What's the SD on "Nutritional inflation"

So I am currently reading In Defense Of Food, its an interesting, if depressing, read but most of it was not too surprising to me. One part was however really shocked me, in one section the author talks about what he callz “Nutritional inflation” (I’ve no idea if he coined the term himself).

He quotes some USDA figures (and some from the UK, he doesn’t say which agency) that the amount of various nutrients in agricultural plants (that is in the plants themselves, not the food produced from them) has fallen quite drastically since the 1950s. Vitamin-C by 20%, Riboflavin by 38%, for example. He doesn’t say exactly where these figures come from (e.g. which plants ? is that an average over several species, or just the “worse case” ?), or which report from the USDA he is quoting.

What do the assembled dopers make of this idea ? I’m surprised it is not more widely know, if an apple I am eating today has 20% less vitamin-C than one fifty years ago, that’s a big deal.

I have no idea if it is true, but I sure wouldn’t be surprised. Farmers have little incentive to breed crops that are rich in vitamins, but much incentive to breed crops that are pretty and will sell quickly.

I have seen people point to this Journal of the American College of Nutrition article to make the case…

I think that must have been his source for the USDA figures (the numbers match his exactly), thanks.

Apples are a very poor source of vitamin C to begin with. That particular 20 % drop doesn’t mean a thing, nutritionally.

I adore Michael Pollan’s books. I can’t tell you how happy it makes me to have someone ask for a cite for his info and get it.