Michael Pollen's newest book has really changed my opinion about food. I think that I am someone who is more conscious of what I eat than the average person. Although I am not the healthiest person, nor do I consume only the best foods but I am someone who thinks about what I am going to consume and am generally aware of what I am eating. Even before reading this I have thought that the level of processing is a better indicator of a food's healthiness than how much of each of the macro nutrients it includes.
The first piece of advice that ever took to heart about being healthy was to shop only on the periphery of a supermarket; the produce, bakery, dairy, and meat sections of the store while avoiding the centre aisles. Although Michael Pollan argues this is a good starting point he warns that "You are what you eat, eats too". In this respect the meat that we consume is far less healthy than it was before. Now, like people, our cattle is living off of seeds. Most of the animals we husband (can you say that?) are now raised on a high calorie diet of grains instead of its natural diet of grasses slowly consumed over a day of grazing. The fact that our animals are now eating food with more calories and a less rich spread of micro nutrients and who knows what else, after all we do not yet know everything in our food that people actually use and what is turned into waste (I mean shit), means we cannot expect modern cattle to be has good for you as say the meat 50 years ago.
The other thing that is worrisome is what comprises our food. Have you looked at the ingredients label on something like yogurt or bread? These are foods that our species has been consuming for thousands of years with positive results. But now these products have all sorts of crazy things in it. This all comes from the repeal of an American law regarding food standards
The 1938 Imitation Rule (repealed in 1973) "There are certain traditional foods that everyone knows, such as bread, milk and cheese, and that when consumers buy these foods, they should get the foods they are expecting... if a food resembles a standardized food but does not comply with the standard, that food must be labeled as an 'imitation'." Reinstating this law would be a good step toward reducing obesity.
This is what worries me about eating now; even if you stick to what appears to be whole foods you are not necessarily consuming real food stuffs. Is it possible to avoid all of the chemicals?
What if you decide to try for the more natural approach of free range? "'Free range' doesn't necessarily mean the chicken has had access to grass; many egg and broiler producers offer their chickens little more than a dirt yard where nothing grows."
Michael Pollen finally summarizes our human condition by stating, "The human animal is adapted to, and apparently can thrive on, an extraordinary range of different diets, but the Western diet, however you define it, does not seem to be one of them"
A really easy and interesting read. As an added bonus, there are a lot of interesting resources available at the back and I recommend it to everyone.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
3 comments:
I am currently reading "The Omnivore's Dilemma" by Michael Pollan, and I find it equally inspiring! It explores the route by which food comes from the sun and soil to our plates. He compares the industrial, pastoral (organic and "industrial organic"), and hunter-gathering routes, culminating in a meal on his own dinner plate (or disposable carton, as the case may be for industrial agriculture).
I love his writing, and I love that you have blogged about it. More people should read this man's work, and really think deeply about what passes our lips when we eat. We cast a vote with every dollar we spend.
Interesting, although I had a conversation with my girlfriend's dad last night who used to own a pig farm and he indicated that more recently pig farmers have converted to corn feed as it reduces the level of fat in the meat considerably. Not sure about other animals, but I thought I should mention that is the current Canadian practice as far as I know. Of course, my statistical sample size is one of many farms so, full disclosure I don't really know what I'm talking about. Thanks for the interesting read suggestion, I know a few people who only shop in the centre aisles who could likely benefit from this book.
P.S. I'm kind of surprised I assumed all they ate in Japan is sushi.
Although Japanese people on balance consume more fish than say North Americans, beef, pork and chicken are still a significant portion of their diet.
Corn is one of the main portions of our diet. It is in nearly everything we eat and is the primary source of food for everything we raise. The fact that people want leaner meat shows how invasive the nutritionist view of the world is.
We should be thinking about how naturally the pig was raised then judge whether or not it is a good food source. Not whether or not we can reduce the fat content by manipulating the diet of the pig. At least that is Michael Pollan's view. One that I cannot help but agree with.
Kasia, I have been told that "The Omnivore's Dilemma" is less factual. I haven't read it yet but if I find it a book shop I will probably give it a read.
Post a Comment