Translation: We aren't selling as many chemicals due to organic demand

Lost in the headlines is that the study concentrated only on polyphenols and not at all on overall nutritional value. It did not measure mineral content nor did it measure pesticide content. When crops are grown in conjunction with pesticides and herbicides and when they are grown with non-organic petro-chemical fertilizers that promote growth but not nutrition in soils that are already mineral depleted, the result is less nutrition.

The reasons are simple: In order for plants to properly digest and uptake minerals, the presence of soil micro-organisms are essential as is the presence of minerals, and as is adequate time for such micro-organisms to convert the minerals. Commercial pesticides and herbicides kill soil micro-organisms. Chemical farming which only utilizes the petro-chemical fertilizers needed for growth and does nothing to replace all the other depleted minerals needed for nutrition, allows more over-farming. As a result, what micro-organisms do exist do not have time to properly convert what minerals do remain.

But then what kind of results and headlines would one expect from a study that appeared in the American Chemical Society's Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry and which was conducted by the Department of Food Chemistry, National Food Institute, Technical University of Denmark?

Always follow the money, and there is very big money in agricultural fertilizers and other chemicals which is threatened by increasing demand for organics.  This study reminds me all too much of all the big pharma funded bad news studies which follow good news about vitamin, mineral and other natural nutrient benefits.  The world has not developed all these many millions of years dependent upon petro-chemical synthetic fertilizers any more than mankind has developed dependent upon unnatural pharmaceuticals.