>> >the "superior" strains will have 10% (or 5% or 7%
>> or
>> >whatever) more of whatever nutrients it naturally
>> >possessed.
The food does not have to be more
>"dense" or bigger to have these higher values.

I still don't understand how is it possible to have more nutrients and the
food not getting bigger or denser unless other nutrients are in a  decrease.
proportion .  yet I am ready to accept the idea than in living cells  the
mathemathic laws doesn't apply , i would like to see some evidence of that.
other point,  they compare a domestic orange with an improved version of the
domestic orange not with the wild original (we lost tract of that one ) i
will be interested for example on a weight to weight basis to have the
nutrients content of a pacific wild crab apple and a modern improved
domestic one , or the comparaison between a wild dandelion or chicoree and
their ameliorated cousins.

this is a good example of the illusion in which we  are bathing. We disturb
in the first place ( domesticating)  , create a problem as a consequence
(impoverish nutrition) , try to fix it ( higher vit content) create a new
problem  ( insuline resistance from higher sugar content in modern food?)
and on and on till we remove ourselves so much from the source of our
problem ( us playing god), that the suffering get so unbearable that we let
go of control. and let nature do the healing.
>
How much suffering is "needed " to reach that humility is the question .

But we can hide the suffering of poor nutrition,  genetic engineering is
going to resolve the problem...

>
>> nature 's balance everything is always at its
>> fullest potential
>
>I have to disagree with this. If everything was at its
>fullest potential than nothing would change, evolution
>would not function, and we would likely not be here.
i have to precise that the balance that i am talking about is a dynamic
process and when we artificially measure things at a given time what is , is
allways at its best at this given time.
>

>
>Where, by definition, you are growing domesticated
>plants! Do you water the plants? Do you feed them? Do
>you keep the weeds out? Then you have already made
>them "unnatural". But, don't despair. You've very
>likely improved their nutrient levels over their
>"natural" counterparts.
It is precisely why i am getting interpelled by your post , i am actually
practicing "the naturel way of farming " from Masanobu Fukuoka . and it is
about not doing better than nature, not because it is bad just because it is
useless to try to improve on what can't be improved. So we grow plants
domestics and wild ) without tilling the ground ,fertilising, weeding,
treatments of  diseases, or pruning fruits trees . They are the 5 principles
that we base our work on .  And for some reasons,  that we are glad to
accept  , the plants over generations revert to their wild caracteristics,
as an instinctive eater it is what i want).
when scientists will be able to create a domesticated nettle that is richer
than the wild one i am retiring and let the agrobusiness take charge of my
food
jean-claude.

>__________________________________________________