While I agree to some extent that "food is food" I don't think that's the start and end of it. Fruits tend to have a lot of water in them. Imagine a fruit tha

While I agree to some extent that "food is food" I don't think that's the start and end of it. Fruits tend to have a lot of water in them. Imagine a fruit that has somehow magically had all its cell have 50% more water in them. It'd be 50% bigger than before. And it would sell for 50% more than before. But would it have 50% more nutrition in it? Hard to say, but it feels like no. There'd be more of some stuff sure, like more cell walls to hold all that extra water. But more of the stuff you want? I don't know. I think this is a legitimate concern to have in the whole "superfood" or modern food nutrition debate. Farmers like increasing yield, and there are probably ways to increase yield without increasing nutrition. It's like the old cram an extra 100lbs on every cow in water with salt trick that ranchers used to and perhaps still use. I'm not suggesting that the whole idea of a superfood is real or valid. But there probably are foods which are better for you by virtue of the fact that the agricultural machine hasn't highly optimized them for whatever yet. I am skeptical of the claim 100x, but I might readily believe 2x or 3x.