That night, I was also able to meet some of my friends that also traveled to different cities for college. It was great seeing them and made me appreciate my friends. We all met at one of my friends' house and chilled till 5 in the morning playing games and talking about our college lives so far. Around 5:30 am we went to Steak and Shake to have some breakfast. After our meal, we then started our shopping spree to Target, BestBuy, Macy's, and Old Navy. Being college students, we all were very careful where we spent our money. I guess that's just what happens when you go to college. We then went to another friend's house and slept from 9am to 2pm. That was a great Thanksgiving!My Thanksgiving was very good, we had my fathers side grandparents come over and we all ate a very good lunch!
Here is a pic of the top left corner of my kitchen, where all the food is displayed on one of the islands.
As you can tell, we had a great deal of food! My favorite was the potato boats (double cooked potatoes) and of course, a massive turkey leg. We prepared Wednesday and cooked all of Thursday and ate at around 2 pm.
In his book, In Defense of Food, Michael Pollan expresses the extreme central belief that the American Diet or, as Pollan names it, the Western Diet is the downfall of society’s health. In depth portrayals of Americans’ failure to eat natural, organic meals, or even meals at all with a family at a table and having consistent snacking in between allows Pollan to make the assertion that it is our culture to blame for the dramatic rise in disease and obesity. He enhances this claim by comparing the United States to France. Americans are some of the most health conscious people, in that the majority buy low fat or low carbohydrate products, along with frozen and preserved foods that come in large amounts. Then why are the French a generally group of thinner and healthier people? Before he gets scientific, Pollan begins to first identify the differences between the countries’ “relationship with their food”. The French eat foods that are not filled with preservatives and chemicals that replace the ingredients we Americans try to avoid. Why then are the French generally thinner and healthier? Pollan claims it is their eating habits comprised in their culture. For instance, the French eat meals together at a table. Their lack of preservatives and substitutes in their food allows for a very whole and untreated meal. Thus, their food was prepared and was not a cheap replacement of the real thing. In comparison to the average American, European cultures eat more slowly in order to fellowship and truly enjoy the meal. They rarely go back for seconds and avoid snacking throughout the day. Thus, they may eat what Americans avoid, but yet they eat less, eat healthier and better quality tasting foods, and actually enjoy their meals instead of eating them on the go or popping food in the microwave.
Pollan writes with passion. When reading, one can almost hear him yelling, almost as if he was preaching to a crowd. For example, Pollan explains that part of the eating problem is attributed to the low quality: “Not everyone can afford to eat high-quality food in America, and that is shameful! However, those of us who can, should”. His writing style reads as if it is an essay or speech, as it is so convicting and opinionated. His credibility as a writer is high because of his extensive research and observations on culture, food, its preservatives and substitutes, and the effects of different types of food and eating habits on society. This passion that Pollan writes with is evident when he makes bold statements criticizing the Western diet. This evaluation of the American diet is given not only by these harsh, insensitive comments, but by criticizing our food guides, food pyramids, even our nutritionists! He writes what needs to be said, stolid about the lifestyles he is condemning. This adamant style of writing, though very persuasive and thought provoking is however, incredibly biased. Bias is a writing component that is difficult to avoid, particularly when in books where there is an opinion about a topic. Pollan uses this opinion and bias to come across as a high authority writer trying to gather followers in his quest to change American food culture. Susceptible readers beware!
Pollan also writes with a lot of repetition, as if he needs to reiterate his point over and over to insure the reader understands. This equates to not only a sense of enthusiasm for the critique of Americans’ relationship to food, but also monotony. Pollan, at times, appears to let his mind get ahead of his writing. He writes as if he were talking. This leads to him repeating various claims in different ways, which makes the monotony equate to a conditioned attitude towards whatever the author has to say. Thus the passion and exuberance that had originally attracted many people to read Pollan’s claim about food, ultimately makes him very vulnerable to losing his audience’s attention. Writing with a lot of repetition can become very monotonous, which can turn many pieces of work to boring. Readers lose interest as they are conditioned to whatever he might be saying because they have heard it so much. Pollan needs to find a different avenue in expressing his zeal in food culture effects on society.
Despite what may comprise each individual paragraph, Michael Pollan has a very clear organization. Although at times monotonous, Pollan still writes in accordance with the main idea of the section. His theme of critiquing the Western diet has three main components: “The Age of Nutritionism”, “The Western Diet and the Diseases of Civilization”, and “Getting over Nutritionism”. Within these sections, Pollan has scientific research, which he uses to support and give authority to his claim. Take for example Pollan’s evidence to back up his claim on the effects of less quality food on the health of Americans: “Is it just a coincidence that as the portion of our income spent on food has declined, spending on health care has soared?”
There is no question, as to what Pollan is talking about or where he stands on each topic. He is passionate; that is clear enough in the way he speaks. Yet his passion has a way of coming back around to hinder him with monotonous repetition. Although In Defense of Food is presented in a very logical and clear order and there is scientific support of his statements, Pollan’s enthusiasm causes readers to become disinterested and thus not be convinced that the Western diet may very well be a critical issue that requires attention.
Michael Pollan, whose primary skill involves writing books, has a surprisingly immense knowledge of food and its components. Not only does he know about the different types of food but also the various processes going on in the food industry. This puts him in a position to critically analyze the food industry and the scientific interference in food processes. In his book “In Defense of Food”, he stresses on three major topics – Nutritionism, the Western Diet and his own estimate on how to eat.
There are various factors in today’s world which influence our way of eating such as scientific interference, media interference and mainly the food industry. These professional fields are trying to alter the way people eat by putting health labels on various food items and producing food which might not contain natural ingredients. Pollan tells us to ignore health labels and look to our cultural ties with food.
Pollan finds links which connect all these aspects to nutritionism. All these efforts are being made to preserve or enhance the health of human beings. The major stress is on macronutrients such as proteins, fats and carbohydrates. Initially scientists failed to recognize micronutrients such as vitamins and minerals as important constituents of food. After realizing their importance, scientists began experimenting with them to produce new food products which would supposedly enhance health. This led to the idea of nutritionism which has further led to the concept of processed foods. Processed foods are prepared by the food industry by stripping down fresh food into their constituents and forming something completely unnatural and unknown. By the time they reach the supermarket there are very few natural components remaining in the food and most of the flavors are artificial. This is an indirect way of fooling people because it only displays the food externally while hiding the manufacturing process. In fact they are processed food which Pollan argues cannot even be called food but food products.
The ideas about nutritionism propagated by the scientists are further propagated by the media through advertisements. They often display false ideas about healthy food and mainly promote the idea of processed food for their own benefit.
Right from the start Pollan talks about the effect of nutritionism on the modern diet. Nutritionism is the idea that the nutritional value of a food is the sum of all its individual nutrients, vitamins, and other components. It also supports and propagates the idea that food is to be consumed to promote good health. Pollan strongly attacks these ideas in his book. Contrary to the idea of nutritionism, Pollan argues that the whole food is more than the sum of its constituent parts. To back up this idea he presents a plethora of facts. Scientists stress the importance of studying food by breaking it up into its nutrients. This way they can isolate the harmful nutrients and keep the healthy ones. But this practice backfired. Scientists attempted to make healthy food healthier by stressing on individual nutrients. Little did they know that the nutrients only work well when they are blended together by various reactions. Consumed separately, they lose their nutritional value.
The second major topic covered by Pollan is the Western diet. As an example Pollan describes the diet of the Aborigines people of Australia. They have been surviving through their traditional methods of eating. When they were exposed to Western food they developed certain chronic diseases. Pollan strongly criticizes the Western diet which is also a reflection of nutritionism in today’s world. Western diet largely comprises processed food. As mentioned earlier, processed food lacks many of the basic nutrients required for good health due to continuous experimentation. Another aspect of Western diet is the production of food by using external chemical agents such as chemical fertilizers and pesticides. Not only do these deplete important micro organisms in the soil but also deprives the soil and crop of nutrients and minerals. This leads to monoculture and the production of only few types of crops such as soybean and corn which has been the case for many years now. The trend has shifted from quality of food to quantity. All these agricultural measures have led to the increase yield of one or two crops while decreasing its nutritional value.
Finally Pollan gives us his own evaluation of how to eat food and how to make the right choices while selecting food. The first steps are to escape from the Western diet and the world of nutritionism. He tells us to only eat food which our great grandmothers recognize as food because food at their time was not refined but presented it in its entire essence. Next he tells us to avoid food labels which depict ingredients which are unfamiliar to us and seem complicated. He criticizes the supermarket and tells us that the farmers market is the best place to find whole food which has not been deprived of its natural value. He links eating to ecology and culture by stating the importance of soil and the food habits of the animals we consume. He culturally criticizes the Western diet by bringing in the French way of eating. As compared to the cheap and fast way of the American diet, the French eat little food over long periods which not only helps them enjoy their food but also keeps them relatively healthy. In the end he tells us that food that is directly produced by us in farms and gardens are the best source of healthy food.
I am not completely certain about the credibility of Pollan’s arguments but as far as I am concerned, he supports his arguments with strong facts. He uses an analytical approach while criticizing the food industry, nutritionism and the Western diet. As mentioned earlier, his extensive knowledge regarding the various processes and constituents of food is astounding and forces readers to take his side and adopt his views towards a healthy diet.
Michael Pollens In Defense of Food addresses the scientifically acclaimed nutritional values of “the tangible material formerly known as food.” Food corporations around the world have scientist hard at work determined to find some nutritional value in their product so they can claim the name of nutrition in their advertising. Michael Pollen rebuts their efforts in masking the true value of their product by giving wholesome examples of the benefits and values of farm grown fruits and vegetables verse the corporate material formerly known as food.
Scientist at major food corporations have gone to the furthest of extremes to claim the nutritional name, they have even tried to claim their candy bars as nutritious and healthy. For instance, scientists at Mars Corporation have found evidence that the flavanols in cocoa have beneficial effects on the heart, thus allowing Mars to market products like its health-minded Rich Chocolate Indulgence Beverage.(1) This is just the start, even our local Coca-Cola plant has used nutritionism to justify vitamin enriched Diet Coke which is acclaimed to be bread bolstered with the Omega-3 fatty acid found in fish oil. Almost every major food corporation around the globe is following this trend so they too can advertise the infamous “Its Nutritious” aspect about their product.
In Defense of Food addresses this issue directly and Michael Pollen warns “Don't eat anything that your great-great grandmother would not recognize as food."(2) I know my grandmother wouldn’t recognize a mars chocolate bar as food, so why should I? Just because the food industry advertises with play to our senses and emotions while giving the slightest truth about only what we want to hear does not mean we should fall for their nutritional traps. As Michael Pollen explained throughout his novel, the beneficiaries of our corporate “junk” is a mere subsidiary at most to the non-nutritional values found in most of the industries products.
The industrially manufactured “food” is subconsciously known to us as junk, and for our brains to see it as beneficial to the body we need to be told so repeatedly until it is engrained into our memory. However on the flip side to this we all know a homegrown tomato is healthy for you. We don’t need anyone to explain its nutritional values. This subconscious contradiction is what the food industry is trying to change. We all know what is and is not nutritious to our bodies and we should all pay attention to the subconscious memory that tells us such.
We all know what is and is not nutritious for our bodies, we need to take control over our food choices and not fall into the nutritional traps so easily set by the food industry. Michael Pollen has given quintessential advice regarding the nutritional facts about the food we eat and the food we should be eating. In my opinion, I advise upon the previous quote, “Don't eat anything that your great-great grandmother would not recognize as food", as well as a personal statement to only eat what I can subconsciously justify as having nutritional value. That said, I am in total agreement with Michael Pollens position against the food industries claim of nutritional value in the tangible substance formerly known as food.
(1) - http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/03books/03masl.html
(2) - http://www.bookbrowse.com/reviews/index.cfm?book_number=2084
What should we be putting into our bodies? Should we be focusing only on nutrients or the food that they are derived from? This is the overarching question that Michael Pollan poses in his latest book, In Defense of Food. In an attempt to answer this main question, Pollan poses many points and ideas. Pollan argues very strongly for the idea that in order to be healthier, Americans should abandon their typical diet and eating habits, which he has dubbed “The Western Diet”, and adopt eating habits of culturally strong nations such as France, Greece, and India among many others. Though the argument that Pollan makes holds logical validity, he undermines the arguments credibility by using copious amounts of empirical data previous to presenting this point and with other arguments he makes throughout the book.
In the first seven words of his book, Pollan sums up one of the fundamental points of what he finds wrong with “The Western Diet”. To counteract this horrid diet, the reader is told to “Eat food. Not too much. Mostly Plants.” Pollan tells the reader (who is presumably American) to focus on eating foreign diets because they are doing everything right by his standards. Instead of deciding what they eat based on the nutrients added or broadcasted on the packaging, these cultural diets just focus on the food trusting that it has the proper chemicals for sufficient fuel and nutrition. Pollan also strongly pushes the point, especially on the part of the French, that these other cultures eat smaller serving. Pollan gives the example that the French, instead of eating until what food on the plate before them is gone, eat only until they are full. The French also make their meals last over a longer period of time, thus eating less over a longer time. By abandoning the act of focusing strictly on nutrients and by beginning to eat more like other cultures, Americans, in theory, will become healthier.
If the reader looks at Pollan’s argument against “The Western Diet” and for French, Greek, and other cuisines, it seems perfectly logical to switch from “The Western Diet”. The typical image that comes to mind of an American is obesity coupled with a disease related to the obesity while the typical image of those who partake in the diet that Pollan vouches for is skinny, healthy, and full of life. If one attributes these differences strictly to cultural ways of eating like Pollan tends to do (and not environmental or other cultural factors such as actually walking to destinations instead of driving or exercise), Pollan’s argument makes perfect sense. If in essence, these other cultures can be much healthier, look better, and live longer simply by eating food instead of just nutrients and by portioning their serving size unlike Americans, it is stupid not to change. Yet in two words, Pollan throws this argument away. Mostly plants. By writing these two words, Pollan manages to link together “The Western Diet” and many of the diets that he recommends Americans to follow. By linking these two words, the lines of “The Western Diet” and a proper diet of that is not American are blurred. Pollan could have possibly avoided this blurring, but by placing these two words within the first seven, he made them a hallmark of the book and committed them to the reader’s memory. If the reader looks at the diet of the French, meats, often fatty ones, and the proteins they bring are a large portion of the French diet. The Greek diet consists largely of seafood with red meats present more than occasionally. While both diets do have plants as a part, one could hardly say that the diets are “mostly plants”. The majority of the other diets Pollan brings up in the book follow the same lines, with Pollan even saying that many diets of healthy groups of people can consists with a low in plants. By allowing these similarities to exist due to his word choice, Pollan’s argument loses much of support. If one can continue the diet of Americans and eat large amounts of after seeing that other cultures can do it, such as the Inuit Native Americans of Alaska, and still be healthy, why change. “Mostly plants” ruins a large part of what Pollan has argued for so diligently.
On a slightly lesser note, Pollan hurts his argument with the complete first half of his book. Though the first half of his book supports his argument that Americans should switch away from the heavy reliance on nutrients in “The Western Diet” by giving reasons why they are unhealthy and how the scientific methods supporting their use is still mysterious and very flawed, he presents the evidence in a very empirical manner, constantly using statistics and studies to support what he is trying to say. Numerical evidence to back up why the scientific evidence is wrong is highly welcomed and a great way to leave ones argument mostly unquestionable. However, Pollan uses this data so much that the reader comes to expect it and need it to accept what Pollan is saying. But in the second half of the book, Pollan ceases to use the statistics and studies and begins to assert his own opinion. Yet the reader cannot trust the validity of his argument when it is solely opinion because previously Pollan has only used numbers to establish his ethos on the subject matter and not himself. So when it comes to him recommending eating like the French or the Greeks purely out of his own logic without any hard, scientific data, readers must question is there any authority behind what Pollan is saying.
In Defense of Food is a novel that causes one to think. Michael Pollan does successfully cause the reader to question “The Western (American) Diet” and see it for what it is worth. Though the Pollan’s text causes us to question what he wants us to, it also causes us to question him. Though many good, valid points are brought up, Pollan’s arguments cannot be wholeheartedly trusted due to his own contradictions and lack of authority, leaving a void due to the fact that the reader no longer believes “The Western Diet” but cannot fully believe in the argument presented.
Michael Pollan encourages Americans to reconsider the way in which they approach food. With scientific research, he shows us how ridiculous Americans truly are when it comes to eating; and in turn convinces us to change our ways to be healthier and more cultural.
"Eat food. Not too much. Mostly plants"(Pollan 1). Pollan starts off In Defense of Food with these seven words that sum up his argument. He displays that Americans constantly worry about nutrition, but are ironically a society consisting of obesity and other diseases that are results of malnourishment. As part of Pollan’s solution, he recommends that we go back to eating food for food’s sake. By this, he means to eat so that we may sustain our health while being environmentally friendly at the same time.
Here is the basic breakdown to Pollan’s opening statement: “Eat Food” simply means not to eat anything your great-grandmother would not recognize as food. He exclaims that we should avoid foods with unfamiliar ingredients, as they are often not healthy. “Mostly plants” refers to his advise on consuming plants in our diets as often as possible. Pollan believes that humans eat the wrong amount of certain parts in their meal. Such as, he advises to think of meat as a condiment and to think of vegetables as a main course rather than the other way around. “Not too much” points out that we do not have to eat until we are completely full. Humans often eat too quickly and eat too much as a result. So Pollan counsels that we “Eat slowly; enjoy food, and preferable with good company.”
As simple as this advice seems, it is quite complicated. Yes, we should eat food, but is what we’re eating really food? Most of what we eat today has either been soaking in fat or drenched with preservatives. This food is not food at all. It has been processed and stripped of all its nutrients, which is the whole reason it was food in the first place. Pollan enlightens his readers that our food has been loaded with various non-food items such as high fructose corn syrup, hydrogenated oils, and lots of non-pronounceable unknown ingredients. As just one example, Pollan writes, "Yet as a general rule it's a whole lot easier to slap a health claim on a box of sugary cereal than on a raw potato or a carrot, with the perverse result that the most healthful foods in the supermarket sit there quietly in the produce section, while a few isles over in Cereal the Cocoa Puffs and Lucky Charms are screaming their newfound ‘whole-grain goodness’ to the rafters" (Pollan 39-40). Another way to put it, food today is advertised as being low in trans fat, having no cholesterol, and consisting of all the measures of goodness, but be labeled a candy bar. Marketers persuade customers into eating unhealthy food and in most cases they succeed.
Pollan conveys out that, even though humans are the most intelligent species on earth; we require food charts, diagrams, pyramids and nutritionists to advise us about eating. He points out times in history when experts have made recommendations that will be completely contradicted the next year. An example, he points out that scientist said margarine would save us all from heart disease; then later it turns out that margarine actually significantly increases our chances of getting heart disease. Another misconception was the all-carbohydrate diet. At first, low fat food supposedly aided in weight loss. Then studies show that the carbohydrates actually make you fat. These studies come and go all the time but people still obey newfound health claims. Pollan informs his readers that scientic research cannot be trusted.
Pollan’s response to this conflicting information is simply to “Eat food, not too much though, and to eat mostly plants, as said before. A diet that consists of fruits, vegetables, meat without preservatives; will likely be a healthy one. As a guide, he recommends avoiding anything that has more than a handful of ingredients. And when shopping for food, always imagine your grandmother is at your side. This way if you pick something up and she says, “What the hell is that?” you know to put it back on the shelf. Because after all, these foods often contain preservatives, which mean they have long shelf lives, so they could stay there for years without going bad anyways. Pollan’s journalistic writing captures his audience through persuasive scientific facts and in turn compels a very convincing argument.
