In Defense of Food: An Eater's Manifesto

What happened to common sense when it comes to food and eating? Isn't it funny that in a day and age where people seem obsessed with how to eat healthily by focusing on nutrients, food-related scourges like obesity, heart diseases, stroke and else are hitting up the roof? Well, why the irony?

Michael Pollan, journalist (mainly for The New York Times Magazine) points straight at the problem: nutritionism itself on one side, and its conflagration with the food industry on the other. And gosh! What a slap his 'In Defense of Food' is! Common sense at its best, but so much needed!

About nutritionism, his main target here, he is bluntly harsh but so right on spot:

'The first thing to understand about nutritionism is that it is not the same show more thing as nutrition. As the "-ism" suggests, it is not a scientific subject but an ideology.'

And indeed it is, and worryingly more than that. As he outlines brilliantly, by reducing food to its nutrients and chemicals components, and thus taking it out of a whole context (meals, diets, lifestyles, cultures, individual metabolisms etc.) nutritionism is not only guilty of bad reductionism but, it can also be clearly harmful -e.g. the saga of margarine vs butter is a case in point, but sadly there are many more!

Relevant, he also shoot his guns at the food industry and its offspring, the so-called Western diet that is, processed food way too rich in calories and, again ironically, mostly depleted in nutrients; with all the obvious consequences for our health:

'A diet based on quantity rather than quality has ushered a new creature onto the world stage: the human being who manages to be both overfed and undernourished.'

'Overfed and undernourished'. Here we are! So what happened to common sense? And, most importantly in our societies completely ruled and taken over by the so-called experts nutritionists on the one hand and the food industry and supermarkets on the other, how can we escape and as best as can be eat proper and healthy food? His last chapter addresses the question, and resounds with sound advices without being dogmatic; which helps making this 'manifesto' a must read for anyone caring a bit about what we put in our plates (and bodies!).

'Eat food. Not too much. Mostly plants.' Common sense, right? Well, common sense being anything but common... Here's a great read! show less

Michael Pollan writes about food and nutrition the same way Farley Mowat wrote about animals i.e. with passion, insight, and definite opinions. Mowat certainly angered people during his writing life and I have no doubt that some people take offense at the things Pollan writes. As a food scientist, a class of researchers that Pollan criticizes, I guess I could have been among those detractors. However, I acknowledge that a lot of the criticism Pollan makes is deserved even though I don't completely disavow my previous employment.

The title almost seems like an oxymoron. Who would be opposed to food? Food is essential, isn't it? Pollan suggests that the modern diet (at least in North America) is "no longer, strictly speaking, food at all, show more and how we're consuming it -- in the car, in front of the TV, and, increasingly, alone -- is not really eating..." (quoted from page 7). For this turn of events he blames nutrition science and the food industry. Nutrition (or food) science comes in for a lot of finger-pointing because scientists look for molecules inside food that could cause effects on our bodies instead of looking at a big picture or more holistic view. I agree that some of the studies that have been published over the past number of years go to ridiculous lengths to draw conclusions based upon a certain nutrient. When those studies get picked up by main stream media all of a sudden everyone is buying acai berries or (even worse) bars with acai berries in them along with a ton of sugar and fat. It is especially worrisome when the studies are done by people who work for a certain industry or who receive funding from manufacturers. Pollan, and another writer I read regularly, Marion Nestle, regularly showcase studies that are biased by the funding they have received. In defence of my former career, most researchers I know would never consider biasing their results to benefit a funder and most would usually state that their findings do not establish that eating a particular food or nutrient would cure disease or ill health. I think that we need both the micro and the macro examination of food and, providing people take a common-sense approach to eating, it helps to understand how our body reacts to certain elements.

In The Omnivore's Dilemma Pollan concluded by offering the following advice: Eat Food, Not too Much, Mostly Plants. In this book in Part III he expands on those suggestions. That's probably the most valuable part of the book for anyone considering how to change their diet. Personally, since reading The Omnivore's Dilemma I have tried to eat better by eating more fruits, vegetables and pulses and eating less meat. The meat I do eat is quite often purchased from local farmers which may cost a little more than mass-produced meat but has a better fat ratio and is far better tasting. I grew up on a farm and I know the trials and tribulations of being a farmer so I also feel good about supporting local farms. show less

This book starts off a bit slow since at first Michael Pollan is simply re-hashing common knowledge for anyone that isn't new to healthy eating, fitness and the dieting game. I found myself absentmindedly nodding along, wondering if I should even bother finishing it, BUT I highly recommend you stick with it, because I can honestly say this book gave me an entire new perspective on food and my eating habits.

Before this reading this book, I had always been in the "nutritionism" camp, believing that food is simply fuel and it's wholesomeness could be boiled down to the sum of it's constituent nutrients. I think I found myself with this mindset, because that's largely what I had been exposed to, especially on mainstream fitness communities show more like reddit and bodybuilding forums, where "you can eat what you want, as long as it fits your macros" is a common phrase. Which technically is not bad advice, especially when your goals are short term.

As I progressed throughout the book, Michael Pollan began to change my mind starting with his exposal of the food industries tampering with US government diet recommendations and the swaying of scientists opinions. I wasn't exactly blind to the food industries corruption before but I hadn't realised it had started so early, so rampant and so transformative of an entire nations diet.

However, the erosion of trust of the food industry and supermarkets was only the beginning, as Pollan also highlights the difficulties with diet, due to the presence of innumerable confounding variables it starts to become clear how little we really know about nutrition. One need only look at how frequently respected institutions condemn previous nutrition advice THEY gave not too long ago. Pollan kindly points out however, that this isn't the scientists fault, as scientists can only make conclusions based on variables they can measure and as technology improves new variables are discovered that were previously unknown invalidating previous results.

In the latter parts of the book, there was also lots of practical tips for determining what to eat and how to eat besides the the really obvious ones (Avoid processed food with ingredients you don't know). Some of the ones I found most useful:
- The amount of time and money spent preparing the food is inversely proportional to the amount of food you eat. This is a really useful tip for me because I have a peanut butter binging problem! Buying large jars from Costco often results in me eating half a jar in one session which makes me feel awful emotionally and physically. However, if I buy a small expensive jar from Whole Foods I find I'm much less likely to binge and I'm able to have peanut butter in the house...
- When buying meat look for grass-FINISHED not just grass fed
- Tofu is not a heavily processed food, it is a food that is thousands of years old -> Just soybean milk curds
- To eat deliberately instead of compulsively. Furthermore to eat meals with other people when possible and not to snack. I actually found that this simple advice completely changed my eating habits and the way I thought about foods. What Michael Pollan explains is that eating is a social and cultural activity, instead of just a means to get fuel into the body, so one shouldn't rush the enjoying of this activity or multi-task (e.g. watching tv) during it. Having a self-enforced rule of only eating with other people/family makes it really easy to ensure I do not overeat snacks, and furthermore that if I do eat alone, that I fully immerse myself in the experience of eating without any other distractions.
- Multi-vitamins are most useful for when we are older, since that is when our bodies are no longer good enough to adequately absorb nutrients from food. Don't waste your money on them when you are younger...
- Although food from the local farmers market is expensive, if one can afford it they should buy it. Both for individual health but also for the ecological health of the community. I used to think that farmers markets is something that only the rich could afford and it wouldn't be a realistic option for food production for the masses, but now I see that for sustainable farming to be successful it initially needs buy-in for the those who can afford it. Thus it is my responsibility to buy local food when I can afford it as a means to give back to the community!

Lastly, even during the boring parts I thought that Michael Pollen had really good and engaging commentary that was easy to listen to.

TLDR: Book starts off a bit slow but absolutely keep reading because it might be transform your perception of food and your diet! Highly recommend. show less

In Defense of Food is the latest from Michael Pollan, whose previous The Omnivore's Dilemma examined the environmental impact of modern food production. In Defense, Pollan sets his sights on the modern Western diet, including some of the thinking that has gone into producing and justifying it. As Pollan lays it out, the modern diet has been shaped too much by the profit motives of large food producers and too little by the needs of human beings. While traditional diets were a product of a culture's trials and errors over centuries, the attempt to apply scientific methods to modern food production has resulted in food that is less healthy.

Pollan has a name for the allegedly scientific framework which has come to dominate the way that we show more think about food: nutritionism. Nutritionism, as distinct from nutrition, is a quasi-scientific set of ideologies about food which reflect little about the real impact of diet on health. Nutritionsim creates the illusion of being a scientific perspective on eating. And though it would seem that the scientific method, powerful as it is, should be able to determine what foods are or aren't healthy, it has failed for several reasons. In part, this is due to the sheer complexity of any diet, which renders it nearly impossible to look at x nutrient or y food item in isolation.

Additionally, the nutritionist impulse to view foods as collections of nutrients instead of whole units can result in bad conclusions. If a study finds that a diet high in red meat and low in fruit lead to higher rates of cancer and heart disease, what would be the logical conclusion? Through the nutritionist lens, that means that the goal should be to cut saturated fats (and cholesterol) and increase fiber (or antioxidant) intake. But switching to leaner meat and ramping up on oat muffins (and antioxidant supplements) does not appear to yield the same benefits as the high-fruit diet.

What then is the solution to the complicated thicket of competing health claims that present themselves in the marketplace? Pollan's recommendations are elegant in their simplicity: Eat food (as opposed to food-like stuffs). Not too much. Mostly plants. He also recommends a return to more traditional forms of eating, especially preparing food from scratch and eating with people instead of in isolation (and on the run).

It seems there is a growing number of people questioning the effect of the modern diet, a trend that Pollan has both helped fuel and benefited from. I would recommend the book to anyone considering a new look at the way we eat now and how much harm it might be doing. Pollan's non-dogmatic approach to the subject makes it an enjoyable read. His thesis about nutritionism may be stark, but his presentation and advice are not. show less

Michael Pollan follows up The Omnivore's Dilemma with an action plan to take back our food. The book is neatly summarized on the front cover: "Eat food. Not too much. Mostly plants."

Pollan devotes the first two sections of the book to all that's wrong with the Western diet and the "nutritional industrial complex." In spite of spending millions on nutritional research, obesity and obesity-related diseases (particularly diabetes and heart disease) are skyrocketing in the U.S. All this focus on nutritional components isn't making us any healthier; instead, it's making us sick.

In the last section of the book, Pollan offers simple advice for a healthier approach to food. From, "Don't eat anything your great grandmother wouldn't recognize as show more food," to, "Don't get your fuel from the same place your car does," his advice is fun, easy to understand, and memorable.

While I love The Omnivore's Dilemma, this book is definitely an easier read. It's also shorter, which means I've been more successful getting family and friends to actually read the book. show less

3.75 stars

Food is no longer what it used to be. It has been broken down into its parts (vitamins, nutrients, etc), some of those parts taken out and/or added back in, as studies find we need more or less of those parts. It has been overly processed. Pollan explains how this happened and what we can do to try to get back to eating real food, and hopefully stave off many diseases that seem to have ballooned since this overprocessing of food became the norm.

I found it quite interesting. There was some stuff I knew and some I didn't. Pollan writes in a way that the info is interesting and accessible, although there was a section in the middle where I did lose focus a few times (which is why I didn't quite rate it 4 stars). I didn't like it show more quite as much as The Omnivore's Dilemma, but still really interesting. show less

Until the third section, I was pretty disappointed in this book. I know reviewers and Pollan himself have said the fact of its existence supposedly justifies its existence - (if that's not tortured logic, I don't know what is) - i.e., that the fact that this book got published and that I am now reading it means there is a need for the information it contains - but I keep wondering why this book is necessary if the advice contained therein is really so self-evident. Perhaps its just because I have read other books and articles on this topic, including those by nutritionist Marion Nestle, who has written about these same topics (and whom he does credit), but most of this advice was completely obvious to me. And I really wondered if Pollan show more wasn't just feeding the flames of the nutrition advice problem that he criticizes by throwing his book into the ring.

I do appreciate many of the points he makes in the first section of the book on the rise of "nutritionism" (a term he admits did not originate with him), especially the idea that "natural" foods can never become anything other than what they are (a point that's not entirely true, what with GMOs and all) but that "artificial" foods can always be changed to incorporate the latest "hot" nutrition fad - Omega 3s, low-carb, etc, and therefore, the obsession with nutrients (as opposed to foods) means that we have moved away from eating natural foods to eating processed foods while believing that we are helping our health by doing so, even though there is really no solid evidence that any of these nutrients in isolation are good for us.

I was confused, however, by Pollan's use of studies regarding nutrition - sometimes I felt he was criticizing all studies that attempt to isolate individual "goods" and "bads", but other times I felt that he was suggesting that some of these studies were more valid than others. I didn't feel he was consistent in this respect. He also says again and again "To borrow the nutritionist's reductive vocabulary...." as a preface to an argument about something. I was confused - are things like nutrients and vitamins an important measure of nutrition, as Pollan seems to argue in the second half of the book (see his seemingly endless discussion of omega 3s versus omega 6s in the second part), or are they overemphasized, as he seemed to argue in the first half of the book? Or is it somewhere in between? In the final section, even Pollan admits that he gets dragged down into reductionistic nutritionism throughout the book.

I very much enjoyed the second section on the industrial food supply and the growth of weird "food products". I don't think Pollan really brought out anything new in the book, but his examination of the ways people "naturally" existed with their food sources serves as a sharp reminder of the oddities and general grossness of the current food supply system. I particularly loved the line "...our bodies have a long-standing and sustainable relationship to corn that they do not have to high-fructose corn syrup."

For me, the third section, humorously entitled "Getting Over Nutritionism", was by far the most valuable section of this book. While Pollan's advice is simple (its summarized in seven words on the cover graphic...."Eat Food. Not too much. Mostly plants."), I think it is helpful advice even for people who have read on this topic before because Pollan then goes on to provide a concrete list of guidelines as to how one should choose what to eat, based on his seven-word thesis. Note that he doesn't say - "You should eat more of this nutrient and less of this one" but instead provides a general philosophy about eating that is based on eating whole foods rather than food products.

I also think its great that in dispensing this advice, Pollan is really careful to point out that eating whole foods is not just enough - we need to look at how those whole foods are produced: a steak from a cow fed on corn, hormones, and parts of other cows is really just fast food and is itself eating a Western diet, Pollan argues. "[Food] comprises a set of social and ecological relationships, reaching back to the land and outward to other people." This is not just about eating well for yourself - its about considering both the small and large implications of what you put in your mouth; I really support that. Pollan's advice is not really difficult, but its not easy, either, especially if you're lazy like I am: invest more time, effort, and money into knowing, locating, and preparing your food.

A valuable book, if not a perfect one. I've heard a lot of this before, but it is always good to be reminded, I think. A book like Pollan's can inspire people to take an active and conscious role in deciding what they consume, rather than simply accepting the strange and often contradictory advice of the nutritionists and the bizarre-o "food products" that sometimes result from this advice like "whole wheat white bread" (which Pollan decries as "not a food") or, my personal (least) favorite product, Go-Gurt, which Pollan advises that no one should ever eat! show less