BREAKING NEWS from globeandmail.com, Saturday, July 6, 2002

Today's fruits, vegetables lack yesterday's nutrition

By ANDRE PICARD
From Saturday's Globe and Mail



 Fruits and vegetables sold in Canadian supermarkets today contain far
fewer nutrients than they did 50 years ago, according to an analysis
conducted by The Globe and Mail and CTV News.

 Vital vitamins and minerals have dramatically declined in some of our most
popular foods, including potatoes, tomatoes, bananas and apples, the
analysis reveals.





Find out more about what you eat

 Take the potato, by far the most consumed food in Canada. The average spud
has lost 100 per cent of its vitamin A, which is important for good
eyesight; 57 per cent of its vitamin C and iron, a key component of healthy
blood; and 28 per cent of its calcium, essential for building healthy bones
and teeth.

 It also lost 50 per cent of its riboflavin and 18 per cent of its
thiamine. Of the seven key nutrients measured, only niacin levels have
increased.

 The story is similar for 25 fruits and vegetables that were analyzed. But
Health Canada refused to comment on the findings, saying the debate was an
academic one.

 The academics, for their part, are intrigued, but not alarmed.

 Modern farming methods, long-haul transportation and crop-breeding
practices are all believed to be contributing to the drop in vitamins and
minerals.

 Phil Warman, an agronomist and professor of agricultural sciences at Nova
Scotia Agricultural College, said there is no doubt the nutritional content
of food is different today, due to the emphasis on producing cheap food.

 "The emphasis is on appearance, storability and transportability, and
there has been much less emphasis on the nutritional value of fruits and
vegetables," he said.

 Dr. Warman said crops are bred to produce higher yields, to be resistant
to disease and to produce more visually attractive fruits and vegetables,
but little or no emphasis is placed on their vitamin or mineral content.

 While there is little evidence, anecdotal or otherwise, that the changes
are resulting in major nutritional deficiencies in the general population,
Dr. Warman emphasized that consumers should care about the issue because it
is the nutrients, not the appearance, that give food value.

 "I care because I want to eat a product that is as high in nutritional
value as possible. Otherwise, I would eat sawdust with nitrogen
fertilizer," he said.

 Tim Lang, a professor at the Centre for Food Policy in London, England,
agreed. "It's an issue of consumer rights," he said. "We think of an orange
as a constant, but the reality is it isn't."

 In fact, you would have to eat eight oranges today to get the same amount
of vitamin A your grandparents got from a single orange. And you would need
to eat five to get the same level of iron. However, the amount of vitamin C
has increased slightly.

 Dr. Lang said declining nutrient levels may prove to be a health issue
because we are only beginning to understand how important micronutrients
are to disease prevention. "The argument that it doesn't matter because we
overconsume is complacent. . . . Nutrient density might also be important."

 Alison Stephen, director of research at the Heart and Stroke Foundation of
Canada, said the biggest nutritional problem is that most Canadians do not
eat anywhere near the recommended five to 10 servings of fruits and
vegetables daily.

 But she is not unduly worried about today's consumers failing to get their
required vitamins and minerals. "A lot of our foods today are fortified
milk, bread, apple juice, cereal," she said.

 In other words, grains and dairy products are far more important sources
of essential nutrients than they were in the past.

 To conduct the analysis, The Globe and Mail and CTV examined food tables
that were prepared by government researchers in 1951, 1972 and 1999, and
compared the nutrients available from 100 grams of the given food.

 The results were almost identical to similar research conducted in the
United States and Britain. The U.K. research was published in the British
Food Journal, a peer-reviewed, scientific publication, while the U.S. data
have been published only in alternative-health journals.

 According to the Canadian data, almost 80 per cent of foods tested showed
drops in calcium and iron; three-quarters saw drops in vitamin A, and half
lost vitamin C and riboflavin; one-third lost thiamine and 12 per cent lost
niacin.

 But some experts said the explanation for the decline might be found in
testing and sampling methods.

 Len Piche, an associate professor of nutrition at Brescia College in
London, Ont., questioned the accuracy of the numbers, saying testing
methods were not great in 1951, so we may only now be getting a true idea
of the nutrients in fruits and vegetables. "Did they really go down, or do
we just have better techniques for analyzing those nutrients?" he wondered.

 However, Dr. Piche said the issue is one Health Canada should examine. "If
there's a problem, I'm confident the government will take it seriously and
do the necessary research to address it," he said.

 In the analysis, the biggest loser was broccoli, a food that epitomizes
the dictates of healthy eating. All seven of its measurable nutrients
declined, notably calcium, which fell 63 per cent, and iron, which dropped
34 per cent. Broccoli is often cited as an excellent source of calcium and
iron.

 With a report from Avis Favaro




Visit globeandmail.com for more breaking news and powerful financial tools.

News: http://www.globeandmail.com
jean-claude