The nutrient values in this chapter are here because there needs to be some collected source of this information to refer to when it is deemed necessary. But please do not start memorizing nutrient charts! People consuming wild foods should not be bookkeepers and accountants of nutrient composition. Not only does that take the fun out of eating, it takes you on the misadventure of eating nutrients, not foods. The only reasons you might refer to these charts are if you are making initial decisions on what nutrient-dense foods you want to add to your diet, you have very specific nutrient goals, or you have a medical condition that requires monitoring such things. Otherwise, stop counting milligrams! Get a life. For most of us, just eating real food (less processed foods, less empty calories) with lots of diversity and gobs of fruits and vegetables is great advice. It is almost that simple.
The conventional categories of nutrients we all know are proteins, fats, carbohydrates, vitamins, and minerals. Within those categories are specific nutrients, including some amino acids, fatty acids, vitamin C, etc., that we need for our bodies to function. These are some of the nutrients and fiber listed in our nutrient data tables.
New substances found in plants called phytochemicals are intriguing many scientists. They are trying to identify, measure, and determine their role in human nutrition. This is a complex field in its infancy. So the most I can do is list a few selected classes of phytochemicals and tell you wild foods that are known to contain them. You’ll find them later in the chapter.
You can greatly improve the quality of your diet just by eating plenty of store-bought, dark-green leafy greens like kale, collards, turnip leaves, and spinach. And you can do yourself even more good by adding wild spinach, field mustard, dandelions, purslane, and other wild foods to that. They are all good for you. The major advantages of the domesticated greens are that they can be purchased and require no identification and harvesting knowledge. The advantage of the wild greens are that they are fun, free, and add tremendous diversity to the diet in terms of flavors, nutrients, and phytochemicals. Health benefits build through this diversity.
As a wild food educator, I am typically asked, “Are wild foods more nutritious than conventional foods?” and “What are the most nutritious wild foods?” I have been uncomfortable answering these questions because I am diet- and lifestyle-focused, not individual food–focused. I try to eat a great overall diet as a lifestyle. I do not like microanalyzing the nutrients in my food. If you are not eating wild foods for the flavors, for the joy of it, or to reach some overall dietary/lifestyle goal, you will not be doing it for long. If you do not have the time or enthusiasm to learn about and prepare these plants, their nutritional value is a moot point. According to the nutrient data I found, most of the wild foods listed in this book are nutrient powerhouses. In fact, garlic mustard (Alliaria petiolata), shepherd’s purse (Capsella bursa-pastoris), wild spinach (Chenopodium album), spiny sow thistle (Sonchus asper), and dandelion (Taraxacum officinale) may be the most nutrient-dense leafy greens ever analyzed. The benefit of wild foods is that they add diversity, the kind of diversity that increases your intake of potential cancer-fighting, heart-disease fighting, and longevity-promoting phytochemicals. Each vegetable has its own array of nutrients. The most nutritious diet is a diverse diet of healthy foods. A greater diversity is possible with the incorporation of wild foods.
Domesticated greens produced on a massive scale may have less to offer then their historical counterparts. Many have been genetically selected for flavor and/or transportability characteristics rather than nutrition. Selecting for flavor would make lettuces and broccoli sweeter and less bitter. Selecting for flavor has a tendency to knock out many of the bitter phytochemicals. (Drenowski, 2000.)
In addition to the selection process, poor farming practices can deplete the soil of minerals over time. Significant decreases have been found in calcium, magnesium, copper, and iron on farm-raised crops since the 1930s. (Davis, 2004; Mayer, 1997.) Nutrient values provided by the USDA (reflected in my nutrient table for domesticated greens) may be outdated over time because of this soil depletion. This means that wild harvested foods may have an even greater advantage than the nutrition tables depict. However, wild foods placed in cultivation could suffer the same fate as domesticated foods if they are grown with poor management practices on mineral-depleted soils.
But, even with the minor reductions in mineral content that some domesticated greens may have experienced, it is better to eat them and eat more of them than not to eat them at all.
Because this book deals mostly with leafy greens, all the nutrients I discuss will only refer to and compare these greens. This idea of comparing greens to other greens creates its own range of what defines a high versus a low level of a nutrient. After all, each part of the well-balanced diet makes its own contribution, so why not let the leafy green contribution be as nutrient-dense as possible?
My nutrient chart gives you a general idea of where nutrients are and where they are not. If you want to eat foods that are nutrient-dense, you might want to start with ones that have a greater number of values shown in the color red. These will be good for you because not only will you get lots of great nutrients, but other possible nutritional factors will come along for the ride that are not listed here, including hundreds, perhaps thousands of phytochemicals.