The High Cost of (not) Eating Fresh
Most people would probably prefer to consume fresh, organically grown produce from a local farm than conventionally grown produce from 2000 miles away. However, one of the biggest factors preventing most from doing so is the perceived ‘high cost’ of such produce. Many people will see a conventionally grown pepper priced at .99/lb and a local, organically grown pepper priced at twice that amount and think, is there really a difference? After all, the two peppers look very similar. There can’t be that much of a difference, right?
Let’s step back from the price for a moment and examine the reason we are looking to buy produce in the first place. People consume produce to provide the nutrients our bodies need to function — and for taste of course. So then the question becomes, does one pepper do a better job than the other at fulfilling these two functions?
Let’s first examine the conventionally grown pepper — the one typically found on most grocery store shelves. This pepper was grown thousands of miles away and was likely picked before it was allowed to fully ripen to give it the longest possible shelf life. This however comes at the cost of receiving the full nutrient potential had the pepper been allowed to properly ripen on the vine. Furthermore, since this is a conventionally grown pepper it likely received multiple applications of synthetic pesticides, many of which have been found to be carcinogenic to humans and fatal to bees. However the most obvious difference between the two will come down to taste. Since the conventionally grown pepper was picked before it was ripe it will not be as flavorful as one allowed to ripen on the vine.
The local, organically grown pepper in contrast is likely to be more than twice as fresh at the time of consumption and therefore can be allowed to properly ripen. This not only enhances its flavor, but also the amount of nutrients it provides your body as the vitality of food declines significantly post-harvest. [For more on this read, ‘Why Fresh Matters’]. Another key difference will revolve around how the pepper was grown. A local farm using regenerative agricultural practices will likely have no need for pesticide applications and if they did it would begin with natural pesticides that are non-toxic to humans and the environment. Furthermore, a pepper grown in healthy soil with a diverse microbiology will have a contain a broader array of minerals and a higher nutritional density.
A 2004 study in the Journal of the American College of Nutrition titled Changes in USDA Food Composition Data for 43 Garden Crops, 1950 to 1999 provides some of the best data documenting these differences. The changes in agriculture during this span center around a dramatic increase in synthetic chemical usage as both a fertility aid and a pesticide/herbicide, in addition to crops being bred for higher yield rather than flavor. The study hypothesizes that, “overall nutrient declines may result importantly from decades of selecting food crops for high yield, with resulting inadvertent trade-offs of reduced nutrient concentrations.” Across the board the foods studied showed reliable median decreases of many of the minerals evaluated including calcium (16%), potassium (9%), iron (15%), riboflavin (38%), and ascorbic acid (15%).
Over the years the market has valued transport over taste and yield over nutritional density. Methods were devised for providing the greatest return at the lowest possible cost. This moved us from creating soil fertility with organic matter like manures and plant debris to doing so in the form of synthetic nutrients, which broadly focus on providing bulk N-P-K (nitrogen-potassium-phosphorous). This may result in a plant that looks good, but is lacking in nutritional content by contrast. Furthermore, vegetables grown in soils depleted of these nutrients will be less healthy themselves and more susceptible to pests and disease, hence the need for regular applications of synthetic pesticides, herbicides, and fungicides.
The upside of mass-scale conventional farming is that it produces a lot of food at a very low price. However, what is not factored into this price is the harmful effects conventional farming inflicts upon on the environment, nor does it account for the composition of the final product; namely, it’s nutritional value and the toxic residues it contains. Corners are cut in order to provide consumers with produce at the lowest possible price. Farms undercut one another to gain a bigger share of the market and every year more and more farms become consolidated into bigger and bigger mega farms. Perhaps the most significant downside rests in the fact that produce that is not grown in such a manner now seems ‘expensive’ by comparison.
If we value only what we can see we lose sight of the real reason we are consuming the food in the first place. When we begin to examine food as medicine it seems foolish to view it as a commodity and value only what is ‘cheapest.’ The end result is a higher cost to both the environment and the person consuming it. It is important to be conscious of what we put into our bodies as the food we consume provides the raw material for new cell growth. Most people don’t automatically choose the cheapest wine or the least expensive pair of sneakers — why should food be any different?
Although awareness is growing regarding the importance of eating local many people still have trouble conveniently sourcing it. This is where a food distribution network like Mother Earth Food can be especially helpful as we bring local, organic produce right to your front door! It may be a little bit more expensive than conventionally grown produce at the store, but the food is produced locally using sustainable and regenerative farming practices, which results in cleaner, more nutrient-dense food while also supporting farmers in the local community. By recognizing that all food is not created equal we begin to build a market that encourages more farmers to take up regenerative practices, which in turn will lead to a greater availability of high-quality food and an overall (lower) cost for everyone.
Written by Rand Gifford
