Why You Need Supplements

Our food supply has been changing since the early dawn of mankind. From paleolithic hunters to modern farming practices with chemical fertilizers and plastics, our food supply is constantly changing. The remarkable feat is that our bodies seem to be generally capable of adapting to this ever-evolving nutrient supply.

Or are they?

In the 1930's, the dentist Weston Price traveled around the globe investigating the effect of traditional diets on the development and health of teeth. He documented and hypothesized that the modern Western diet with its emphasis on flour, sugar and processed vegetable fats leads to nutritional deficiencies resulting in dental changes ranging from increased caries to alterations in the development of the facial structure (resulting in overcrowded of the teeth).

Many clinicians feel that these same dietary changes could be underlying most modern diseases, such as cardiovascular disease and osteoporosis. While cardiovascular disease was a leading cause of death 100 years ago, the incidence has continued to increase from 137.4 in the year 1900 to 192.9 deaths per 100,000 in 2010. Part of this increase is likely due to improvements in medicine increasing the lifespan (and therefore how many people develop cardiovascular disease) but could also be due, at least partly, to changes in our traditional diets and food supply.

Changes to our soil, atmosphere and harvesting practices have been occurring for the past 100 years, or even 10,000 years depending on who you ask, and have caused widespread changes to the food supply.
These changes to our food supply have the potential to dramatically alter physiological function over time. It is important now more than ever before to choose nutrient-rich foods, avoid nutrient-poor foods, and supplement nutrients that may be available in sup-optimal levels.

One of the most powerful representations of this change was a 2004 comparison study published in the Journal of the American College of Nutrition. The study compared the USDA nutrient data from 1950 and 1999 for 43 garden crops. Selected foods were chosen to be identical varieties in 1950 and 1999, and adjusted for moisture. The food selection included 39 vegetables, 3 melons and strawberries. The nutrients compared were protein, fat, carbohydrate, ash, iron, thiamin (vitamin B1), riboflavin (vitamin B2), niacin (vitamin B3), and ascorbic acid (vitamin C).

As a group, foods showed significant decreases in protein, calcium, phosphorus, iron, riboflavin and ascorbic acid, ranging from decreases of 6% to 38% in the 1999 foods:

6% decrease in protein
16% decrease in calcium
9% decrease in phosphorus
15% decrease in iron
38% decrease in riboflavin
20% decrease in ascorbic acid

No significant differences were found for vitamin A, thiamin, niacin, fat or carbohydrate. Unfortunately, the USDA did not collect nutrient data for magnesium and several other important trace minerals in 1950.

Another analysis was conducted in the UK by the English doctors and food scientists R.A. McCance and E.M. Widdowson from 1940 through 1991. The project involved gathering nutritional data on foods, including fruits, vegetables, meats, dairy products and other foods. Efforts were made to control for species and preparation, although these did differ for some foods. While many foods were unable to be compared (for examples, changes in butchering techniques limited the comparison of meat products across the decades), the average differences were dramatic and reflected across vegetables, fruits and meats:

46% decrease in calcium from 1940 to 1991
24% decrease in magnesium from 1940 to 1991
27% decrease in iron from 1940 to 1991
49% decrease in sodium from 1940 to 1991
16% decrease in potassium from 1940 to 1991
76% decrease in copper from 1940 to 1991
59% decrease in zinc in vegetables from 1978 to 1991

Part of these findings may be due to differences in preparation, for example most vegetables in 1940 were boiled twice as long as vegetables in 1991, however cooking technique is least likely to compromise the mineral content of a food. While some vitamins are easily destroyed with exposure to heat, minerals are generally quite stable. Some foods are particularly striking in their losses. 'Old carrots' lost 75% of their magnesium, 48% of their calcium 46% of their iron an 75% of their copper between 1940 and 1991.

Differences in the ratios of minerals were also found:

Calcium : Phosphorus 1 : 2 in 1940 compared to 1 : 1 in 1991
Sodium : Potassium 1 : 10 in 1940 compared to 1 : 17 in 1991
Magnesium : Calcium 1 : 4.8 in 1940 compared to 1 : 3.4 in 1991
Iron : Copper 1 : 10 in 1940 compared to 1 : 30 in 1991

The levels of minerals and/or the ratio of minerals in the body could have wide-spread effects. Minerals act as cofactors for hundreds of different enzymes, playing critical roles in cell-to-cell communication, energy utilization, cognitive function and musculoskeletal health. Differences in the overall intake of these nutrients or in the ratios of these nutrients could alter physiological functionality.

Another analysis of the British data involving 20 fruits and 20 vegetables confirms that there were significant decreases in calcium, magnesium, copper and sodium in vegetables and decreases in magnesium, iron, copper and potassium in fruits from 1960 to 1991.

These findings are not necessarily definitive and remain controversial. Arguments have been made that the differences are due to enhancements in the nutrient analysis technology or sample collection, or improper statistical comparison. However, agricultural practices, environmental conditions and post-production have all changed in the last hundred years resulting in a food supply with lower levels of nutrients.

Read more about specific changes to the food supply