can't get everything they need from whole foods, they’re going to have to figure out how to hit their nutritional targets. If food isn't cutting it, supplements become necessary.

But if we're being realistic:
Since darkbison81 doesn't have any data on how food composition is shifting, there's nothing for them to weigh in on. If you guys want to have a serious conversation about this with her, you'll need to provide the actual data first. 🙂

darkbison81 said:if anyone wants to chat about this and she's having trouble digging up the right info, feel free to just send the data over to her 🙂

Look, mistybear4 isn't actually interested in talking shop about vitamin content in food... they just want darkbison81 to buy their supplements!

I forgot to mention

mistybear4 said:I’m completely rejecting any kind of pressure to go out and hunt this down immediately.

Of course. Honestly, my apologies if I came off as pushy. I wasn't sure how much of this info was at your fingertips—I assumed since you work professionally in nutrition, you might have the data right there or could grab it easily—and I didn't account for how much time you'd actually need. Regardless, take all the time you need; it’s really not an issue. 🙂

Jose Miller3 said:mistybear4 doesn't actually want to have a real conversation with darkbison81 about nutrient density in food; he just wants darkbison81 to buy his supplements!

There you go, being spiteful again. 😁

: smajlickojisamsebelupapoprstimaigovorineto:

Jose Miller3 said:: smiling at yourself while you're finger-pointing and talking nonsense:

Oh, it's possible, Jose Miller3, it's totally possible. 😘 😁

mistybear4 said:mistybear4 isn't actually interested in discussing nutrient density with Luca; they just want Luca to buy their supplements instead.

I've seen this routine before, and honestly, it’s pretty sad how you frame everything through such a negative lens—you can't even recognize helpful information when it's right in front of you. It's that classic Midwestern bitterness, where people seem more concerned with seeing someone else fail than actually learning anything useful. 👎

Luca said:I forgot,
of course. I sincerely apologize if I came off as pushy. I wasn't sure what kind of data you had access to—I assumed since you work professionally in nutrition, you might have these things handy—or how much time you needed to dig. Anyway, take all the time you need, it's really no big deal. 🙂

Fair enough, no worries. I managed to track down some details, though they feel a bit incomplete since I can't find the full set of data, so if anyone here happens to find more on this, I'd definitely appreciate the heads-up:

The study was conducted back in the late 90s over in Karlsruhe, at Labcorp (I might have the name slightly off, to be honest). 😕