Food Transformation: How Global Agricultural Practices Have Changed the Essence of Modern Food
The noticeable difference between the products we consumed a few decades ago and those filling the supermarket shelves today has long ceased to be just a topic for nostalgia. It became the subject of research in the field of nutrition, agronomy and medicine. Changes in the structure of agricultural production, selection strategies, focus on volume and stability of supply — all these factors gradually transformed the very essence of food. At first glance, nothing suspicious: a crunchy cucumber, a shiny apple, a bright yellow banana. Everything is as if from the pages of a catalog — without stains and a hint of natural randomness. But it is worth taking a bite, and the taste turns out to be pale, almost sterile. Instead of an explosion of juices and aroma – only texture, instead of a rich aftertaste – the feeling that you are eating an illusion. Modern food products are increasingly the result of compromises: between taste and storage, nutrition and yield, ripening speed and composition. Formally, the nutritional components remain: the label declares proteins, fats, carbohydrates, sometimes trace elements. However, behind the same indicators more and more often there is a different reality — a lower content of nutrients, a decrease in bioavailability, the absence of secondary metabolites that affected the body’s metabolic reaction. Any chance of going back to real food? This is a question that worries the modern consumer every time he fills his basket at the supermarket.
A drop in nutrition that is documented
Over the past decades, food has changed dramatically — not only in appearance, but also in content. The changes are imperceptible at first glance: supermarket shelves are filled with attractive fruits and vegetables, packaging promises benefits, labels – vitamins and minerals. But behind this apparent perfection, another side is hidden – a significant decrease in the nutritional value of modern food. What was once a natural source of health is now more and more often an empty ballast for the body. It is interesting that the food began to lose its taste imperceptibly. Tomatoes just became smoother, apples shinier, and bread – fluffy and soft. Products began to look better than ever, but gradually it turned out that such beauty is only a shell. Emptiness hides under it more and more often. Not literally, because there is enough food. But it hardly saturates, does not give strength, does not heal, as it once did. Even more, it can harm health. Yes, modern food has become convenient, stable and visually attractive, but at the same time it is poor in benefits.
Not only critics of agro-industry talk about the decline in food quality. According to the data given in the 1964 “Table of Food Ingredients” guide, which is located at the French Academy of Agriculture, the nutritional value of foods has dropped dramatically. For example, the content of calcium in green peas decreased by 25% (from 65 mg to 48.5 mg per 100 g of product), and vitamin C by 30% (from 19 mg to 13.6 mg).
It showed similar results research in the USA, which covered the period from 1950 to 1999 and compared 43 types of vegetables and fruits. Under the leadership of Donald R. Davis, a significant decrease in protein, calcium, phosphorus, iron, vitamin A, riboflavin, and vitamin C was recorded, ranging from 6% to 38%.
Industrial strategy: big, beautiful, empty
These changes are not based on chance, but on the consistent logic of agricultural production. The priority is not benefit, but yield, transportability, appearance. The selection of cultures according to these criteria led to the appearance of products that look great, last a long time, do not spoil, but no longer saturate the body as before.
This degradation is most clearly visible on the example of tomatoes, which lost over 60 years:
- 26% calcium,
- 57% of vitamin B1,
- 59% of vitamin C.
These fruits often lack even a smell. It is not for nothing that they are called “plastic” in Ukraine. And the Israeli geneticist Haim Rabinovych, who is working on the breeding of new varieties of tomatoes for the European market, advised to season the products with balsamic sauce and olive oil when complaining about the lack of taste. The irony is that both of these ingredients have also mostly lost their properties. Sauces often contain monosodium glutamate, and oils are stripped of flavor and beneficial fatty acids due to processing.
In addition to reducing nutrition, the mass use of hybrid varieties deepens the problem. Such cultures are bred taking into account exclusively marketing requirements, according to which products should be stored for a long time, not spoil during transportation, and be uniform in size and color. But at the same time, there are two significant problems. Hybrids do not produce stable seeds, which creates a constant dependence on seed corporations. Also, to extend their shelf life, the technology of blocking rotting enzymes is used. Such food is not fully decomposed in the body. A person has to spend his own enzyme reserves to digest it, and enzymes are minerals and vitamins. So, the body actually spends itself to digest food that is already low in nutrients. All this together leads to metabolic exhaustion without feeling hungry.
Today, the food industry actively uses a wide range of additives in the process of manufacturing products. Their main purpose is to improve the taste, color, texture, as well as to extend the shelf life of products. However, this approach to transforming natural ingredients into products with a long shelf life, ease of preparation, and an attractive appearance often has the opposite side — a gradual loss of useful properties. Food additives, especially in combination with intensive processing, can not only neutralize the benefits of the product, but also make it difficult to absorb or even have a negative effect on health. Although among such substances there are relatively safe ones that are capable of causing no harm with moderate consumption, nevertheless, the risk assessment depends on both the specific substance and its amount in the daily diet.
The food industry quickly found a way to monetize the consequences of its own activities through the sale of vitamin and mineral supplements. In every supermarket, it is easy to find shelves with jars that promise energy, immunity, and health. But reality indicates a completely different effect. A study of 400,000 Americans showed that mortality is higher among those who regularly take vitamin supplements. Another study found that synthetic beta-carotene increases the risk of lung cancer. And iron, which is added to multivitamins, accumulates in the body and harms the heart, brain, and pancreas. The reason lies in the inconsistency of the forms of assimilation. In natural products, vitamins and minerals are associated with enzymes, acids, and proteins — this is how the body recognizes and assimilates them. In synthetic formulas, these bonds are missing, which disrupts biochemical pathways and causes side reactions or toxic effects.
A clear example of artificial intervention is the extrusion of cereals. This process turns grains into crispy flakes under pressure and temperature. Convenient, tasty, enriched, but dangerous. A University of Michigan study on rats found that animals that consumed only corn flakes died faster than those that ate just a cardboard box of these flakes. An autopsy revealed damage to the liver, kidneys, and nervous system. As it turned out, denatured proteins, which after extrusion behave like neurotoxins, together with sweeteners, dyes and synthetic vitamins form a deadly cocktail that is dangerous not only for rodents.
Dietary supplements that kill
To better understand the impact of the most commonly used food additives on the human body, let’s consider a few of them in more detail.
Monosodium glutamate is one of the most common additives used to enhance flavor, particularly in meat products, soups, snacks, ready meals and fast food. Its presence in the food industry has already become a standard. Despite its prevalence, E621 has been the subject of debate for many years. In 1969, a study on laboratory mice showed that in high doses, this substance can cause disorders in the brain. However, for humans, such a risk is much lower, since monosodium glutamate does not cross the blood-brain barrier — the brain’s natural protection against potentially harmful substances. Individual people still have increased sensitivity to this supplement. They may experience a headache, fever, or mild numbness after eating foods containing glutamate. In such cases, it is recommended to pay more attention to the choice of products and, if necessary, to avoid their use. But how to avoid what is contained in almost all modern products? Obviously, the question is rhetorical.
Colorants are widely used in the food industry to provide attractive color to a variety of products, from confectionery to condiments. In the labeling of ingredients, such additives are indicated by codes ranging from E100 to E199, which include both natural and synthetic variants. Scientific evidence shows that some artificial dyes can negatively affect the behavior of children with increased sensitivity, in particular, contribute to manifestations of hyperactivity. In addition, in some cases, a tendency to increase the frequency of allergic reactions was recorded. For example, experiments on animals have shown that the red dye erythrosine (E127) is associated with an increased risk of developing thyroid tumors. Despite the available results, the scientific community emphasizes the need for further research to definitively establish the level of safety of these supplements for humans. And despite doubts from researchers, manufacturers continue to actively use dyes in their products. It is worth remembering that dyes are most often present in intensively processed products that do not form the basis of a healthy diet. To maintain good health, it is recommended to give preference to products with natural color, which, in addition to color, also carry real nutritional value.
Sodium nitrite is often used in the meat industry, especially in processed products such as sausages, ham, bacon and hot dogs. Its main function is to prevent the growth of harmful microorganisms and preserve the characteristic pink color of the product, as well as add a specific salty taste. However, during thermal cooking, especially at high temperatures, in the presence of amino acids, nitrites can turn into nitrosamines — compounds with carcinogenic potential. According to numerous scientific studies, increased consumption of nitrites and products of their transformation is associated with a higher probability of developing cancer, in particular, cancer of the stomach, colon and rectum, mammary glands, and bladder. Moreover, recent studies indicate a link between regular consumption of foods containing nitrites and an increased risk of developing type 2 diabetes. Given the potential risks, it is recommended to limit the consumption of processed meat products that contain sodium nitrite. An alternative can be fresh sources of protein – chicken, beef, fish, pork, legumes, nuts, eggs and dairy products, which do not contain such preservatives and fit better into a healthy diet.
Sodium benzoate is one of the most common preservatives that is often added to carbonated beverages, acidic foods, and cooking additives—including salad dressings, pickles, fruit juices, and a variety of sauces. Although this preservative is considered safe to use within prescribed limits, some studies have drawn attention to possible side effects. For example, the combination of sodium benzoate with synthetic dyes can increase the manifestations of hyperactivity in preschool children. In adolescents and young adults, frequent consumption of beverages containing this additive has been associated with symptoms of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder.
In addition, when interacting with vitamin C (in particular, with ascorbic or citric acid), sodium benzoate can form benzene, a toxic substance that has a carcinogenic effect. The highest formation of benzene is recorded in carbonated drinks, especially those that do not contain sugar. One study, which measured benzene content in various foods, found that the permissible limits were significantly exceeded: in some samples of kohlrabi and lettuce, the concentration reached more than 100 parts per billion, which is 20 times higher than the limit for drinking water. To reduce the risks associated with this substance, you should carefully read the composition of products. It is especially advisable to avoid products containing sodium benzoate, benzoic acid or benzene if the ingredients also include sources of vitamin C.
What was the food like before
Previously, the quality of food products in Ukraine was regulated by a strict system of state standards — GOSTs, which had the status of mandatory standards. Food produced in accordance with GOST was checked for chemical composition, calorie content, organoleptic characteristics, absence of harmful impurities and microorganisms. Control was carried out by sanitation stations, technological laboratories at enterprises and separate state supervisory structures. GOSTs stipulated not only the recipe, but also the production technology, raw material base, terms of implementation, permissible deviations in mass and even the type of packaging. For example, the classic “Doctor’s” sausage consisted only of beef, pork, egg powder, milk, salt, sugar and spices. No substitutes, flavor enhancers or soy additives were allowed in the recipe. Similarly, condensed milk had a standard: only whole milk and sugar, without vegetable fats, preservatives or stabilizers.
A vivid example of state regulation was the production of bread. Bakery products had strictly standardized weight, moisture, acidity, crumb structure, and crust color. Sanitary regulations regulated the temperature regime and duration of baking, as well as the time of implementation after production. If the bread is “yesterday’s”, it must have been withdrawn from sale or sold at a lower price as having lost its marketable appearance.
Dairy products underwent double control: sanitary (bacteriological tests) and technological (compliance with GOST). For example, fermented milk products were checked for the level of acidity, the presence of foreign bacteria, and the stability of the structure. Sourdough or kefir had no right to contain thickeners — the structure was achieved naturally by fermentation. The production of products in collective farms and state farms was also regulated: meat entering state-owned enterprises was checked at veterinary and sanitary stations. A veterinary certificate was a mandatory condition of supply. The carcasses were marked: for example, a stamp with a quality mark or a mark of permissible use only after heat treatment.
The system was centralized, inertial, often formal, but at the same time created a unified field of quality. The products did not have a wide range, but what reached the shelves had a stable and predictable composition. Substitutes, dyes, flavorings were not used in mass production, because the state took care of the health of the population.
As you know, we are what we eat. And if modern food loses its nutritional essence, is sterilized to the point of appearance and expiration date, then those who consume it lose their health along with it. Once upon a time, the food system in Ukraine had a clear control vertical: sanitary-epidemiological stations, regular inspections, requirements for the quality of products even at the stage of cultivation and processing. The manufacturer knew: there is a limit beyond which there will be consequences. Today, these institutions have been liquidated. The State Production and Consumer Service is nominally supposed to monitor the quality of products, but its work is almost imperceptible. Control of content, quality, origin is often declarative. Business adapts to the market, not to health, and the consumer chooses what is closer, brighter, cheaper. If this logic continues, we will reach a complete unification of food – good to look at, stable in supply, profitable for suppliers, but poor in everything that should nourish. And in the end, we will lose not only the taste for food, but also the body’s ability to live fully.
