Overload

The human mind is a fascinating piece of work. Some people dedicate their lives and their brains to determining how it is able to process so much information. All this research is not necessary to prove that the human mind cannot process an infinite amount of information at one point in time. In the bestseller, In Defense of Food, Michael Pollan argues that the western diet has become too interested in a scientific approach to nutrition when it is much healthier to revert to the traditional food values. His argument is made effective by his play off the mind's ability to process information quickly.
Pollan has certainly taken the time to put together a well thought out argument. He has woven in countless sources and bountiful support for his anti-nutritionalist argument. Often with books containing this much information, authors tend to write in a boring style purely designed to get the facts out. Pollan, however, chooses to distinguish himself from the average ninth grade history book by adding a whole load of his emotion into the facts (as sarcastic and overzealous as it may be). His style of writing allows the reader to easily get through a page of information still thinking about the grand picture and whether or not to trust him, but the real effect of Pollan's writing comes into effect after many more pages. After one page, the reader is excited to see how Pollan defends and elaborates on the opening statement, "Eat food. Not too much. Mostly plants." After ten pages, the reader acknowledges that he has drawn many conclusions, and eagerly awaits to study his defense of them. After fifty pages the reader thinks it to be impressive how much information Pollan has gathered about the history of food and the science behind it today. After one hundred pages the reader is still impressed, but wants the information to much less be the entire argument than support and still has fifty pages of this factual overindulgence left. By the end of the factual segment, the reader doesn't want to read anymore informative writing for the next six months.
How could disgusting your audience with an abundance information possibly be a positive strategy for Michael Pollan? He leaves almost no chance to question his deductions. When the naturally doubtful readers read so many facts in a row, they will gradually question each piece of data less and less just trying to reach the book until the reach the point where they just accept Pollan's research as true. With so many facts swirling around in the heads of the readers, and only the ability to concentrate on one, Pollan effectively overloads the minds of his readers. It is nearly impossible to read this book without skimming a few pages (it's more likely to skim a lot). Pollan has crafted this mind working project as a one sided argument that is very hard to lose.
With the exception of a few cases such as the reference to Aborigines, this book contains mostly data thrown at whatever innocent person opens the cover. There is a point where Pollan focus less on rough facts and more on his views. in the last quarter of the book, the readers feel so free to be ridden of the factual burden placed upon them that they do not realize that he has created the same effect with his own sentiments. The mental over load of unceasing conclusions causes the readers to continue their flat out acceptance of his ideas.
After reading In Defense of Food, many think that it reads more like a textbook than anything else. The two share a similarity: an abundance of facts. In reality Michael Pollan's book couldn't be more unlike a textbook. The former is a maniacal manipulation of the readers minds, and the latter is an unbiased approach to teach many ideas. This is not too say that Pollan's strategy is not effective. It is very effective.