Diskussion:Ernährungssoziologie

America's vegetables

March 1, 2006
By Lance Gay
Scripps Howard News Service

In spite of what Mother taught you about the benefits of eating broccoli, data collected by the U.S. government show that the nutritional content of America's vegetables and fruits has declined during the past 50 years -- in some cases dramatically.

Donald Davis, a biochemist at the University of Texas, said that of 13 major nutrients in fruits and vegetables tracked by the Agriculture Department from 1950 to 1999, six showed noticeable declines -- protein, calcium, phosphorus, iron, riboflavin and vitamin C. The declines ranged from 6 percent for protein, 15 percent for iron, 20 percent for vitamin C, and 38 percent for riboflavin.

"It's an amazing thing," said Davis, adding that the decline in nutrient content has not been widely noticed.

He said an agriculture scientist appears to have been the first to pick up the disappearance of nutrients in 1981 in a paper comparing the data on nutrients on garden crops grown in the United States with those grown in England.

Davis, who discussed his findings at a recent meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science meeting in St. Louis, suspects the trend in agriculture toward encouraging crops that grow the fastest and biggest is a reason for the decline. The past five decades have been marked by the "Green Revolution," which has seen a marked increase in U.S. production and yields as farmers have turned to the fastest-growing and greatest-producing plants.

The tradeoff is that the faster-growing plants aren't able to acquire the nutrients that their slower-growing cousins can, either by synthesis or from the soil. He said there also are differences in the amounts of nutrients lost in differing varieties of wheat and broccoli.

Davis said he doesn't want his study to encourage people to stop eating vegetables on the grounds they lack nutrients.

"That's completely wrong," he said, contending his study shows that people need to eat more vegetables and fruits, not less. "Vegetables are extraordinarily rich in nutrients and beneficial phytochemicals. They are still there, and vegetables and fruits are our best sources for these."

Al Bushway, a food-science professor at the University of Maine and an expert with the Institute of Food Technologists, said the decline of nutrients in vegetables and fruits could be made up through other foods Americans eat.

"For vegans only using plant sources for food, this could be an issue," he said. But he said most Americans would pick up adequate quantities of calcium they need by drinking milk.

Bushway said that fruits and vegetables are still crucial to providing nutrients people need. "They are an important part of the diet -- extremely important," he said.

The Agriculture Department data that Davis used doesn't include all of the nutrients scientists today can identify in fruits and vegetables.

(http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/health/261163_veggie01.html?source=mypi) --Edia 18:07, 6. Mai 2006 (CEST)

Fast-Food Ice Dirtier Than Toilet Water

Fast-Food Ice Dirtier Than Toilet Water

Seventh Grader's Science Project Turns Up Some Disturbing Results

February 20, 2006
ABC

Jasmine Roberts never expected her award-winning middle school science project to get so much attention. But the project produced some disturbing results: 70 percent of the time, ice from fast food restaurants was dirtier than toilet water.

The 12-year-old collected ice samples from five restaurants in South Florida — from both self-serve machines inside the restaurant and from drive-thru windows. She then collected toilet water samples from the same restaurants and tested all of them for bacteria at the University of South Florida.

In several cases, the ice tested positive for E. coli bacteria, which comes from human waste and has been linked to several illness outbreaks across the country.

"These [bacteria] don't belong there," said Dr. David Katz, medical contributor to "Good Morning America." "It's not cause for panic, although it is alarming because what she found is nothing new. You're not more likely to get sick now. But she's done us a favor by sounding the alarm."

Both Roberts and Katz said that the ice is likely dirtier because machines aren't cleaned and people use unwashed hands to scoop ice. Toilet water is also surprisingly bacteria-free, because it comes from sanitized city water supplies.

Support from Big Brother

Roberts got interested in the project after reading a newspaper article about bacteria in airplane water and decided to do something similar. Plus, she said, all of her friends chew on ice, and it drives her crazy.

"I just picked the not-obvious choice," the seventh grader said of her project.

Her 18-year-old brother, Justus, is also an award-winning science fair veteran who said he has encouraged his little sister's interest in science.

Justus said when Jasmine told him her idea for this project, "I gave her a high five, then said, 'You're a strange little kid.' But I supported her all the way."

The restaurants also have taken notice of Roberts' project. Two began new sanitary polices and have asked her to come back and do her tests again.

"First they appreciated the project," she said. "And one location even asked me to come back and test the temperature of their food."

(http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/Health/story?id=1641825&page=1) --Edia 18:13, 6. Mai 2006 (CEST)

Extremsituationen

Kann mir jemand (als Fachfremden) diesen Absatz erklären? "Auch Katastrophen wie eine Hungersnot sind stark sozial bedingt: Es sind dies immer auch akute Verteilungskämpfe in Zeiten der Knappheit, bei denen die Verhungernden unterliegen (vgl. auch Wucher)."

So wie es hier im ersten Satz steht ist eine Katastrophe sozial bedingt, im zweiten Satz wird erläutert, dass Katastophen soziale Folgen haben. Das zweite würde ich ja noch verstehen, aber das erste???

(Nicht nur) Ökonomen sind der Meinung, dass es eine Eigenschaft von allen Gütern ist, knapp zu sein. Folge ist immer ein Verteilungskonflikt. Dies gilt auch aber bei weitem nicht immer für Katastrophen. Und nicht bei jeder Katastrophe verhungern Menschen... Der Bezug zum Wucher ist dann für mich erst recht nicht nachvollziehbar.

Für jede Erläuterung bin ich dankbar.Karsten11 15:16, 1. Nov. 2006 (CET)

Vgl. Katastrophensoziologie. Später Gruß -- €pa 19:00, 29. Feb. 2008 (CET)

Küche der Deutschen Demokratischen Republik

{Kopie aus der Portal Diskussion:Soziologie#Küche der Deutschen Demokratischen Republik}
Hallo, derzeit wird im wp:Portal Diskussion:Essen und Trinken#DDR-Küche über die Frage diskutiert, ob es eine DDR-Küche gab. Gibt es soziologische Forschungsergebnisse aus denen sich Antworten auf die Frage, welche Auswirkungen die weitgehende Berufstätigkeit von Frauen auf die Ernährung hatte, heruasziehen lassen? Vielen Dank im Voraus --H2SO4 17:58, 6. Feb. 2008 (CET)