We have a lot of things going against us in terms of trying to stay well nourished these days. To start with, no one seems to know how or what to eat any more. Secondly, historic documents and various alternative health measurements (such as iridology) show us that humans are not born with constitutions anywhere near as strong as what people used to be be born with. Thirdly, industrial attitudes towards food and the agribusiness farming practices that flow from those attitudes alter the nutritional profile of foods significantly for the worse. Many studies have long established that organically grown foods are more nutritious than industrially grown foods. I think that common sense would indicate this but scientific measurement also now confirms it. Fourthly, as I wrote in a previous post we have lost much of our genetic material in terms of varieties of produce and livestock so the nutrition and growth adaptability they provided is also lost. Finally (I like to say “finally” but I am sure this next blow against good nutrition is not the final one), rising CO2 levels in the atmosphere reduce various nutrients in all foods whether or not they are grown with organic or industrial methods.

This last threat is detailed in “Global Warming and Empty Calories” on Grist.

One of the silver linings of climate change, some have argued, is that high carbon dioxide levels will mean increased crop yields, which will, in turn, be good for combating global hunger (the logic, I suppose, being that if we’re frying fifty years from now, at least we won’t be hot and hungry). But some underpublicized studies, reported this month in Nature, cast a long shadow on this sunny assertion.

Careful experimentation with growing crops in a simulated high CO2 environment revealed that

crop yields were elevated — plants imbibing large quantities of CO2 had more starch and more sugar in their leaves than those on a normal carbon diet. But because they also took up less nitrogen from the soil, they made less protein.

Industry says, “Great. With higher CO2 levels in the atmosphere, we can grow more food and just have farmers throw more fertilizer on the fields to make up for the lack of nitrogen.” Nature, however, is not so easily meddled with and certainly not to be outsmarted by mere humans:

Arnold Bloom, a plant biologist at the University of California in Davis, thinks that the reduced nitrogen levels seen in high-CO2 conditions is not just the result of plants needing less protein. He believes they actually become less able to absorb nitrates from the soil — in which case, dumping extra fertilizer on fields won’t be of much help.

Protein levels in wheat, for instance, are not only important in terms of nutrition, they are critical when it comes to making bread. Gluten is the protein property of wheat that forms the stretchable structure that holds the gases generated by the action of the yeast and allows the dough to hold the rise. This is so important to the breadmaking process that you can buy gluten as an extra ingredient to insure a high rising, light loaf of bread.

Gluten content of the same variety of wheat will vary from year to year anyway according to varying weather conditions. Now it seems, though, that we have created the atmospheric conditions that will cause protein levels in wheat to drop permanently. Gluten is expensive. While many bakers use it as a matter of course, I never have. So far our bread rises fine (thanks to the thorough kneading provided by our Bosch) but apparently the day will come when that probably won’t be the case. I hope I have some time to come up with a Plan B for this. I know one baker who always researches the percentage of protein in each year’s wheat crop and adds gluten to her recipes accordingly. Perhaps we will all have to do this eventually. Or perhaps we can start eating more flat breads where holding a rise isn’t an issue and make up for the shortfall of dietary protein from other sources.

However, research also shows that

crops grown in high-CO2 environments have diminished calcium and zinc levels (between 10 and 20 percent).

OK, I guess we will have our grass-fed cows and goats to rely upon for calcium, zinc and protein. And I can learn how to make more varieties of flat breads. I wonder how many kinds of flat breads there are anyway. Time for another Google search… If I come up with a particularly nutritious and tasty flat bread/cheese combination, I will be sure to pass it along. It is never too early to think ahead.

Quick note: I quickly started a Google search before posting this and already unearthed the fact that there are more than 60 types of flat breads worldwide. I don’t think pita crisps are where I would start after pizza, pancakes, tortillas and chappatis, however. Here is a short list of possibilities to choose from. Or how about fragrant, flavored focaccias or Turkish Spinach and Feta Gozlemes or even fried Ricotta flat bread with parsley sauce (I would subtract the anchovies)?

Wow, this certainly seems to be a case of opportunity arising out of difficulty. I am going to sprint into the kitchen and get to work. I will keep you posted on on all interesting flat bread developments!

From the beautiful mountains of southwest Virginia,

Leslie

If you would like to support the Pockets of the Future Project, prayers, encouragement and donations are always welcome.