Analysis Of In Defense Of Food By Michael Pollan

A bread is no longer an original bread but a mixture of chemicals. Most products out in the market are not food, and people should choose wisely on what they put in their mouth. It is important for people to eat healthy food and keep their immune system strong. People these days bought food that is cheap and available to them. They have to choices to eat healthy yet it is hard to control themselves against something that is convenient, low cost, and predictable. The article “Eat Food: Food Defined,” written by Michael Pollan, explains what kinds of food people should eat. Based on his explanations the only food are those capable of rotting, less than 5 ingrdients and with pronumbacble ingrdeients. He also said we should not go to the supermarket nor buy can food but to buy fresh food from farmer’s market. His ideas of eating food is push toward the healthy side, and it is a great start for people to understand, to learn and to progress in eating healthily.

Journalist and novelist Michael Pollan writes about the trials and tribulations surrounding food in North America and raises questions regarding Western diet, which is mostly comprised of refined sugar and high fructose corn syrup and corn in general. He reiterates that chemically generated food is creating disease in North Americans; If we eliminate these factors and adopt the eating habits of less industrialized places in the world will we in our lifetime see rates of heart disease, type two diabetes and obesity decline dramatically? The western diet has evolved drastically in the last sixty years, so much so that people have become codependent on the government, dietitians and food agencies regarding their health and what to consume. The land is suffering from pesticides and singular plant farming, the alternative to this is to buy organic but at a higher price. Media has influenced the consumer to read the label and accept and trust the daily vitamin percentages on the box, as this is what is best for them. Money is the key factor in all of this and the government, scientific research and media know that, therefor the public is in for a shock when they realize that the very labels that are supposed to save them have fooled them.

First off, in regards to a better diet, what would be considered “healthy” in the perspective of these authors? Explicitly stated by Pollan, “the most important fact about any food is not its nutritional content but its degree of processing” (Pollan 423). With this in mind, it can be determined that contrary to popular belief, how healthy something is does not depend on the nutritional facts printed on the package, but rather the amount of times the food has been processed before reaching the hands of a customer. Moreover, Pollan does not stand-alone in this belief. Zinczenko expresses that “complicating the lack of [alternative food suppliers] is the lack of information about what, exactly, we’re consuming” (Zinczenko 463).

In Michael Pollan’s essay “ An Ethic of Eating”, he talks about how ‘real’ food is disappearing from supermarkets and groceries and being replaced with “food-like substances.” He claims that the overly processed foods are taking over and that “ordinary foods” are becoming harder to find. He is also claiming that these “food-like substances” are confusing consumers into thinking that they are healthy for you and consumer should shop from the source, farmer’s markets.

He probes them to learn the what, where, and how of dinner – knowing what is going into the body, knowing where that food came from, and knowing how that food was made. By first knowing what is being consumed, people can make better informed decisions about their purchases. Nutrition, or lack thereof, is a key component in the battle against obesity. Food giants are hoping to hide the often unnecessary filler present in their products by use of dodgy claims and socially engineered advertisements. In general, most consumers probably couldn’t say where their food came from. This usually boils down to the fact that shoppers typically don’t think about it. Breaking this reliance on mass-grown foods is the second part of Pollan’s proposition. The third and equally important element is how the food is produced. More specifically, Pollan is concerned whether or not the food has been produced in a sustainable manner. Preserving the biodiversity of food, maintaining fertile land for future generations, and ensuring consumers receive food that does not compromise health are all factors of sustainability. Without informed consumers, what, where, and how will continue to be unanswered questions. Whether it is for nutritional or ethical choices, a particular food’s history is something that needs to once again become common

David Zinczenko's article "Don't Blame the Eater" discuses with regard to a series of health-related topics involving food that most people and, particularly, young individuals eat today. The article is meant to raise public awareness concerning the risks associated with consuming particular foods. These respective risks are generally ignored because companies selling the products refrain from emphasizing the exact effects that consuming their food can have on someone's health. The reality is that cheap foods are an appealing alternative for young people who are more concerned about the quantity than the quality of the foods they eat.

In the article “Escape from the Western Diet”, Michael Pollan suggest to the people that they should stop eating a western diet because western diet is also responsible for western diseases such as diabetes, high blood pressure and many more. In his article he said that “People eating a Western diet are prone to a complex chronic diseases that seldom strike people eating more traditional diets.” He also gave the solution of this problem by telling people to stop eating a western diet. New theories made new treatments to treat different diseases. In his point of view, if people want to escape from western diet they need to stop eating western food daily. He thinks that if people want to stay healthy they should eat food, not too much,

Take a gander around your local mega-mart today, and what do you see? An epidemic of food like substances taking over the supermarket shelves; an epidemic that has substituted real food for fake, shown links to obesity, and has altered our eating habits. There is, however, a solution that allows you to stick to the healthy foods you want to eat and avoid the foods you don’t.

With having true genuine intentions in eating healthy people fall into the ideas advertised by cooperation’s that their products are healthy. Food corporations protect themselves through ingredient secrecy and even through the FDA because they are not required by law to disclose their ingredients; however, the chemicals used need to be considered by the FDA to be Generally Regarded As Safe (Schlosser 25). People should take responsibility in the research of the food products they consume; therefore, allowing an individual to be wise and informed of what their really consuming. Maybe, instead of cutting corners in trying to eat healthy with false idealistic advertisement consumers should consider eating fresh fruits, vegetables, and cooking ingredients. Consumers should like the author Pollan suggested in his rules of thumb: avoid food products unfamiliar, unpronounceable ingredients, and products containing more than five ingredients (Pollan

The Omnivore’s Dilemma, written by Michael Pollan, gives light to the question, “What should we have for dinner?” that he thinks Americans today cannot answer simply due to the fact that there are too many food options. This book serves as an eye-opener to challenge readers to be more aware and accountable of what is consumed daily. In order to understand fully where our food comes from, we must follow it back to the very beginning. Pollan goes on to discuss three different modern food chains in which we get our food: the industrial, the organic, and the hunter-gatherer. By tracing our food back to the beginning, we can understand that most of the nutritional and health problems America is going through today can be found on the farms that make our food and the government that can decide what happens. America deals with many food related illness such as, heart disease, obesity, and type II diabetes. Majority of a human and animals diet consists of being corn-fed leading to a high cause of obesity in the United States these are just some of the many diseases that come with over processed foods and diets we are unaware of. In this study, we will highlight the environmental and health issues and impacts related with modern agriculture and how these systems can be made more sustainable.

To address what distinguishes the food of a western diet, Pollan compares whole foods and processed foods. He quotes Gyorgy Scrinis and concludes to himself “instead of worrying about nutrients, we should simply avoid any food that has been processed to such an extent that it is more the product of industry than nature (Pollan, 438). Pollan agrees with Scrinis for avoiding processed foods, but he complicates it by mentioning that all whole foods are taken over by industrial processes. Again Pollan reminds the reader that escaping the western diet will not be simple,

Pollan first establishes his ethos by citing nutritionist Joan Gussow. This shows us that he has done his research in the field and provides his reflection to her speech; this makes him appear more as an equal peer talking to us about why food should be redefined. He continues to draw the reader in by bringing a pathos aspect; bringing up your great grandmother. Pollan explains, “We need to go back at least a couple of generations to a time before the advent of most modern foods” (107). He continues to encourage the reader to imagine grocery shopping with your great grandmother. Pollan brings an emotional aspect to making the reader reminisce about great grandmother’s cooking and possibly remorsefully reflect how grandma would complain about how unhealthy food is today. Then he tells us to avoid foods she would not recognize as a food that contains familiar ingredients, no extra additives

As a culture and as individuals, we no longer seem to know what we should and should not eat. When the old guides of culture and national cuisine and our mothers’ advice no longer seem to operate, the omnivore’s dilemma returns and you find yourself where we do today—utterly bewildered and conflicted about one of the most basic questions of human life: What should I eat? We’re buffeted by contradictory dietary advice: cut down on fats one decade, cut down on carbs the next. Every day’s newspaper brings news of another ideal diet, wonder-nutrient, or poison in the food chain. Hydrogenated vegetable oils go from being the modern alternatives to butter to a public health threat, just like that. Food marketers bombard us with messages that this or that food is “heart healthy” or is “part of a nutritious meal”. Without a stable culture of food to guide us, the omnivore’s dilemma has returned with a vengeance. We listen to scientists, to government guidelines, to package labels—to anything but our common sense and traditions. The most pleasurable of activities—eating—has become heavy with anxiety. The irony is, the more we worry about what we eat, the less healthy and fatter we seem to become.

Going to the grocery store when I am hungry has always been a disastrous idea. Usually after those kinds of trips, I come out with too much food. Those foods claim that they are healthy; low in fat, low in sugar, high in protein, and they have all the vitamins that I need to replenish my body after a hard workout. Thus, I usually don’t feel too guilty about eating them, and I tell myself those snacks are healthier than eating at the dining hall. However, I now realize that I have fallen into the trap of buying and consuming the “foodlike substitutes” of which Michael Pollan talks about in his essay “Eat Food: Food Defined” (9).

While nutritionism is suppose to scientifically guide us to eat healthy, Pollan points out that there is no scientific evidence to back it. Instead, he provides research conducted by Harvard nutrition scientist that proves the opposite. "In the public's mind [...] words like 'low-fat' and 'fat-free' have been synonymous with heart health. It is now increasingly recognized that low-fat campaign has been based on little scientific evidence and may have caused unintended health consequences." (Pollan 43). In Based off these observations, Pollan uses inductive reasoning to draw the conclusion that nutritionism is more harmful then helpful.