Re: Hard facts

Well, to the two people who disagreed with the above, I totally stand by what I said. And not only can I not find facts, neither can organisations who are genuinely pursuing the truth, as I am. I just got an email from Dan Kittredge, who features in this video


He is director of the real food campaign, which is a project of http://www.remineralize.org,
and when I sent him the list of of things which would prove this he replied:

"We are intending to make the case for nutrition in food by documneting shortcomings, assisting farmers in increasing quality, setting up an empirical mineral assay quality standard, and generally developing the vertical integration necessary to bring nutrient dense crops to the food supply. Sorry to not have the info you and many others want right now, but we have built a very solid list of allies with the capacity to implement the aforementioned list and are in process. Keep and eye out, and feel free to spread whatever we come up with that meets your very appropriate hard Science standard."

My initial request for scientific proof was met by an email that said "The details that you are looking for are the ones that I am trying to collect and disseminate." So if an organisation dedicated to this sort of thing can't find it, then it's hardly surprising that I can't. But the point is, don't believe anything you read just because you think it's right, or because it appeals to you. We all like to learn good news about our bad habits, and there are people out there ready to feed us that news by twisted Science and the media, here is an example - http://www.nhs.uk/news/2009/11November/Pages/chocolate-mental-health-cut-stre...
- an article that got widespread news such as even on "What Doctors Don't tell you" http://www.wddty.com/a-little-chocolate-every-day-helps-reduce-stress.html

Even the name of the website has implications that doctors withold truth from you, and they are there to reveal the truth. But as the link shows, the Science was distorted and poor. Hardly surprizing, as Nestlé sponsored it. They want your money, it's that simple really, and they will play any tricks to get it. They have been doing it for over a decade, see http://www.google.com/search?hl=en-GB&q=chocolate+is+good+for+you


Going back to real food, I really don't think there are strong publicised reports out there that prove the point of nutrient depletion, or at least I have yet to find one. Permaculture organizations are not well funded and simply don't have the money. If anyone has done research it I suspect it would have been the chemical industries, and they would not have published if it showed their methods of farming using fertilizers have depleted nutrients.

At the end of the day, it may well be that nutrients are depleted, or perhaps some are depleted and some are increased, or the plant produces more crop but the nutrients absorbed are the same as before so the overall density is less, I don't know. But I also won't take any notice of words (it's not even proper research) from people who want to sell food suplements. They are no different to Nestlé, they have a business to run, take a look at this http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/sep/12/matthiasrath.aids

I'll stick with Matt Lederman's advice and avoid supplements. Even if nutrient densities are less now, we have a bigger choice of excellent fresh fruit and vegetables than ever before, we are living in plenty. The real reason people get deficiencies is because they choose to eat at McDonalds. Tweet