Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
100 words for 100 days: submit your 100 word essay and get published on AlterNet
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Pollan: Nutrition 'Science' Has Hijacked Our Meals -- and Our Health

By Terrence McNally, AlterNet. Posted April 3, 2008.


Much of what lines supermarket aisles is not food. It's merely foodlike, and it's making us sick.
imagedb
bookcover
Advertisement

Why would anyone need to write a book called In Defense of Food? If we can afford it and can get our hands on it, we eat food several times a day. Or do we?

According to Michael Pollan, most of what Americans consume isn't food. He calls it "edible foodlike substances." He also says that the way we consume it is not really eating. It's something we do pretty unconsciously as we work or drive or watch TV.

We all know about the U.S. epidemic of obesity and diabetes over the past 25 years, on top of the steady rise of chronic diseases over the past hundred. Paradoxically, this happens just as Americans and the food industry are ever more aware of nutrition. What's going on here?

Pollan claims that in the Western diet, good old food has been replaced by nutrients, mom's good advice by nutritional experts, common sense by confusion, and for most, a relatively good diet by a bad and dangerous one. The book in which he makes all these claims and advises us simply to "Eat Food. Not too much. Mostly plants," has topped the New York Times bestseller list.

Michael Pollan's previous books include The Omnivore's Dilemma: A Natural History of Four Meals, named one of the ten best books of 2006 by the New York Times and the Washington Post, and The Botany of Desire. Pollan is a contributing writer to the New York Times Magazine and a Knight Professor of Journalism at U.C. Berkeley.

Terrence McNally: How did you grow to focus on plants and then food?

Michael Pollan: Well all my work really begins in the garden. I was a very passionate gardener beginning at age 8, although I fell away from it for a few years. In the 1980s I was living in New York and took up gardening at a weekend house in northwestern Connecticut. I got very absorbed in the garden as a place to look at our relationship to nature.

Like a lot of Americans, my understanding of nature and our relationship to it was shaped by Emerson and Thoreau and Melville and Whitman. When I actually started to garden, I realized all those ideas about the romance of nature were distinctly unhelpful. Thoreau's love of wilderness and worship of the wild really doesn't equip you when the pests come and destroy your crops, when the woodchuck attacks your broccoli.

I got into trouble following their philosophy. I didn't have a fence, for example. I thought a fence was too alienating from the natural world. I got into a war with a woodchuck -- just like Bill Murray in Caddyshack -- until I was defoliating my property and pouring gasoline down a woodchuck burrow. I was like William Westmoreland in Vietnam, willing to destroy the village to save it.

I realized then that the garden was a very interesting place to examine our relationship to the natural world. Traditionally, when Americans want to think about nature, we picture the wilderness, we go camping, we go to Yosemite. But nature is happening in our homes, in our gardens, in our lawns, and on our plates.

TMN: At that point you were writing about other things?

MP: I was an editor at Harper's Magazine, and I began writing a series of essays about what was happening to me in my garden, my woodchuck war, my dad's battle with the neighbors over his front lawn. These kinds of issues became my first book, Second Nature.

I started looking at our relationship to plants and animals, and at drugs, since a lot of drugs are plants that change our consciousness.

TMN: And that shows up in The Botany of Desire?

MP: Yes. When I was working on Botany of Desire, I visited industrial farms in Idaho to see how industrial agriculture works, and I was shocked. I was absolutely floored by these vast monocultures, the amount of pesticides that are used, the fact that the farmers are afraid to go into their fields for five days after they spray for fungus, because they know how neurotoxic this stuff is.

TMN: Stuff which will later end up on our plates?

MP: In fact, they would often have a little patch of organic potatoes by the house for themselves, because they could not eat the food coming out of their farms.

I suggest they are more irresponsible than they are. Over time the potatoes leech out the worst chemicals, so you can't just dig industrial potatoes and eat them right away, or you'll get too heavy a load of residues.

I also visited organic farms and realized that there were alternatives. People were having great success growing organic on a fairly large scale in Idaho with a completely different mind-set. Not monoculture being the key fact. Heavy rotations, poly-cropping.

When I realized that eating is our most profound engagement with the natural world, I got very excited to take a hard look at the food chain that we're a part of.


Digg!

See more stories tagged with: health, food, diet, eating, whole foods, nutritionism, nutrition science

Interviewer Terrence McNally hosts Free Forum on KPFK 90.7FM, Los Angeles (streaming at kpfk.org).

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »

Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
I don't even need to read this article
Posted by: davesilvan on Apr 3, 2008 1:35 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Avoid processed foods at all costs. I prefer to eat fresh vegetables, fresh meat, fresh poultry, none of which contain 'partially hydrogenated soybean oil,' 'high fructose corn syrup,' or 'blue #3.'

Processed foods are full of fillers and chemicals, which are cheaper for large companies to buy and therefore lower the bottom line of what that 'food' costs.

I do have a soft spot for Pepsi cola, and while I've greatly limited it's intake in the last few years, my mother is more or less addicted to it and always has a bottle on hand. Amazingly, when I read the label, it actually included 'sugar' instead of high fructose corn syrup, which has it's own woes; studies have shown that is is the high fructose corn syrup which, even in diet colas which contain no calories, still contributes to the expanding waist-line. (I feel sorry for my sister, who is overweight and drinks nothing but Pepsi One, which claims to only have 1 calorie per can. Of course, no one can tell her that even though it only contains 1 calorie, she's not losing any weight, and sadly, the only true solution is exercise.)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: super collider lawsuit Posted by: abbadon2007
Excellent!
Posted by: armorypk on Apr 3, 2008 1:49 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
But without at least some government oversight and regulation, the priorities of the food mega-corporations will always be profit first, the health of their customers second.
Here's a simple first step that the FDA can take that will instantly improve the quality of our food and positively impact the health of all Americans:
Ban the use of high-fructose corn syrup as a food additive!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: xcellent! Posted by: donl51
» RE: xcellent! Posted by: zorba1
» RE: xcellent! Posted by: armorypk
» RE: xcellent! Posted by: peacefullaim
The Root Cause
Posted by: BlackbirdHighway on Apr 3, 2008 3:23 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You need to get to the root cause. People didn't just wake up one day and decide they wanted fake food. No consumer demanded that polysorbate-80 get added to their favorite foods.

The root cause is that these fake foods are made by big corporations. Giant corporations have taken over our governments and our lives. They have far too much control . In a democracy, the people decide what's right and wrong, but big corporations are deciding that for us.

Over time corporations have accumulated power and rights that were never explicitely given to them. Corporate "personhood" must be reversed. don't expect to see that on the platform of either Democrats or Republicans, Both parties are owned completely by the corporations.

Watch the documentary, "The Corporation" to see what I'm talking about.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: The Root Cause Posted by: Drume
» RE: The Root Cause Posted by: e rice
» RE: The Root Cause Posted by: Drume
» RE: The Root Cause Posted by: e rice
» RE: The Root Cause Posted by: peacefullaim
» RE: The Root Cause Posted by: manatthewindow
Grandmother Said...
Posted by: tnrider on Apr 3, 2008 3:37 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
One of my Grandmother's frequently heard sayings was "You either spend money at the grocery store, or you spend money at the doctor's office." And of course she was NOT talking about processed foods being the majority of the diet, although she did have a few processed items like cereal around the house.

I find that I have even fewer processed items around than she did. Like women of her generation, she used margarine and canned goods, while I stick to butter and fresh veggies. Attitudes can change, but marketing must make it incredibly difficult for adults that have children to avoid junk like "cereal straws."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Grandmother Said... Posted by: henderson
Huh?
Posted by: Cowardly_lion on Apr 3, 2008 3:58 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It's funny how this is because I remember back a few years ago when Burger King first released their onion rings I peeled the breading off and took a look at the "onion." It was a paste! I showed it to my father and said out loud to him in the store, "they're feeding us onion paste!" He laughed and said, "no that must be what happens to it when you deep fry it."

He'd make a great spokesman for a large corporation.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Funny... I've never seen that... Posted by: JoshuaLudd
» RE: Huh? Posted by: Cooltruth
In Mexico
Posted by: CommentCulture on Apr 3, 2008 4:02 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Young people call American food "Frankenfood." It started with American genetically manufactured corn. Corn is the most basic staple of the Mexican diet. But American corn is called "Frankencorn."

I'll spare you all the stories about what this corn does in your bodies. But just let me say it is very grotesque!

Dont eat ANY Frankenfood !

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: In Mexico Posted by: fringedweller
buy local
Posted by: Fat Man at the Buffet Line on Apr 3, 2008 4:03 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
you get what you pay for.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Exercise and don't eat junk food, period
Posted by: Bobsays on Apr 3, 2008 4:25 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
My cousin made a fortune on processed food: she is a big old feminist role model.But she is fat because she eats what she makes. My sister-in-law sucks on 'diet' cokes all day long. She is fat and gets fatter by the day (I feel sorry for her skinny husband - she once looked like a hot Swedish woman).

I always stick with fresh meat, veggies/fruit, and grains. My cupboard barely has anything that is processed.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Processed not cheap either
Posted by: Allstar Cookie on Apr 3, 2008 4:25 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The irony, is that you have to pay for all of that "processing".......and then you eventually pay with your own health.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Processed not cheap either Posted by: bittershaman
Food contains thousands of nutrients
Posted by: PaulK on Apr 3, 2008 4:58 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
For example, mixed carotenoids are better for you than one carotenoid called "Vitamin A". When you get a package (that has been sitting on a store shelf for 2 months), it now lists only a very few nutrients on the package. So, the few people who read the label can monitor two to ten variables.

Most people don't know what they're getting.

Genetically modified food, where a pesticide production gene is inserted into corn or where a fish gene is inserted into strawberries, adds new chemicals to the food at the source. We don't know what dozens or hundreds of organic chemicals the fish DNA produces in a strawberry. The fish has been tuned to hundreds of millions of years of immunological response to various threats to the fish. How does all of that inner firepower interact with the thousands of chemicals produced by the strawberry?

As for the pesticide embedded in the corn, the consumer doesn't know and the multinational who made the corn doesn't care. Certain sensitive people eat the corn and have medical reactions to the pesticides.

Worse, the Frankencorn pollen doesn't stay on one field's corn. It sometimes blows over to the organic farm across the road, contaminating the seed corn with pesticide genes.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

What's happened to eating?
Posted by: Pau on Apr 3, 2008 5:00 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Why is it that some cultures find a pleasure in the basic life act of eating, enjoying the flavours and textures and feeling that in the act they are experiencing one of the basic pleasures of life and yet others solely feel the need to stuff something in their mouths, in the process destroying that sense for choice of foods that millions of years of evolution, trial and error have given us?
Why is it that some people prefer to follow a usually miscontructed sentence made by an imagologue, to those years of experience? Don't they realize that those sentences are constructed purely for the sole purpose of increasing the profits of corporations?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Dumb and dumber
Posted by: Miguel Sastre on Apr 3, 2008 5:01 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Sadly, most people select their "food" based on appearance, taste, and texture. Equally as lamentable is the act of eating for recreation instead of looking at food as fuel.

Blame it on a lot of things, but since the advent of television people read less, exercise less, and consume much, much more - of just about everything. Critical thinking has been replaced with advertisements full of misleading statements and false promises, marketing ethics have disappeared as quickly as Wal-Mart appeared!

Eat less and stop buying junk!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Dumb and dumber Posted by: plantsareneat
» RE: Dumb and dumber Posted by: e rice
A long history
Posted by: GPFrank on Apr 3, 2008 5:05 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Processing, chemical conversion of food has a long history.
Take barley and rye, first converted to beer, a slow process. But beer, ale and especially stout from oats as brewed before 1950 is fundamentally nutritious. But with the invention of the still, what happened?
As the mountaineer said, "I don't eat anything I can drink"
But he and Schenley's make good money on it.
But this stuff has no vitamins, to say the least.
Let's go to salt pork: the great assistant in sea voyages allowing spreading of civilization, and all its amenities along the globe. But then salt pork went to smoking it using saltpeter and everybody knows the old joke about what saltpeter does. Birth control at the nozzle.
About wine, allowing water consumption without
cholera, the subject of a great Biblical miracle.What they do with wine nowadays is too much for this small space. But then what is the meaning of the "water into wine" story except as an old Presbyterian said to me, that fresh spring water is the greatest delight?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: A long history Posted by: Shey
If the Western diet is so bad...
Posted by: Drume on Apr 3, 2008 5:06 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I agree with most points of what Michael Pollan says. However, my question is, if our diet is so bad, why is it that we are not all dying at, say, age 55 or 65 even? I know we used to, back when we smoked a ton, pollution was worse, we drank a lot more, and so on...but now we don't. We die mostly, for the least well off starting at 69 and then for the most well-off, we die at about 78 or 79. So that is my question.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Good point. My grandparents... Posted by: JoshuaLudd
» RE: If the Western diet is so bad... Posted by: kitchencoach
» RE: lies, damned lies, and statistics Posted by: nochicagoboys
» my typo Posted by: e rice
» RE: lies, damned lies, and statistics Posted by: photon's feather
» RE: If the Western diet is so bad... Posted by: bittershaman
» to answer your question...we will... Posted by: undrgrndgirl
High fructose corn syrup, fungicides, pesticides, and antibacterials...
Posted by: thoughtcriminal on Apr 3, 2008 5:29 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The high fructose corn syrup is an industrial product itself, and using it as your main carbohydrate source appears to be just as unhealthy as eating margarine, as it promotes obesity and type II diabetes.

That's why people who move here from other countries start developing obesity problems that were unheard of in their own countries.

The fungicides and antibacterials are added as the food is processed to increase shelf life, and pesticide residues are left over from the industrial agricultural system.

The solution is not to buy any processed foods, to buy direct from organic farmers whenever possible, and also to get all the sugary junk food banned from our nation's public schools - just like tobacco manufacturers, junk food producers know that children who are hooked early remain lifelong consumers (even if their lives aren't so long).

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Don't worry. These junk snacks will be outta here once Peak Oil kicks in.
Posted by: maxpayne on Apr 3, 2008 5:30 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Before the age of oil, this kind of junk food was unimaginable. It's takes loads of crude oil to manufacture this shit inside and out let alone transport it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Amen Posted by: xenocyd
It's not personal, just strictly business
Posted by: snowhound on Apr 3, 2008 5:31 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Corporations are motivated by profits not your health. Whether it's food, vaccines, or drugs..whatever, it's all about the money. You can not rely on any information from government agencies or mainstream news sources for truth. You have to use critical thinking and ultimately your own common sense.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

"Death By Supermarket" Nancy DeVille (Barricade Books, 2007)
Posted by: Woodpecker on Apr 3, 2008 5:50 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Sorry to disabuse Mr Pollan, but I'm WAY ahead of him. May I recommend the above tome for his perusal!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

ever wonder?
Posted by: bomec on Apr 3, 2008 6:23 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Ever wonder why the French and other Europeans have such wonderful, tasty, healthful cuisine and appear slimmer and healthier in all respects than Americans? Duh! Every little village, and not just in Mediterranean countries but Northern Europe and England as well, has a weekly market selling locally grown produce, meats and dairy. Not just in summer but year round, the French are able to buy good fresh food that has not been injected with preservatives and food color because it has had to travel hundreds or even thousands of miles to get to the grocery store. French bread is without question the best in the world because it is made fresh twice daily and doesn't last more than a day. Why? Absolutely no preservatives and it is not wrapped in plastic and shipped from elsewhere.

Americans suffer from a Candide-like naivete, which is really a type of arrogance. They have been fed the fable from their youth that they live in the best of all possible countries. Everything here, they are conditioned to believe, is the best--health care, nutrition, housing, economy, standard of living, you name it. We are the best.

NOT!

Open up your eyes and your minds to see the wider world and you will see clearly that in many respects we are lagging far behind the Europeans, health care and nutrition being two major areas where we have a lot to learn from our friends across the pond.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» oh, that was just cruel! Posted by: e rice
» RE: ever wonder? Posted by: walldodger1969
» RE: ever wonder? Posted by: blitzmesser
» RE: ever wonder? Posted by: Spot
» RE: ever wonder? Posted by: AlineSE
» RE: ever wonder? Posted by: roxz67
Splitting hairs.
Posted by: ShrubtheWarcriminal on Apr 3, 2008 6:32 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Ok, some may think I am splitting hairs here but it is NOT science that is responsible per say for the issues in this article, but corporate fascism. For some perspective:

Science: the STUDY of the physical and natural world and phenomena, especially by using systematic observation and experiment.

Facism: any movement, ideology, or attitude that favors dictatorial government, centralized control of private enterprise, repression of all opposition, and extreme nationalism

OUR government is run by corporations, is becoming more dictatorial by the day, more centralized, repressive and un-amerikkkan to even suggest that we eat more natural foods (Article: Food industry folks say "We don't think we should regulate this sort of thing because Americans believe in individualism and free choice, but we're all for public education.".)

Science just wants to find out things. Applied science is in the control of corporations, who just pimp the science and/or scientist. Science is neither good nor bad; it is how you decide to use it.

I tried to make these clarifications because there is a concerted effort today to demonize, and destroy science in its purist form. But of course when the corporate fascists NEED it to make a buck science is good and even can serve as a cover for their greed. (“The scientist made me do it!”)

One other point. It seems to me as I look around me with a lot of fractured families and people having kids later in life that most people will have to imagine their grandmothers let alone their GREAT grandmothers. I doubt very few even met their Greats, let alone know what they experienced.

Great article otherwise.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

you are what you eat
Posted by: roxz67 on Apr 3, 2008 6:40 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I have been a server and catered for many years while going through school, I have been witness to how Americans eat. I worked for many types of restaurants through out NYstate. I noticed that most Americans freak out if their food tastes like something.......They usually call it too spicey. They all claim that it will irritate their stomach...but when I see them gorp down that sausage or 2lb prime rib I wonder about their delicate stomach. I have passed trays at many parties and get to see face to face many reactions to the( very good) food I was serving which at the time was contemporary fusion dishes ( using ethnic flavors and foods but dumbing it down a bit for American tastes, or lack of, all prepare by CIA graduate chefs.) The maturity in which alot of those people displayed while I encouraged them to try something new was embarassing. I have had people spit things out and make horrible noises of disgust. The key word is maturity....I don't see a mature approach to food with most people. I have learned to expand my tastes in food by trying it more then once and exploring, I understand this because there was a time did not like many foods, I was not encouraged as a youngster to try new and healthy things so I did not build up a food vocabulary. Today I realize how much I would of missed out on if I never changed my ways. I see this with many people today. They would prefer to eat that boxed frozen broccoli drenched in the chemical cheese sauce rather then a chunk of fresh and healthy raw broccoli. Americans need to grow up!!! We can't eat "candy" for the rest of our lives!!!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» so true, so true Posted by: e rice
» it's hilarious how Posted by: AlineSE
» RE: you are what you eat Posted by: Drume
» RE: you are what you eat Posted by: e rice
» Just outta curiosity... Posted by: Cooltruth
» RE: Just outta curiosity... Posted by: roxz67
Ironically, there's another side to this story
Posted by: navy-vet on Apr 3, 2008 6:44 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
To someone who's been co-manager of a health food co-op in new York City, and a historian, there's a flip side to this story. The irony is that 100 years ago it was the unregulated FRESH FOOD industry that was causing serious illness and death. And it was the processed food industry, starting with the absolute necessity of pasteurized milk, that began the vast increase in human longevity--which has almost doubled since 1880.

So, there's nothing wrong with nutrition, dietetics or processing, as long as it doesn't get captured by the Multinationals for their Bottom Line. There could be no problems with food additives as long as these are actually nutritious and not doing harm--which means HEAVY REGULATION AND OVERSIGHT BY CONSUMER-FRIENDLY WATCHDOG AGENCIES. I remember years ago reading a book ("The Nuts Among the Berries"), a sympathetic study of the much-maligned leaders of the first wave of nutritional concern in the US, around 1890-1910. The detractors were conservatives in the fresh food industry (organically grown in those pre-chemical days) at all levels. Ordinary farmers were feeding the public crops poisoned by highly polluted human and animal runoff, unwashed farm laborers, and rats and mice in silos laving fecal matter all over the stored crops. Unregulated grocery stores cared little about cleanliness, vermin, or dating of perishables. The monopolistic meat packers, whose filthy conditions were exposed by Upton Sinclair in THE JUNGLE, had the money and funded the opposition. In fact, the entire food industry from farmers to grocers opposed careful scrutiny and regulation of what people ate and spent a lot of advertising money making fun of it. (To this day, "health nut" is a derogatory term.)

At the turn of the 20th century "health nut" encompassed vegan-ism, eaters of exclusive diets like fruit only, and also those who demanded clean food. Cleanliness required some amount of processing--if only to wash it under sterile conditions. The struggle for clean nutritious food was part of the anti-monopoly, strict regulation, radical wing of the Progessive era that led to creationof Pure Food & Drug laws and the FDA. It was led by two men of Battle Creek, MI, Will Keith Kellogg who founded Kellogg's Food and his brother, Dr John Harvey Kellogg. Both were vegetarians, peace activists, and promoters of social justice causes. They were called "health nuts" by the food industry, but they had the last laugh since both brothers lived to age 91. Will, an inventor and a highly regarded anti-trust lawyer, refused to leave his children more than tiny legacies, giving his vast fortune to social work and charity. He said he expected his kids to work, not be lazy heirs. (Can you imagine the Bush family saying that?) Will Kellogg invented processed dry cereal, and at first it was used exclusively in Dr John Kellogg's vegetarian health sanitarium, then caught on by word-of-mouth. I remember the book emphasized that around 1900 too many children ate no breakfast whatsoever (my parents were of that generation)--a highly unhealthy life style--and went off to school hungry. That was because town and city families no longer grew food, in poor families both parents worked and factory-working parents had no time to prepare a farm breakfast with eggs, even if they could afford eggs that weren't rotten, which most couldn't. Kellogg's Wheat Flakes and Corn Flakes, safe, clean, inexpensive and providing numerous nutrients, rapidly became popular.

The point is--it's not fresh food OR processed food that's the culprit. It's LACK OF WATCHDOG REGULATION of what goes into our food, whether pollutants, unnecessary or even dangerous chemicals, fat-makers, or questionable DNA experiments. DEregulation does nothing but promote the corporate interests. It always, invariably, harms the public!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Excellent comment Posted by: wheresarah
» very good points Posted by: e rice
» Thank you, good reality check Posted by: stilldreaming
» thank you for a good reality check Posted by: stilldreaming
smilingweasel
Posted by: smilingweasel on Apr 3, 2008 7:25 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As a nutritionist and writer, I thoroughly enjoyed this interview, but I now don't feel the need to read the book!

I do, however, take issue with Pollan's assertion that avoiding supermerkets and buying exclusively from farmers' markets is the solution we should be selling to the general public.

The nutritional science community in the UK has finally woken up to the difference between 'food' and 'nutrients' and now tends (though not always) to make recommendations based on foods, that consumers can understand. Now we are at the stage of encouraging people to buy fresh produce, but to buy wisely, to maximise health benefit and minimise waste. This may, in some cases involve re-education and is by no-means an easy process. Farmers' markets in the UK at least, are an financially expensive option for many (myself included) and, as a shopping concept need to be approached in a different way by those of us on a budget. Once this has been achieved, then perhaps farmers' markets will become an affordable option.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: smilingweasel Posted by: macdon1
» RE: smilingweasel Posted by: Cooltruth
my mother cried to me all of her life
Posted by: bitsfick on Apr 3, 2008 7:55 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
about the poor diet she had as a child. Her diet consisted of what they could grow in the garden, home made bread and the occasional chicken. My mother will be 94 this year, and can out walk people half her age. One of the results of her belief of what constituted poor food, is that my diet as a child consisted of the worst food you can eat, large amounts beef, pork, organ meats etc, "eat that liver it is good for you" The best thing that happened to her (though she won't admit it) was her so-called poor diet.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» 'progress' and luxury Posted by: e rice
» My parents and grandparents Posted by: Cathyc
Living like helpless children,
Posted by: wisewebwoman on Apr 3, 2008 9:36 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
But without the curiosity. The great dumbing down of the sheeple, bought and paid for by Big Corp. Unquestioning as to how the food supply, the very core of life, is grown, harvested and managed.
The joy of eating is taken away. Families sit with their own little TV tables gobbling mindlessly while they absorb even more toxic sludge from the screens in front of them.
What happened to the whole social intercourse of preparing colourful, good food, mainly plants, and sharing the meal with good conversation?
Oh right, there's no time - everybody's out there working like dogs to buy more processed crap and the health care to offset its horrific effects.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]