Not contradicting your view that the article isn't very diligent, but have you heard of oxidation? Atoms constantly react to the environment, they can bond wit

Not contradicting your view that the article isn't very diligent, but have you heard of oxidation? Atoms constantly react to the environment, they can bond with other atoms, form new compounds. Oxidation time varies, in the case of potassium it is very fast, the claims in the articles would stand. For vitamins, it also depends. I got into a rabbit hole a few years back, digging into numbers from multiple academic sources on the subject. They concur that fruits and vegetables have "lost" the majority of their nutrient density. The low end figure is (rather was) 70% loss, the high end 90%. The reasons are multiple like the article said. I recall reading a thorough and most backed paper explaining the main cause is the soil. We are over exploiting, not allowing the time needed for soils to recoup their content, in minerals in particular. We use fertilisers but these are to enable growth, not so that what end up in your dish is rich in nutrient. We could quite easily reverse the trend, even getting back to normal levels, but that implies a massive hit in production for several years, in a row. Some would call it greed, but can we even produce for the world's population if we did that...