Jump to content

Talk:Dried fruit

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Fruit leather?

[edit]

It seems to me that this article should be expanded slightly to explain what fruit leather is. Fruit leather redirects here, and it's mentioned once in passing in the article, but that's about it. I think fruit leather is created by drying a puree of fruit, kind of like a "Fruit Roll-Up" but created from fruit instead of sugar. I'm pretty sure I've had it before. I'm just not sure enough to feel comfortable editing in the definitive Wikipedia passage about it. So if anyone has good knowledge of fruit leather, please add it to the article. --Cyde Weys 20:16, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There isn't much more to be said than what is there. I added the words "in sheets" to clarify how fruit leather is made, but unless we want to go into a lot of detail about all kinds of fruit drying, this seems enough. Sreed888 (talk) 03:04, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I was also a bit disappointed to find that I can't find any reference in Wikipedia to the Iranian sweet/fruit leather called "lavashak". I can't find any indication of how this is correctly transliterated into English, so would appreciate help from anyone with knowledge of Farsi or who knows something about the origin of this sweet - I realise that it may well be something typical of the entire region, or imported to Iran from Turkey - I'm guessing, as I literally have no idea. Anyone care to help? Jimjamjak (talk) 15:03, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nutrition

[edit]

In this section, it is claimed that "The drying process also destroys most of the Vitamin C in the food." This is complete nonsense. while it is true that Ascorbic acid is destroyed by the high tempertures that result from most cooking processes. The temperatures used in commercial dehydrators rarely exceed 46°C (115° F) Ascorbic acid remains stable at these temperatures. Pending disagreement I will remove this misleading text from the article. 64.223.101.74 (talk) 01:41, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Actually..it does destroy a lot of it. For example in "SPECIFICITIES OF FRUIT FREEZE DRYING AND PRODUCT PRICES" by Ivančević Savo, Mitrović Dragan, Brkić Miladin they find: "According to the research results about the quality of freeze dried raspberries it could be concluded that freeze drying is a very suitable method for drying of sensitive fruits such as raspberry. The results of all analyzes indicate that the quality of convectively dried fruits in comparation to freeze dried is much worse. Advantage of freeze drying is refected in better preservation of L-ascorbic acid, for about 54%, anthocyanins, for around 51%, lower loss of total favour, for about 66%, lower volume reduction, for about 92%, higher porosity, for about 49% and better organoleptic mark, for about 51%." also elsewhere in the paper: " Loss of L-ascorbic acid in convectively dried fruit was 63.83%, while in freeze dried was 21.28%, Janković et al., (2006)." (which refers to: Janković, M., Bukvić, B., Zlatković, B., Stevanović, S., Vukosavljević, P. (2006): New products raspberry obtained by lyophilization, Economics of Agriculture, IEP, Belgrade, 53 (2): 327 – 335.)--Egregius (talk) 06:30, 30 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Vitamin C tends to be lost or destroyed by ANY method of food preparation or preservation. You would need to compare the Vitamin C retained in dried fruit versus other methods. Comparing to fresh fruit is of little value. Traditionally, dried fruit is not an alternative to fresh fruit; it was a preservation method. It would be more useful to compare the Vitamin C present in dried fruit to the Vitamin C present in no fruit. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.87.169.18 (talk) 17:33, 20 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sulfur Dioxide in Dried Fruits?

[edit]

Could someone add something about the use of Sulfur Dioxide in dried fruits. Most of the dried apricots and pears I've seen contain this chemical. In addition, the Sulfur Dioxide article mentions this. Ajoones (talk) 02:35, 2 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Basal Metabolic Index?

[edit]

The "Dried fruit and Weight Management" section mentions Basal Metabolic Index (BMI). In terms of diet, BMI normally refers to Body mass index. There's currently no article for Basal Metabolic Index. Should this sentence be changed or is it referring to an entirely different metric? I've added a dn tag to the BMI link for the time being. Nick Number (talk) 15:28, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Two different things. BMI is usually referred to as Basal metabolic rate (BMR). The abbreviation isn't used so I removed it, and linked as appropriate. --Muhandes (talk) 16:29, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'm going to leave this as needs clarification. I'm not a professional, but from my days at the gym, higher BMR is better (burns more calories), so this doesn't fit. --Muhandes (talk) 16:34, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Read a bit more about it, and BMR increases with weight, so it does fit. I'm going to leave the abbreviation in case this was indeed an error. --Muhandes (talk) 16:39, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Great, thank you for the quick response. It's allowed BMI to be crossed off this month's disambiguation list. Nick Number (talk) 16:45, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Bias

[edit]

From a reading of this article, it almost feels like an advertisement for dried fruits. There seems to be a major imbalance in that the entire article discusses the benefits of dried fruits while neglecting any seeming negative aspects. What irks me particularly is the claim that there is little loss of nutrition when drying fruits. While eating identical amounts of dried vs fresh fruit would definitely make both seem to have similar nutritional content (or even favour dried fruits), the impression given by the article is that nutrients are not lost when drying. This is untrue, and a quick comparison (between raw and dried apples, for instance) on the US National Agricultural Library Nutrient Data Laboratory shows that for the same mass of fruit (excluding water content, that is) there is an indeed a loss of nutrients such as Vitamins C, A, E, and K. I don't quite have the time to correct this right now, so I will tag this article, and if anyone has time to deal with it, that's great. Otherwise, I will do it myself when I do have time. Brambleclawx 22:04, 24 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it reads like a disguised advertisement, and is also quite verbose. Perhaps if you want to go way over in the other direction, you could include [[Fructose intolerance (disambiguation) as a negative aspect. Sminthopsis84 (talk) 22:28, 24 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Information such as frequent overeating of dried fruits should be added as well as changing the nutrition loss information it should be noted however that Vitamin C does not significantly degrade until 90 degrees C and dehydration temps are well below this. What typically is causing the degradation is not heat but oxygen exposure and the sulfur dioxide which protects some nutrients at the cost of others 67.52.42.116 (talk) 17:39, 1 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. It clearly is not neutral and presents a one-sided point of view. Most notably, the external links are almost entirely to fruit growers advisory boards, which is a bit of a giveaway. It reads like marketing content. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.3.99.206 (talk) 23:43, 5 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I second this big time. This wiki article is a joke. It is among the biggest list on the internet that sum up health advantages of some food. Compare with the wiki article about fruit, which only contains a single paragraph on nutrition, and it appears perverse. It is not worthy of an encyclopedia. Solution: make it only a single paragraph on nutrition (similar to the fruit article) and have all other information in a seperate article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.155.14.19 (talk) 21:08, 10 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I am concerned about the glowing, one-sided endorsement of their oral health benefits, which seems to be taken almost verbatim from a study underwritten by the California Raison Board. 107.199.198.217 (talk) 20:56, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the article is highly misleading. Most dentists consider dry fruit to be especially bad for teeth, a fact that is not mentioned at all in the article. It is a shame seeing an article on an important topic so distorted through commercial interests.

There is no mention that certain dried fruits customarily contain added sugar, unless specially prepared without. These include: cranberries, mangoes, kiwis, strawberries, blueberries, papaya, and pineapples. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.87.169.18 (talk) 17:28, 20 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Downsides of dried fruit

[edit]

1) Gas google it, it is real and common. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.53.159.138 (talk) 22:04, 31 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Promo

[edit]

So, there's plenty of comments that this thing reads like promo. I looked at the "nutrition" section.

There aren't many links to support its claims. The first - http://www.mypyramid.gov/pyramid/fruits.html - is dead. Looking at the internet archive copy - https://web.archive.org/web/20110521012117/http://www.mypyramid.gov/pyramid/fruits.html - is (a) far too fluffy, and (b) just doesn't support the claim "Dried fruits retain most of the nutritional value of fresh fruits". The second - http://www.health.gov/dietaryguidelines/dga2005/document/html/AppendixB.htm#appB1 - can only support "Dried fruits are a particularly significant source of dietary fiber and potassium..." via SYN.

So I've removed the section.

The "Bone health" section also looks dodgy. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3330619/ looks more sensible, and barely mentions dried stuff, so I think the section in the article is far too unbalanced, and so goes.

William M. Connolley (talk) 22:11, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Dried fruit. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:08, 17 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Types

[edit]

It really bugs me that the "Types" section talks exclusively about mangoes. It appears somebody wrote this section assuming this page is only about dried mangoes, not dried fruit in general. 137.82.238.41 (talk) 16:58, 8 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Came here to say this; agreed. Subcortical (talk) 22:19, 10 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Have split the content to Dried mango – Thjarkur (talk) 23:22, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]


Widespread

[edit]

We say consumption is widespread or something equally vague. It would be nice to say what percentage by calories or weight of the worlds food is dried fruit. All the best: Rich Farmbrough 21:41, 1 September 2024 (UTC).[reply]

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Dried_fruit&oldid=1243510212"