The Neolithic period in our evolutionary history ushered in the development of agriculture, as tribes of Hunter gatherers increasingly converted their lifestyle from nomadic tribes to community oriented farmers who relied on the development of agriculture for their survival. Roughly 10,000 years before the Neolithic period, as they were gathering seeds in a meadow well populated with plants (that have since been developed into modern-day wheat), one or more of our ancestors apparently became inspired with the idea of planting some of the seeds from the most productive plants to see if the offspring would produce better than average yields. That simple act proved the benefits of a policy that has survived the test of time, and is still used today as the primary selective breeding technique used by plant breeders. In other words, when producing seed for next year's crop, foodgrains, such as corn, wheat, and rice, for example, are selected for high production potential, in order to feed a growing world population. Pre-Neolithic soils were rich with nutrients. Ever since the beginning of time, nothing had been taken out of the soil that hadn't been returned, as expired plants and animals decomposed so that their nutrients were returned to the soil. When rain fell, minerals (such as magnesium, potassium, and calcium, for example) leached from various rocks to enrich the soil and river and lake water. Nutrient content of the soil is critical for both plants and animals. Over time, intensive agriculture without adequate replenishment of nutrients can strip soils of essential minerals, which cascades through the entire food system, affecting plant health, animal nutrition, and ultimately, human health. When soils are depleted of essential minerals like magnesium, zinc, selenium, iron, and potassium, crops grown in those soils typically show a reduction in mineral density. This is well-documented in multiple studies showing declines in nutrient content in fruits, vegetables, and grains over the last 50–70 years. For example, wheat and spinach today have been shown to contain significantly less iron and magnesium than in the mid-20th century. Crops grown in mineral-poor soils also tend to be more vulnerable to pests and diseases, reducing yield and quality. Fertilizer practices often don't replace micronutrients. Modern industrial farming often relies heavily on N-P-K fertilizers (nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium), which encourage plant growth but don’t replenish trace elements. Over time, this creates an imbalance — high yields, but with reduced nutritional value. Animals raised for meat, milk, and eggs rely on either forage or grain crops for nutrition. If these crops are grown in depleted soil, the animals consuming them may also suffer from subclinical deficiencies of key minerals. Furthermore:
These mineral deficiencies often don't cause obvious disease but can reduce productivity and meat quality, which can then affect the nutrient density of the animal products humans consume. Ultimately, this affects human health. When the entire food chain is built on nutrient-depleted soils, the end result tends to be: Lower dietary intake of essential minerals (like magnesium, iron, zinc, iodine, and selenium). A higher risk of micronutrient deficiencies, especially in populations dependent on local food systems or in regions with poor soil health. Soil is not just a growth medium — it's a living system that directly influences the nutritional quality of our food. When it becomes depleted, the effects ripple across ecosystems and food webs, from plants to animals to humans. Long-term food security and nutrition depend not just on crop yields or animal growth rates, but on investing in soil health as a foundational pillar of agriculture. Selective breeding of grains such as corn, sorghum, wheat, and rice has historically emphasized enhancing yield and accelerating growth to meet the demands of a growing global population. While these efforts have successfully increased production, they have also led to notable changes in the nutritional composition of these crops. Prioritizing yield can result in the "dilution effect," where the concentrations of essential nutrients decrease as carbohydrate content increases. This phenomenon has been observed in various crops, including vegetables and grains. In wheat, for example, breeding for higher yields has been associated with reductions in protein content and essential micronutrients such as iron and zinc. Some plant breeders have attempted to enhance grain nutrition. To counteract nutrient reductions, biofortification strategies have been implemented. These involve breeding crops to enhance their nutritional profiles. A notable example is Quality Protein Maize (QPM), developed to contain increased levels of lysine and tryptophan, essential amino acids lacking in conventional maize. Note that the U.S. refers to maize as "corn", while most of the rest of the world uses the term "maize". Unfortunately, few farmers plant QPM. Despite the fact that QPM varieties have been available for approximately 50 or 60 years, and new varieties with improved and enhanced features have been introduced within the last 30 or 35 years, less than 1% of the corn produced in the U.S. is from this category. Worldwide, precise statistics are not available, but probably less than 5% of the corn/maize produced has QPM genetics. It's most widely used (5–10%, depending on the country) in sub-Saharan Africa, where diets rely heavily on the use of maize. A recently posted online article with the title "Fruits and vegetables aren't as nutritious as they used to be. What happened?" describes many of the nutrition problems with today's food (Millerm, 2025, March 27).2 The article notes that fruits, vegetables, and grains today are less nutritious than they were 70+ years ago, with notable declines in six key nutrients:
And the author mentions that a him study cited found up to a 38% drop in riboflavin (vitamin B2) in commonly consumed vegetables since the 1950s. In addition to the problem of soil nutrient depletion, modern crops are bred for higher yield, pest resistance, and faster growth, and this typically occurs at the expense of nutritional value. In other words, fast-growing plants accumulate fewer nutrients per unit of weight. Even global warming negatively affects nutrition levels of plants. As the author points out, rising CO2 levels may increase carbohydrates (sugars and starches) in plants while diluting minerals such as zinc and iron, because increased CO2 levels increase photosynthesis rates. Can utilizing organically produced foods improve our nutrition? The author recommends choosing organically produced food because it's often more nutrient dense, and grown in healthier soils. While research shows that organically managed soils typically contain more nutrients than soils used in conventional commercial production, whether or not the food produced by organic methods actually contain more nutrients than conventionally produced foods depends on which nutrients are under consideration. It is under certain conditions, but the difference is not universal across all foods, and results vary, depending on the crop, farming practices, and environment. A major 2014 meta-analysis published in the British Journal of Nutrition analyzed 343 peer-reviewed studies and found that organically produced crops had 18–69% higher levels of antioxidants like flavonoids and phenolic acids. These compounds have been linked to lower risks of chronic diseases. And some studies showed higher levels of iron, magnesium, and phosphorus in organic vegetables and grains. Organically produced milk, meat, and eggs often contain higher omega-3 levels due to grass-based feeding and access to pasture. But that doesn't mean that organically produced foods are always better. The study showed that organically produced crops did not always show higher levels of certain macronutrients (such as protein, carbs, and fats). In the study, these levels were usually comparable between organic and conventional produce. Some studies showed slightly higher levels of vitamin C and calcium in organic produce, while others showed no significant difference. Comparing organic and conventional crops, the bottom line appears to be:
The researchers concluded that organic foods can be more nutrient-dense, especially in antioxidants and certain minerals, but the difference is not guaranteed across the board. Looking at a more recent study: A more recent comprehensive systematic review of 147 scientific articles, designed to evaluate whether organic foods are consistently more nutritious than conventional foods (based on 68 different food types, and the consideration of 22 nutritional properties) found that (Thaise de Oliveira Faoro, et al., 2024):2 1. 29.1% of comparisons showed significant nutritional differences between organic and conventional foods. In these cases, organic foods may have shown higher nutrient levels or lower levels of contaminants, but only in specific foods and nutrients. 2. 29.0% of comparisons showed inconsistent results across studies. Some studies found differences, and others did not, so there was no consensus. 2. 41.9% of comparisons showed no significant difference in nutritional content between organic and conventional foods. The researchers concluded that there was no generalizable nutritional superiority of organic over conventional foods. In other words, nutritional advantages of organic foods are specific to certain food types in certain nutrients. Therefore, the belief that organic is always more nutritious is not supported by this large-scale review. Feedlot animals and poultry: Selective breeding in feedlot animals and poultry has long focused on enhancing traits like rapid growth and improved feed conversion efficiency. While these advancements have bolstered production metrics, they have also introduced notable changes to the nutritional composition of meat, particularly concerning fat content and fatty acid profiles. Selective breeding has led to leaner meat in certain livestock breeds. For instance, the Large White pig (a British breed) is renowned for its efficient feed conversion and high slaughter value, resulting in a significant proportion of lean meat. The emphasis on rapid growth and leanness can affect the balance of fatty acids in meat. While leaner cuts may have reduced total fat, the composition of essential fatty acids, such as omega-3 and omega-6, may also shift, potentially altering the nutritional quality of the meat. Beyond nutritional changes, intensive selection for growth traits has been linked to meat quality issues. In poultry, conditions like woody breast, white striping, and spaghetti meat have emerged, affecting texture and consumer acceptance. No easy solution exists. The healthier soil, environmental practices, and reduced chemical exposure often associated with organic farming are real benefits, but do not guarantee better nutrition in every crop. Decisions about organic vs. conventional foods should consider specific goals (for example, reducing exposure to pesticides, supporting sustainability, or seeking higher antioxidant content), not just perceived nutritional superiority. References 1. Millerm, K. (2025, March 27). Fruits and vegetables aren’t as nutritious as they used to be. What happened? Yahoo!Life, Retrieved from https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/fruits-vegetables-aren-t-nutritious-090004954.html 2. Thaise de Oliveira Faoro, D., Artuzo F.D., Rossi Borges J. A., Foguesatto, C. R., Dewes, H., and Talamini, E. (2024). Are organics more nutritious than conventional foods? A comprehensive systematic review. Heliyon, 10(7), e28288. Retrieved from https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10987935/
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWayne Persky Archives
December 2025
Categories |
Offices: 19242 Darrs Creek Rd, Bartlett, Texas 76511-4460
RSS Feed 
