What to Eat Nutrition Final (1)

8/12/2019 What to Eat Nutrition Final (1)

1/13

1

What To EatANT 301 Nutrition and Health

Final Exam

Kiki Sabater


2/13

2

A BLISSFUL IGNORANCE?

It all used to seem so simple. Healthy eating meant eating French vanilla yogurt

with fruit in the morning, my packed ham and mustard sandwich with an apple for lunch

at school, and my mothersbalanced home cooking for dinner with the occasional cookie

or ice cream indulgence on weekends. Healthy eating was a matter of course in my

world, or at least it seemed that way. My parents encouraged staying far from the sugary

fruit roll-ups my schoolmates devoured ad nauseum during snack time while

Lunchables was a world synonymous to chemistry set should I ever dare to request

one of my own.

Prior to my journey into independent living far form the restrictions of my

parentspantry and structured meal times, I had given little thought as to the reality of the

relative health of the food I was eating. And why should I have? It seems unreason able

to doubt that the food I put into my mouth should be anything less than good for me.

While the sushi I bought at my local Sainsburys my first year at school in Scotland

might have some questionable fake crab, why would I ever think twice about the grapes I

purchased as a post-sushi snack? What would ever lead me to believe that the fiber filled

fruit I could devour by the handful were doused in carcinogenic pesticides that could

destroy my delicate organ systems (Action Network North America, 2009)? Why would I

think twice that they werent organic, or locally grown? They were fruit, and therefore,

they must be good for me.

It wasnt until I became aware of a crippling gluten allergy that had been

plaguing me for years that accompanied lactose-intolerance I tried so desperately to

ignore that I became aware of the effect the food that was supposed to be nourishing


3/13

3

was having on me. Upon further research, with a broad, diverse pool of readings from

nutritionists, food critics, anthropologists, food scientists and historians, the apparent

absence of health in the foods available to the civilized person is striking and has

become a reality I, nor the educated consumer, can ignore.

THINGS ARE NOT WHAT THEY SEEM: WHAT NOT TO EAT

In a world where food is mass produced, cultivated in fields sprayed with

Roundup to kill pesky pests, with a food system that uses one crop to feed its livestock,

preserve its foods, and feed its people, healthy eating becomes a daunting task (Kenner,

2010). What is ostensibly nourishing and healthy is instead prodded and poked,

manipulated by the fingers of science and marketing into a product that cheap, tasty, and

often addictive (Moss, 2013). When it comes to deciding what to eat, being able to first

determine what not to eat greatly narrows the consumers pool of choices; and in making

initial steps towards healthier eating, the consumers first step can be to avoid

processed foods.

Packaged is often synonymous with processed, even with the simplest of food

products. Thanks to the emergence of monoculture in farming practices, what was once a

considered a nourishing meal of traditional meat, potatoes, and string beans at the corner

deli is instead a plate of preservatives, pesticides, and most prominently, corn (Pollan,

2006). The advent of the ability to manufacture foods, thanks to an overabundance of

nitrogen fertilized corn (Pollan, 2006), similarly invites a slew of ingredients not found in

any kitchen cupboard into the mouth of the consumer (Kenner,2010). The multigrain

crackers the consumer selects instead of a candy bar are better only in a degree of


4/13

4

relativity; both are made of genetically modified corn based ingredients, filled with sugar,

soybean oil, and countless preservatives (Critser, 2003) to keep them safe from the trucks

from the factory to the supermarket shelves where they will sit for what can be weeks if

not months, only to sit potentially for longer in the back of the consumers pantry(Nestle,

2006).

While these ingredients in moderation are not entirely damaging to health

consuming them in moderation has become a near impossibility in the world of packaged

foods. While the consumer can accept that regular fast food consumption is evil

somehow he fails to see that daily sugar laden fruit yogurts or hydrogenated oil filled

salad dressings are just as perilous to his health (Pollan, 2006). The artery clogging

saturated, hydrogenated fats pale in their health effects only to the diabesity inducing

toxic amounts of sugars jammed into the very same food products (Lieberman, 2008).

In order to give scientifically engineered bland cheap corn into a flavorful, delicious,

mouthwatering snack cake, it is pumped with palm, sunflower, and soybean oils to give it

a soft, rich texture that is made palatable by the high fructose corn syrup used to make it

just the right amount of sweet to make you crave the next one (Moss, 2013). This process

is no different from those used to create your favorite brand name salad dressings,

granola bars, or white breads (Critser, 2003).

These additives are useful to the producer to ensure product consistency,

enjoyability, and shelf life, though are not beneficial to the health of the consumer; rather,

they are toxic (Taubes, 2011). While some food brands have been successful in

reducing the amounts of additives in their products, mostly due to FDA restrictions and

mandates with respect to trans fats (and soon hydrogenated oils), sugar restrictions are


5/13

5

currently non-existent. When food shopping, the conscious consumer should not avoid

packaged foods at all costs, rather they should be wary of packaged foods that are

simultaneously overly processed; while jarred almond butter can be a healthy choice, it

becomes immediately less so when its ingredients also include hydrogenated palm oil,

sugar, and maltodextrin.

SO I WONT BUY PROCESSED FOODS: WHATS LEFT?

In a perfect world, or namely, in a Paleolithic version of our world, eating an

unprocessed, plant-based diet is both fully nutritious and satisfying (Eaton, 2002). I focus

my suggested diet choices primarily on a plant-based diet for my own health, and

promote it for others because of the potentiality for nutritional fulfillment entirely from

plant sources. Paleolithic man was able to eat a wide variety of fruits, vegetables, and

limited amounts of nuts and grains that provided him with a nearly complete and

balanced nutritional profile (Eaton, 2002). In eating dark, leafy greens and seasonably

and geographically available fruits he was not limited by the dominance of one or two

subsistence crops like the agriculturalists that followed him (Goodman, 1989). This shift,

though, from nomadic hunter-gatherers to rooted civilizations who cultivated and

domesticated their food sources created what would become a global shift in human food

consumption (Bryant, 1985).

Thus, were the modern consumer to attempt to make a shift back to his Paleolithic

roots, he would run into some serious nutritional deficiencies. Modern subsistence on a

fruit and vegetable diet would be far from equivalent from that of his Paleolithic

ancestors (Milton, 2002). The important distinction to understand is the nutritional value


6/13

6

of these foods with respect to the differences in wild versus cultivated plants. An ear of

genetically modified corn grown tightly packed next to acres of more corn, sprayed with

pesticides that kill not only the nutritious bugs on the plant that is already fighting for

nutrients in the overplanted, nutrient leached soil is hardly nutritionally comparable to a

wild ear of corn fertilized by animal manure instead of nitrogen that has the benefit of

space and time to grow (Bryant, 1985), (Milton, 2002).

With respect to modern production of fruits and vegetables, conventionally

cultivated produce is more often than not genetically modified, meaning that it has been

altered either with gene replacement from other plants or altered to produce a desired

ripening, anti-pest, or pesticide resistant attribute (Cummings, 2009). This results in a

genetic crossover of plants that are in no way related in species, making consumption of

conventionally grown produce dangerous for those of us with serious food allergies

(Cummings, 2009). Beyond the implications of potential allergens, we are unknowingly

subjected to a market flooded with produce that is just as processed and engineered as

the packaged foods on the next aisle over; a processing that is equally dangerous to the

processed food additives found in boxed cookies. With genetic engineering and

modification, we are buying fruits, vegetables, legumes and nuts that are antibiotic

resistant, nutritionally lacking, carcinogenic, and pesticide coated (Weber, 2009).

While I do focus on the potentialities for enjoying a healthy plant based diet, I

would like to note the potentiality for a healthy diet that includes meat, fish, and dairy

products in moderation. While I personally avoid these food sources because of

frightening production and domestication techniques used by conventional producers,

there is room for occasional, careful consumption of organic beef, chicken, fish (not


7/13

7

farmed) and dairy (Milton, 2002). The reasons I do not openly promote large

consumption of animal products is due to both the feed with which these animals are

provided, namely in the form of corn that they are not designed to digest, as well as

overcrowded, unclean mass domestication and growing techniques that threatens the

potential for health benefits in their consumption (Kenner, 2010). Additionally, habitual

overconsumption of protein (which is the main component of these foods) is not

beneficial for human health, even at the amounts of small daily meat or dairy

consumption (Lieberman, 2008).

Similarly, the consumer should look to make moderate their consumption of

grains and to avoid overly processed and refined versions of them. White flour, white

rice, white pastas, cakes, cookies, etc., made from bleached, refined flours are nutrient

lacking and not beneficial to health (Gueyenet, n.d.). While they may provide a source of

calories and fast carbohydrate energy, they are devoid of the fiber or vitamins from the

husks of whole grain brown or black rice, or the ever favorite, complete-protein quinoa.

However, grains, like animal proteins are not necessary to the human diet to ensure

nutritional needs are met; all of the requirements for proteins, carbohydrates, fats,

vitamins and minerals can be found in a fruit, vegetable, and nut based diet (Gueyenet,

n.d.). Furthermore, production techniques for grains in the current global food system are

often flawed, much like fruit and vegetable production, though the toxin contamination

levels are higher. Most recently, traces of arsenic have been found in brown rice and

brown rice syrup in the form of an alternative sweetener (Berman, 2012). Grain

consumption should perhaps then be kept moderate and occasional, much like animal

proteins and dairy products.


8/13

8

WHAT TO EAT: THE CONSUMERS BEST BET

At this point, the consumer throws his hands up, defeated, thinking he might as

well get that Big Mac and super-sized Coke since it appears that nothing is safe for

consumption. While it may be the case that the food system in the U.S. as well as those

worldwide are highly flawed, the consumer is not entirely devoid of healthy food options;

the organic market is often his best choice for safely and ethically produced foods.

Organic, especially Certified Organic in the U.S. ensures no use of dangerous

pesticides, genetic engineering, or chemical fertilizers (Hirshberg, 2009). While this

alternative fails to address the issues of nutrient density of cultivated foods, it is a greatly

favorable alternative to most conventional produce. Additionally, it is important to note

that organic designation is not synonymous with healthy; sugar, corn, and saturated and

refined oils can all be produced organically .

The major issues that organics present, however, are those that also plague

conventionally produced foods; those of large carbon footprints and issues of

sustainability. The ability to mass-produce food has created a potentiality for

irresponsible food production that is a plague both to the consumers health and the

health of our planet (Pesticide Action Network North America, 2009). Decimating the

earths natural resources by producing beyond our natural means with the use of chemical

fertilizers and genetic modification, we are not only destroying the nutritional value of

our food, we are killing our planet (Kenner, 2010). Additionally, transporting foods

across the country, and often across the planet produces an issue of gas emissions that

contribute to the global warming crisis (Nestle, 2006). The consumers best, most health


9/13

9

and environmentally friendly choice, then, is to purchase locally produced, organic foods

whenever possible.

WHY SHOULD I CARE?

The effects of the food we eat extend even beyond the consequences of our

consumption habits on our personal health; it becomes a community, national health issue

as well as a huge environmental concern. With more than 40 million obese American

adults and 14 million obese American children, obesity is an American epidemic that has

its growing roots in the overly-processed-sugar-and-fat-dense readily available and

affordable foods (Moss, 2013). Children grow up drinking Cocoa-Cola purchased at their

school vending machines where potato chips are the obvious accompaniment. Major soda

companies pay schools for product promotion while physical education becomes a things

of the past as school budget cuts demand money to be used elsewhere (Blanding, 2010).

Diabetes and metabolic syndrome plague the nations lower socioeconomic classes who

can afford nothing more than the processed and fast food options that are filled with

toxic sugar and artery clogging fats, creating a national health care crisis (Woods Johnson

Foundation, 2009). Buying organic or buying local does more than keep the consumer

and healthier. Responsible consumption sends a message to the major food producers in

the U.S. and to those worldwide, demanding more food that is legitimately nutritious and

safe for all consumers as well as the planet (Salatin, 2009).

Environmentally, animal domestication for consumption is a major contributor to

global warming in the form of methane emissions from livestock production (Kenner,

2010). Its effects are accompanied by the carbon footprint left from transportation of


10/13

10

these products as well as fruits and vegetables miles from their growing origins (Nestle,

2006). Similarly, mass monoculture destroys acre upon acre of land, leaching and eroding

the earths topsoil while conventional production techniques pollute water systems with

toxic pesticides and chemical fertilizers (Bryant, 1985). The way we eat affects not only

our health, but also the health of our planet, making a shift to responsible, sustainable

production an absolute necessity.

While the research shows the painful reality of the flawed food system of the

nation and world in which we live, it also gives alternatives for more favorable

consumption practices as well as suggestions for future improvements. When deciding

what to eat, the modern consumer must be much more savvy than he might have been

forced to be 50 years ago. Thanks to government subsidies and the introduction of

chemical fertilizers, packaging, processing, genetic engineering and the perils of mass

production have reshaped the way calories are available, thus making the modern

individual that much more responsible for his eating choices (Critser, 2003). Healthy

food is no longer what is most available for human consumption, even when attempting

to subsist on mostly fruits, vegetables, and nuts. Instead, the consumer must be willing to

fight the good fight in the supermarket, reading ingredient lists and nutrition labels,

purchasing organic and local food as much as is available for their own health, the health

of others, and the health of our planet.

On my honor, I have not received, nor given, nor witnessed any unauthorized

assistance on this work

Kristina G. Sabater


11/13

11

References Cited

Berman, J. (2012). Scientists Find Arsenic in Baby Formula Sweetener. Voice of America

News, . , Online.

Blanding, M. (2010). The Battle For Schools. The Coke machine: the dirty truth behind

the world's favorite soft drink(pp. 89-117). New York: Avery.

Bryant, C. A. (1985). The Cultural feast: an introduction to food and society. St. Paul:

West Pub. Co..

Critser, G. (2003).Fat land: how Americans became the fattest people in the world.

Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin Co..

Cummings, R. (2009). Hazards of Genetically Engineered Foods and Crops: Why We

Need a Global Moratorium.Food, Inc.: how industrial food is making us sicker,

fatter and poorer -- and what you can do about it(pp. 79-89). New York:

PublicAffairs.

Eaton, S. B., Eaton III, S. B., & Codain, L. (2002). Evolution, Diet, and Health.Human

diet its origin and evolution(pp. 7-17). Westport, Conn.: Bergin & Garvey.

Kenner, R. (Director). (2010).Food, inc[Documentary]. USA: CTV International [ed.] :.

Goodman, A. H., & Armelagos, G. J. (1989). Disease and Death at Dr.Dickinson's

Mounds.Applying anthropology: an introductory reader(pp. 58-62). Mountain

View, Calif.: Mayfield Pub. Co..

Gueyenet, S. (n.d.). Whole Health Source. Grains and Human Evolution. Retrieved

December 11, 2013, from

http://wholehealthsource.blogspot.com/2008/07/grains-and-human-

evolution.html


12/13

12

Hirshberg, G. (2009). Organics-- Healthy Food and So Much More.Food, Inc.: how

industrial food is making us sicker, fatter and poorer -- and what you can do

about it(pp. 47-59). New York: PublicAffairs.

Lieberman, L. S., Smith, E. O., McKenna, J. J., & Trevathan, W. (2008). Diabesity and

Darwinian Medicine.Evolutionary medicine and health: new perspectives(pp.

72-95). New York: Oxford University Press.

Milton, K., Teaford, M. F., & Ungar, P. S. (2002). Hunter Gatherer Diets: Wild Foods

Signal Relief from Diseases of Affluece.Human diet its origin and evolution(pp.

111-120). Westport, Conn.: Bergin & Garvey.

Moss, M. (2013, March 20). The Extraordinary Science of Addictive Junk Food. The

New York Times, p. Online.

Nestle, M. (2006). The Produce Section. What to eat(pp. 24-66). New York: North Point

Press.

Action Network North America. (2009). FIelds of Poison.Food, Inc.: how industrial

food is making us sicker, fatter and poorer -- and what you can do about it(pp.

143-148). New York: PublicAffairs.

Pollan, M. (2006, June 4). Mass Natural. The New York Times, Online, n.a..

Pollan, M. (2006). The Omnivore's Dilemma. NY: Penguin Group.

Woods Johnson Foundation., & Weber, K. (2009). Childhood Obesity.Food, Inc.: how

industrial food is making us sicker, fatter and poorer -- and what you can do

about it(pp. 259-261). New York: PublicAffairs.

Salatin, J., & Weber, K. (2009). Declare Your Independence.Food, Inc.: how industrial

food is making us sicker, fatter and poorer -- and what you can do about it(pp.


13/13

13

189-196). New York: PublicAffairs.

Taubes, G. (2011, April 13). Is Sugar Toxic?. The New York Times, p. Online.

Weber, K. (2009).Food, Inc.: how industrial food is making us sicker, fatter and poorer -

- and what you can do about it. New York: PublicAffairs.

Documents

What to Eat Nutrition Final (1)