this post was submitted on 19 Dec 2025
161 points (97.6% liked)

World News

51361 readers
2358 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 6 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] The_v@lemmy.world 4 points 7 hours ago

The studies are repeating stuff that we've known for 50 years. Higher CO2 levels = plants grow faster due to more efficient photosynthesis. They are able to produce more carbohydrates in the same amount of time. CO2 burners/generators are standard in many high tech greenhouses because of this. We've been artificially increasing the CO2 levels in production greenhouses for decades.

The conclusion that the higher CO2 is going to decrease food nutrition overall is complete bullshit. It shows a complete lack of understanding by the researchers of agricultural practices and the market requirements they sell into.

So the question these researchers are not asking is "What else affects the nutritional quality of food?" The answer is pretty close to everything: genetics, nutrient availability, pest pressure, disease pressure, relative humidity, temperature, light intensity, soil type, soil pH, soil salt levels, soil microbiome, fruit load, plant architecture, storage conditions, storage time, storage temperature, and a shit ton more.

Due to all of these variables, quality standards have been developed to facilitate equitable trade. Every crop has quality standards enforced by government regulation, international treaty, or industry standards in most regions of the planet. Although most of these standards were created without nutrition being a primary concern, they do enforce a surprising amount of regulation by accident.

Rising CO2 levels is one more variable that the growers will have to adapt to maintain their quality standards.

[–] Quacksalber@sh.itjust.works 10 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

Interstellar is real! ^i^ ^think,^ ^I^ ^don't^ ^know^ ^the^ ^plot^ ^so^ ^well^

[–] einkorn@feddit.org 9 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

The premise is that crops have come under threat by climate change, on the one hand, and various blights such as mildew.

[–] usualsuspect191@lemmy.ca 6 points 14 hours ago

It's a specific fictional disease called blight

[–] venusaur@lemmy.world 11 points 18 hours ago (1 children)
[–] Cybersteel@lemmy.world 2 points 6 hours ago

Supercalorificexpialidocious