3 ms·
It's true but it still means we could do better by trying to optimise for nutrition value as well - which seems to somehow hidden from us. You often don't taste
by mirekrusin 11y ago
It's true but it still means we could do better by trying to optimise for nutrition value as well - which seems to somehow hidden from us. You often don't taste or see nutrition value.
Also what does it mean for food recommendation if one strawberry has completely different vitamins/minerals/etc than the other one? Eating strawberry A and B means completely different things now. "One fruit a day" or "One cheap fruit a day + supplement pill"?
- scrumper 11y agoWell, we've optimized for yield (=> cost) exclusively. Taste and nutritional value are other axes. In a way you're saying the same thing as the article - that it's a shame to focus only on yield. To answer your question, I think its important to first understand whether the nutritional gap between zero strawberries and modern strawberries is much greater than that between modern strawberries and old-fashioned low yield tasty strawberries. My opinion (worth nothing of course) is that it's better to have some fruit than no fruit, and high yield, cheap produce allows that.