In a concurrently running thread,
Healthy Recipes, I attempted to answer the original poster's question, which got me to read an article or two which in turn got me thinking about what we eat, and where that food comes from. In one of Michael Pollan's articles he suggests that corn fed beef is causing us health problems that grass fed beef doesn't. He made the comment that
"we are what we eat, eats" - in other words, and perhaps oversimplified, the nutrition we get from our food depends on what our food eats, what nutrition it gets. This is true for animal protein as well as vegetables and fruits. So, a steer that eats corn provides a different nutritional profile than one that eats grass.
So, what about fruits and vegetables. They take in nutrients from the soil, and well conditioned, healthy soil should produce healthier and more nutritious plants. A lot of fertilizing in this country is done with petroleum derived fertilizers. What is the nutritional value of such fertilzer compared to organic compounds, which may contain more than just nitrogen, phosphorous, potassium (I think those are the big three), perhaps containing trace minerals and other elements.
So, are synthetic, petroleum-derived fertilizers providing less nutrition to the plants we eat, and the plants our cows and chickens and ducks eat? Are we in some way shortchanging ourselves nutritionally by using chemical fertilizers?
shel
You Are What You Eat, Eats ... 
