One Potential Caveat To the Nutrition "Makes Modern Boxers Better" Statement

Nutrition, namely a greater understanding of nutrition and better percieved eating habits on the behalf of modern athletes, is a center piece to the modern boxers > classic boxers debate (or the athletic debate as a whole).

While it its true that our understanding of nutrition is better today, I have one idea that I would like to run by the posters here as a side note to get some reactions.

One thing that is rarely said in this nutrion debate is that our food supply according to a substantial amount of research has become very corrupted during this period of time. This is across the board. A few examples:

1. Agriculture in the U.S. and many parts of Europe has shifted from small scale projects into the hands of huge corporated comglomorates, and has been paralleled by widescale use of hormones and antibiotics in meat production that are percieved as harmful to human wellbeing.

2. Ocean resources have become increasingly polluted, as documented.

3. The use of pesticides in agriculture has been well noted to be accompanied with negative effects, so much so that this knowledge has spurred a huge budding industry in organic foods during the last 20 years.

In short, while we are more knowledgable about nutrition, these percieved benifits may be negated in some ways by the corruption of our food sources in the past 50 years. Knowledge of nutrition, in my estimate, has to be cross referenced to the detrimental effects of food production in our contemporary society.

I'm unsure that there is any way to show this quantitatively, but its worth discussing.