but they aren’t Food, at least not according to Pollan. He tries to emphasize that people used to be much healthier because they ate Things, rather than Parts of Things. He claims that historically, when we take a plant and process it to get a single nutrient out of it, we are likely to produce much less healthful food, and that applies to pretty much all three of your points, with the possible exception of wheat (especially if you eat most of the plant).
This is his argument, not mine, but it’s one I’m moderately swayed by.
By the end of the book he’s also clarified that it’s not that food reductionism doesn’t work, period. It’s just that it’s not nearly at a point yet where we actually know what we’re doing.
Right. It’s very important to note (especially around here) that he’s not anti-science, he’s just pointing out that the current state of nutrition science is awful and that we’re currently not ready to custom-design our food.
I also more-or-less agree with this. I also think that for similar reasons it makes sense to get your protein from meat rather then processed soy or whatever.
For the record, I get my protein from dairy and eggs, which is basically the same. people vastly overestimate how much protein they need. Three glasses of milk is basically it. It’s also perfectly healthy to get your protein from rice and beans and similar combinations.
But I do eat a lot of processed soy products, and the book has made me rethink that a bit. I converted to partial vegetarianism a while ago, and used Boca products to ease the transition. Then I stayed that way for five years. It’s probably time to try and take some more steps to improving my diet.
I haven’t read the book either but am wondering how on earth he comes up with ‘mostly plants’ given that the three harmful products just mentioned:
are all plant products.
Especially looking at margarine, which is a plant product whose substitution for animal products (butter and lard) turned out to have been a bad idea.
but they aren’t Food, at least not according to Pollan. He tries to emphasize that people used to be much healthier because they ate Things, rather than Parts of Things. He claims that historically, when we take a plant and process it to get a single nutrient out of it, we are likely to produce much less healthful food, and that applies to pretty much all three of your points, with the possible exception of wheat (especially if you eat most of the plant).
This is his argument, not mine, but it’s one I’m moderately swayed by.
By the end of the book he’s also clarified that it’s not that food reductionism doesn’t work, period. It’s just that it’s not nearly at a point yet where we actually know what we’re doing.
Right. It’s very important to note (especially around here) that he’s not anti-science, he’s just pointing out that the current state of nutrition science is awful and that we’re currently not ready to custom-design our food.
I also more-or-less agree with this. I also think that for similar reasons it makes sense to get your protein from meat rather then processed soy or whatever.
For the record, I get my protein from dairy and eggs, which is basically the same. people vastly overestimate how much protein they need. Three glasses of milk is basically it. It’s also perfectly healthy to get your protein from rice and beans and similar combinations.
But I do eat a lot of processed soy products, and the book has made me rethink that a bit. I converted to partial vegetarianism a while ago, and used Boca products to ease the transition. Then I stayed that way for five years. It’s probably time to try and take some more steps to improving my diet.
Margarine doesn’t count as “food” according to his definition.