Joel cited (?):
>SUPER-BROCCOLI that packs an extra punch against cancer has been bred from
>ordinary broccoli and a scrawny wild Sicilian relative. Compared with
>regular broccoli, it contains 10 times as much sulphoraphane, a substance
>that helps to neutralise cancer-causing substances in the gut.

At this point I would like to ask which substances of ordinary and
wild
broccoli are missing or severely decreased in "super-broccoli".

>Williamson, who described the super-broccoli earlier this month at an
>Institute of Food Research seminar in London, expects that people who eat
it
>will produce even higher concentrations of glutathione transferases.

Let's do a bet: he will proven to be wrong. You can't force your body
to increase its production of one single substance by such simple
means.

It's always the same story. Yesterday it was super-blue-green-algae,
today
we get super-broccoli and tomorrow I guess we wil have super-peaches
or
super-tomatoes (didn't we already get flavr savr - what has happened
to
it?) and so on.
One single fruit or vegetable is pushed as being the cure for all
ailments
of this world. So silly.

We have talked much about natural diets here and one thing should be
clear:
humans can eat and thrive on a very broad spectrum of foods so there
is
little chance one can reduce all that to a handful of "super-foods"
which
provide all a human needs.
Of course there are exceptions... ;-)
One related person lived half a year solely on durian and its seeds in
Vietnam. He added 10kg of muscle mass and came back in a bright and
joyous mood.

Have a good raw day,

Stefan