Pollan's Eater's Manifesto

I just finished reading Michael Pollan's In Defense of Food. In my opinion, it was an Omnivore's Dilemma lite which turned out to be a bit disappointing. Many of the subjects of this little volume are covered in his other book - down to some of the same examples - with less detail and finesse. It feels hurried, frankly, which seems ironic, given the subject of the book.

On the downside, the book feels like a rant and a rehash of a conversation that he has already had with his audience. And it lacks the sense of inquiry that I loved in OD. He is disgusted with the fallout from our industrial agricultural society - whether that be with the scientists who support it; the journalists who make headline news out of every fad and the companies that take advantage of the American public by feeding them more and more processed foods. Confusion and chaos reign at the consumer level as we numbly shop for food that is prominently labeled with health benefits as opposed to reaching for an apple.

The other thing that bothers me about his arguments are that he has to resort to the reductionist method of looking at food - in order to take issue with the 'reductionist' school of scientists out there who study "nutritionism" in its components not the totality. This is basically the act of analyzing an isolated nutrient like saturated fat or an antioxidant like Vitamin C. Pollan vilifies this type of research in the first part of his book and then proceeds to utilize the same tactics to support his own position. Doesn't he therefore make his own arguments faulty? According to him, the answer is no. Because his position is the right position. Hmmm.

What I liked about this book actually had more to do with Systems theory. If we look at each nutrient in relationship to the whole plant or animal, it does seem the the sum is greater than the parts. There is a synergy of nutritional value found in a carrot as opposed to taking a beta carotene supplement. If we take this up a level and look at the carrot as food and what my relationship is to it, again, something else emerges: a relationship of my body to the bounty of this earth. I mean, really, isn't this what has been true since humans first grab a tool or gnawed on a root? I am a biological creature that is geared to eat the plants and animals of this planet. And the things I don't metabolize well I either cook or eat what eats it (like the cow that eats the grass that my stomach won't digest.)

Pollan does continually point out what a complex system food and diet is. And I appreciate his dedication to bringing to my attention all the holes in the current nutrition research that is going on. I believe that it is good to question the research and ask the questions that he is asking - but to me, the issue with diet is not just about the industrial food complex - it is also how we, as American Society, have allowed the food industry to serve us such junk while we run around like the proverbial chicken with its head cut off.

Pollan gets to this towards the very end of his book but I think I would have liked to have seen more on this cultural movement towards moving through life at sixty miles per hour. There isn't time to cook anymore - why not? There isn't time to sit down and eat - why not? We have moved indoors as a nation and into a much more sedentary lifestyle then any previous generation of homo sapiens. We drive everywhere instead of walking. We shop at Costco in our Suburbans. We don't know what a 'normal' portion is anymore let alone when we are really full.

Let's add to that cultural picture with a dose of the psychological. How many people use food as a way to handle emotional issues? Do we use food as a way to give ourselves a sense of abundance? Is food a way to fill ourselves up or a way to disconnect? And what are we 'filling?' And what about the neurobiological component: the dopamine effect that is being explored in certain research. I don't think we can ignore how many eating disorders inflict millions of Americans. It is a phenomenon that bears some attention in this conversation - and Pollan remains mute on that subject.

I bring all of this up because I think that Pollan began to hit on something huge when he labelled America as suffering from a "national eating disorder." And while he comes back to this on and off in his writing, he tends to stay with delivering information to us about the evil empire as opposed to really addressing the more prevelant anthropolocial themes of WHY we have allowed ourselves to be lulled into this lifestyle and the costs to our physical health are just a part of it. Yes, we wanted to believe that margarine was the best alternative - yes, we like to get 'more for the buck' - but I don't think I have ever believed the MacDonalds was a worthy substitute for a home cooked meal. I ate it because it was convenient and I was making convenience a priority in my life.

When my mom had her first heart attack we all switched to a more heart healthy diet. Pollan tears the low-fat diet apart as hogwash, but I don't think I agree with him. We watched our fat intake and noticed that when we ate at home - meals prepared simply and from scratch - a low fat diet emerged all on its own. It was in the eating out where I know I discovered truly rich, high fat and high sodium food existed. It's easy to make MacDonalds into the Darth Vadar (might as well keep with the evil empire theme) of industrial food - but what about all the teriyaki, pho, thai, chinese, fat burgers, indian restaurants that populate every strip mall? We're back to the notion of convenience, aren't we?

I've probably gone on long enough and I'm left with some interesting questions. I can look at what I eat - but I think it is just as important to look at HOW I eat. Pollan's books have been a great diving board into this subject and it is only fitting to move forward from where he has left off.

Blog spot's spell checker is not working - so if you notice more spelling errors than usual :)