Nutrition: What's it to you?

[Pontormo]

Do you care about nutrition?

Do thoughts about getting a full range and desirable amounts of vitamins, minerals, protein, etc. affect the choices you make shopping, cooking or eating?

In what ways?

Do you simply trust that you'll make the right decisions and it will all balance out?

Do you find the whole business so PBS Fund Raiser meets Oprah Dietician & goes Berkeley-Earnest that you simply don't care?

—Or do you rebel? How? (Please, answers longer than one word preferred. I know you like bacon. )

FINALLY , and this is what interests me the most:

If you believe there is such a thing as Good Food that is good for you, how do you talk about it without preaching?

Can you promote nutrition without sounding patronizing,* dull, pious, gloomy or artificially spunky and bright?

*Superior, judgmental, priggish, uppity, elitist, self-righteous…

[jdtofbna]

hmmmm...lots to ponder there. I do care very much about nutrition, but I also love good food, and I do believe the 2 can go hand-in-hand. I lost 65 pounds on Weight Watchers 5 years ago and have kept it off by eating well in every sense of the word. I eat lots of fresh fruits and vegetables, but that happens to be what I love, so it's no tough choice. I try to buy organic when possible (and affordable, sorry!), wild caught salmon instead of farm-raised, etc. But, here's the deal---people don't want to hear about nutrition unless they already feel like I do, so I just keep my mouth shut and set an example by my actions and my appearance--unless they ask, and then I can preach it with the best of them but I do try not to be patronizing . I might also add that I think vitamins are questionable at best, much better to get those nutrients from your food, I think.

And I probably should also add that I do feel superior about many of my food choices

(edited to add that last snippy comment)

Edited July 24, 2006 by jdtofbna (log)

[LindsayAnn]

Wow lots of questions, I will try to answer all (or most) in my reply...so here goes:

1.)I do care about nutrition

2.) Thought about the full range (vitamins, protein, etc etc etc) do effect my purchasing and cooking/eating, but only to limited amounts. Meaning, I look at labels, consider fat and carbs but I also endulge in all when my body wants them. I try to balance it all out. If I have a HUGE brunch I eat a lighter dinner (or try to...hehe we all have our bad days and that is 100% ok). I buy lighter (never fat free usually) products when I know they are good and that the flavor/textures wont be hindered. Take cheese for example, there are a few that can get away with "light" (still considerable fat amount though)...fat free no way - no taste. but, some cheese varieties need to be full fat (take blue cheese, same goes for blue cheese dressing or creamy garlic dressing, brie, etc). Ice cream's though, some of the "light" versions are pretty damn good....no fat free crap though, pretty much tasteless in my humble opinion

3.) Although I do trust my choices I know that I have no 'degree' in nutrition and food, no matter how knowlegeable/interested in the topic that I think I am. So, taking that into consideration I definetly like hearing about new studies, findings, food preparation techinques, and the like. You can always learn, always...even if you are Emeril Lagase (sp?)

4.) And, after all that is said and done heck yeah I rebel at time. Who doesnt? I mean food is love, its enjoyalbe and it brings friends and family together. I have my bad days and I don't care (well, I always think I do but in the end oh well right!)...i would rather live a life filled with enjoyment than one where I am the perfect nutrition advocate but incredibly taste deprived!

That's my 2 cents!

[Lilija]

Nutrition is something I think about, a great deal. I do all the shopping/cooking, in my household, so I just don't buy junky-food. (Junk food, sometimes, but not junky food, big difference)

Anything we can get, in whole wheat, or better yet, a multigrain version, we do. Pastas, bread, brown rice, when applicable. Anything that doesn't suffer from being sugar free (beverages, some desserts, hard candies, etc) I stock. Artifical sweeteners are the only evil food chemical additives that I really love

I seldom use processed/convenience stuff, preferring to shop in small amounts every other day, for fresh ingredients, like veggies, fruits, meat, bakery breads. The only canned veggies in the house are beans, and tomatoes. I think skipping rich, salt/sugar/fat/chemical laden foods, as an every day occurance (fast foods, TV dinner type stuff, common American junk food), balances a really creamy, cheesy home made mac and cheese or a well marbled steak, from time to time. We're really big into moderation, and every day we try to instill that, in our son.

Healthy, to me, is getting a wide variety of fresh, and well prepared foods. Balancing the occasional rich cream sauce, or fatty steak, with light meals. Sometimes, we'll have miso soup, and a huge salad, for dinner. Healthy is not eating exorbitant amounts of sugar, refined starches, or artifically flavored/colored stuff. No hydrogenated fats, and I really look at labels, for high fructose corn syrup. Natural sugars and fats are bad enough. I try to get a lot of fiber and protien in each meal, and I figure multivitamins will make up for what I miss, in a particular day, vitamin-wise. Of course, it's really easy to buy a bag of Oreos, and eat them in one afternoon, but this is definitely the exception, not the rule.

How do I talk about it? When people ask me what I made, I'll gladly explain that it's whole wheat-whatever, with lower fat cheese, fresh tomatoes, etc. That usually sparks a discussion about why this, or why that, and I can go from there. I just try to make good food, well, with as many healthy aspects as I can manage, without screwing the dish up, and try not to justify myself too much. In my household, we're always talking about food, so it just comes up, naturally. I read a lot, and I love sharing what I read with my family, little tidbits of info, about this particular kind of salad, or like, how that cheese is made, etc. It's a pretty natural thing. The most important, though, as someone mentioned it, is set a good example. I can't preach to my son about not eating junk food, then turn around and devour a bag of potato chips.

As far as rebellion goes, of course we do, but we make sure to establish that this IS a rebellion from the norm, and feels good, to just say screw it sometimes, and eat that plate of tortellini alfredo...But, moderation...It's all about treating yourself right, while still treating yourself occasionally.

A lot of this comes from just being into food, and cooking, too. I think people who are foodie types are just naturally inclined to eat (what I think of as) healthier.

Now, I just have to get us on some kind of excersise plan...

Edited July 25, 2006 by Lilija (log)

[Shalmanese]

Heres how I look at it. There are 4 types of food:

Good and Good for you (Salads etc.)

Good and Bad for you (Bacon etc.)

Bad and Good for you (Boneless, Skinless Chicken Breasts etc.)

Bad and Bad for you (McDonalds etc.)

Increasing the amount of Good and Good for you and decreasing the amount of Bad and Bad for you is a no brainer. Everyone should be doing that and having an education in cooking and eating in often (so you can control exactly how something is cooked) helps towards that goal. I don't know anything in the Bad but Good for you that you can't get from Good and Good for you so I'll ignore that part from now.

Just those alone is enough to substantial improve your diet but the real hard part comes from the Bad but Good for you category. You really have to look closely at each item and figure out whether the "goodness" in taste is worth the "badness" in nutrition.

My general philosophy towards my diet is that I don't care about the actual amount of fat I put into my diet but every damn gram of fat has to count for something. As a result, I've cut out mayo, cream, ice cream, french fries, peanut butter, most pastries, all but the strongest flavoured cheeses and a few more things out of my diet. I fully acknowledge that they taste good, even great. But they don't taste good enough for the amount of fat they are adding to my diet because the fat is there mainly for textural reasons and not for flavour. I use vinagrettes rather than mayo, full fat milk rather than cream, sorbet rather than ice cream, roast potatos rather than fried and use well aged, pungent cheeses so I can use less of them. All of these are still, to some measures "bad' for you. But they're far less bad that what they replaced and they still taste delicious.

The other thing I believe strongly about is that you absolutely have to understand how to make everything that goes into your mouth, otherwise you can fall into some very dangerous traps. It wasn't until I actually made mayo that I saw viscerally just exactly how close it was to pure fat. It wasn't until I made cake that I realised it's pretty much equal parts refined white flour, saturated butter fats and refined white sugar. These experiences haven't stopped me from eating either mayo or cake, but it has stopped me from eating a lot of bad mayo and cake. Until you can hold a piece of food in your hands and mentally break it down into it's component parts, you can't make an educated decision as to whether you should put it into your mouth or not.

In general though, I've found my instinctive food instincts are pretty well honed with occasional splurges. left to my own devices, my meals are filled with vegtables, fruits and seafood and I tend to prefer good fruit for dessert rather than chocolate cakes. I'll eat steak, but that steak will be Wagyu and satisfy me for 6 months which is a lot better for me than 10lbs of shitty steaks over the same time period.

Edited July 25, 2006 by Shalmanese (log)

[Shalmanese]

Damn, Lilija just said everything I wanted to say as I was drafting my response. Read her post folks, it's much more clear and concise than mine.

[Dave Hatfield]

I care about nutrition, but I don't think about it much anymore. I don't talk about it unless asked.

I decided about 15 years or so ago to really take a close look at nutrition, the more I looked the more silly things became. If you believed everyrthing the 'experts' told you, you would probably starve to death.

So I gave that up & applied some common sense. I asked myself what did our ancestors eat? Meat when they could get it, fish the same, lots of whole grains because they'd learned to store them, fresh vegatables in season, fruit in season, dairy products both fresh & preserved (cheese mainly) and natural alcoholic drinks.

What didn't they eat? Processed (in the modern sense) foods, simple carbohydrates (refined suger, white flour, white potatoes, unless they were of North American origin.)

This not only made sense to me it appealed to my taste buds and love of eating & cooking. A couple of years and 15 pounds off later I discovered the Montangac method which reinforced these ideas in a more scientific way. I've been eating this way ever since with occesional lapses into the simple carbs.

I'm not over weight & rarely ill. At 69 I feel great, walk a lot and eat very well thank you. My blood tests are good as is my blood pressure. I cook a lot as you can tell from my blog & posts. I do get asked how I can eat the way I eat, cook the things I cook & stay at the weight I am. That's the only time I talk nutrition.

[CaliPoutine]

Bad and Good for you (Boneless, Skinless Chicken Breasts etc.)

Hey now, speak for yourself. I love Boneless, skinless chicken breasts, especially in Cook's Illustrated Chicken Fajita's. I know I'm in the minority here, but I can't stand dark meat chicken.

[Pontormo]

Shalmanese, don't sell yourself short. The categories you set up at the beginning of your post are great! Thank you and Lilija, both, for very thoughtful, in-depth commentary.

Lindsay Ann & Jdtofbna express a kind of ambivalence or preference for conscientious moderation. The first post is especially interesting since it addresses the issue of weight which I deliberately avoided; J also voiced my own sense of how receptive people are when it comes to hearing about nutrition.

Nonetheless, look at the success Alice Waters and cooks or chefs in special school lunch programs are having when it comes to getting children to eat an increasing range of food. People over the age of sixty have been trained to change their eating habits; I see them pick up kale and whole-grain cereals while shopping, convinced they'll enjoy longer, healthier lives.

Is there anyway to reach the in-between ages? I don't know that the "eat more colors" campaign is influencing much change.

[srhcb]

Do you care about nutrition?

FINALLY , and this is what interests me the most:

If you believe there is such a thing as Good Food that is good for you, how do you talk about it without preaching?

Can you promote nutrition without sounding patronizing, (superior, judgmental, priggish, uppity, elitist, self-righteous), dull, pious, gloomy or artificially spunky and bright?

←

If I might illustrate a point about taste in food by using a comparrison using taste in music: I currently run a business selling parts for high performance street and race cars. (I don't make any money, but nobody laughs as often during a day at work as I do! )

I'll usually have a current or classic rock radio station on in the shop, but occasionally I'll tune in to MN's NPR station, which is famous for it's classical programming. Since my customers tend to be a lot more familiar with Top Fuel Dragster Campion Kenny Bernstein than Leonard Berstein they'll sometimes give me an odd look or make a crude remark.

I tell them, "A little bit of ****in culture never hurt anyone!"

Likewise, although I'm not a fanatic about it, I'll usually try and error on the healthy side of food preperation on the theory that if anyone doesn't like it, "A little bit of ****in nutrition never hurt anyone!"

SB

[tupac17616]

I don't know that the "eat more colors" campaign is influencing much change.

I had no idea such a campaign existed, but if that's the case, are they looking for a new campaign manager? Sign me up.

For me, eating a variety of colors is a huge part of what I consider to be good nutrition. Different colors usually connote different nutrients, from what I was taught. (Keep in mind, I'm only 21, so what do I know? ). I always make it a point to have at least two or three different colored fruits/vegetables at every meal. Red tomatoes, yellow corn, orange sweet potato (my favorite vegetable), green asparagus, blueberries, etc, etc. I may be crazy, but cooking and eating with that in mind is definitely doing something right for me. I can't even remember the last time I was sick. And there's a reason I can eat as much as I want without much, how should I say it....horizontal enhancement. It's because I am incredibly aware of the nutrition of the foods I eat. People tell me with as much as I eat I must have a hollow leg, but I know my body better than that...it's full of calcium, and lycopene, and beta-carotene, and...

[MissAmy]

I am concerned about nutrition. I eat a lot of veggies, and lean protien, and try to limit simple carbs, sugar, and saturated fat. It's a little hard to do with my job, but I try my best. I'm about to start an exersize regimen to drop some extra poundage.

Edited July 25, 2006 by MissAmy (log)

[srhcb]

I don't know that the "eat more colors" campaign is influencing much change.

I had no idea such a campaign existed, but if that's the case, are they looking for a new campaign manager? Sign me up.

For me, eating a variety of colors is a huge part of what I consider to be good nutrition. Different colors usually connote different nutrients, from what I was taught.

←

One thing I picked up from my Mother was making sure food was attractive and "color coordinated" on the plate.

Since she had a BS in Home Economics from the U of MN, (we used to say this made her a certified Professional Mother), I don't know whether her primary motive was aesthetic or nutritional. Probably a bit of each?

SB (learned a lot about cooking via osmotic action)

[gini]

I don't think about nutrition that much.

My diet consists of loads of fruits and vegetables in season, whole grains, yogurt and full fat cheeses, and little meat. I don't eat much poultry besides duck and I only eat red meat once or twice a month. I have fish a few times a week. I don't pay attention to fat or calories and I'm certainly not on a regime of any sort. This is just the way my family eats and how I've always eaten. I mostly buy from farms (pesticide free, free range, boring, boring, boring) and direct from fishermen. I don't worry about what I eat when I go out to dinner. I'm a moderate drinker - never mixed drinks though - why would I put sugar in perfectly good alchohol? I also eat most things in moderation - binging is neccessary, but every day would be absurd. Sometimes the salt & vinegar potato chips call to me .

I think some of the general public thinks the kind of food I eat is either a) boring b) hard to make or c) inconvenient. Why cook for yourself when you can micorwave? I hate microwaves - they take up so much counter space!

I don't talk about how I eat to people who don't ask - most say what I eat is too complicated for them - I work in an office where the fridges are full of micorwave dinners.

I certainly don't think my eating habits are unique or different - especially here on egullet.

Btw - bacon is in a food category on its own - I wouldn't even consider it pork .

ETA: I don't promote the way I eat - sometimes people ask me how I stay so thin and eat the way I do (no fake diet foods in sight? SHOCKER! ), and then I'm happy to explain, never in a superior tone or fakely cheerful - what I do seems so commonsense to me that I talk like a normal person would.

Edited July 25, 2006 by gini (log)

[Knicke]

Hmmm, that's indeed a lot of questions...

I do think about nutrition pretty often, although I am not as good about living up to my own standards. I usually think primarily about the balance of carbohydrates, protein, and fats in each meal. The main reason for this is that I have self-diagnosed myself as somewhat hypoglycemic. Nothing severe, but if I don't eat a good balance of protein, carbs, and fats (say, if I eat an all-carb meal), I'll end up with a blood sugar crash later. Not fun.

Apart from that, I don't scrutinize every meal, but I do try to make sure that I eat a variety of vegetables and fruits every day (the "colors" concept works for me!), and I tend to choose whole grains just because I think I get more "full feeling" for my buck (I'm about to be a poor student again) - plus I like how whole grains taste. I've been going back and forth on the dairy/butter thing; I know sat. fat is not good for me, but skim milk and no-fat yogurt are just not worth it to me. Not sure where I fall on that subject.

I do try to buy organic when I can or when it makes sense (I have that wallet card that shows the fruits/veggies highest/lowest in pesticides, and I use it).

I try to think (in general) in terms of the value of the calories I am eating. I don't mind eating something that's high in fat or sugar, but it had better be worth it! That is, I'd better be getting a lot of calcium or protein or something else good along with the not-so-great. And/or, it's got to taste sublime. Yeah, I think I usually consider nutrition in terms of economy: what am I really paying for? Am I paying for something to fill me up and delight the tastebuds now, or am I paying for something that will really help to fuel my body and keep it running?

Do I tell other people about this stuff? Not unless it comes up. There are enough other crazy food proselytizers out there...

[purplewiz]

When I was trying to put together an eating plan that would address my specific requirements while being realistic, I thought about nutrition a LOT. I researched and read everything I could get my hands on and thought about it darned near constantly.

I reached several conclusions from this:

1. Like most medical things, nutrition is ever-changing as more research is being done.

2. If people only ate foods which no "expert" claims has something bad for you in it, we'd all starve to death because no foods fit that criteria. Yet somehow the human race has managed not only to survive but thrive beyond our wildest expectations on this bad for you stuff.

3. Most nutrition research doesn't worry about taste or satiety or what color the sky is in the real world.

4. Nutrition gets REALLY boring after awhile.

So I ended up figuring that if I ate a wide variety of foods, especially foods that fit in with the goals of the plan, I was going to eat a wide variety of nutrients, and that should cover it. I still take a multivitamin to cover all the bases.

If my body was feeling the need for a little extra of something, it would let me know via a food craving. Learning to trust my body to tell me and to trust in my ability to listen was an adventure in and of itself.

I only talk about nutrition when asked. Most people aren't interested or don't want to know. Or they do know and they don't want to be reminded for their own personal reasons. (There's an erroneous concept among many reformers that if people only KNEW, they would naturally and inevitably take action to correct problems. It doesn't quite work that way.)

And honestly, I have no idea if what works for me will work for anyone else. In fact, I know it won't. On the rare occasions I am asked about it, I emphasize this point - I refuse to preach about diet and nutrition because I know how it annoys me. Even when I'm already on board.

Marcia.

[chow guy]

This is a very tricky subject. Very few folks want to hear about nutrition. It often comes off sounding like religion. In my own experience, every single time I've heard what a nutritionist had to say, I was appalled by their lack of actual knowlege about food. They have espoused "good food" and gave me deadly dull recipes, I would never try. I think the challenge is to educate and expand peoples ideas about what food "can" be, and to make nutrition more palatable.

I am also a Weight Watcher devotee, and I must say that I ate a pretty heathy diet (lots of fruit veggies etc.) before WW. My problem was portion size, high fat cheeses, sugar, carbs and pints of Hagen Daz. Now, that I write everything down I know exactly, how many servings of fruit and vegetables, dairy, water, oils etc. that I'm consuming. I won't lie to you, it's a pain in the butt, and takes way too much time, But...this accountability has had a remakable effect on my nutrition My labs and blood pressure are a testament to that. Besides I've dropped a whole bunch of weight and feel great.

I've been involved in writing a grant for a garden to kitchen program for grammar school kids here in New Mexico. I was fortunate enough to be invited to spend a day seeing how they do it at Alice Waters' wonderful Edible School Yard project. Their program works very well but, they also have a HUGE budget. Our biggest challenge here is money. Fresh fruits and vegetables cost alot more than fast food. I myself, even balk at paying 99 cents a pound for bananas and a $1.89 for apples. The reality is that vegetables for many of the kids mean french fries and onion rings. Salad is even a hard sell. It's an uphill battle that needs to have lots of money thrown at it.

[miladyinsanity]

I do what Shalmanese does.

Is it worth the calories to me? If it's not, then I don't eat it.

So I cut out all the cheap candy bars in favor of a small piece of good chocolate regularly.

But I don't preach about it. People don't usually want to listen. Do you know how difficult it is for me to make my dad NOT order a soda when we're out? And his older brothers are diabetics!

[markk]

After reading a post on the Chain Restaurant thread today, I'm wondering how people reconcile such comments as the one from that thread (first one below), with all the contradictory stuff that's been 'discovered' and written about health and nutrition, a lot of which was discussed on the recent Pollan thread - though I'd like to remove from the discussion the question of whether what our great grandparents recognized as food was healthier for us than today's processed foods, which was one major focus of that piece.

After re-reading the many sobering scientific points made by Fat Guy, I'm starting to question my own emotional beliefs a teeny bit. (BTW, we're not just talking about obesity here, and Fat Guys quotes aren't just about obesity, but health and longevity as well.)

How does everybody else feel about this? When nobody's looking, which food do you reach for when you look yourself in the emotional mirror? My answer is, I'm not so sure any more. Maybe I can lay off the broiled fish and fresh green veggies and just indulge my KFC cravings more.

When the baby boomers and the following generations get SEVERE health wake-up calls, when 75% of the nation has diabetes or is morbidly obese, and people can't afford the health care consequences of American eating habits, I bet we will see the chains having to change.  Imagine if there was a calorie, fat, and fiber count next to every menu option in chain restaurants?

vs

I'm saying the problem of obesity is wildly overstated, that many of the solutions are worse than the problem, ...Moreover, I marvel at the willingness of so many people to accept the existence of an obesity epidemic as conventional wisdom despite the well-publicized avalanche of evidence questioning every aspect of it.

I think the baby boomers, who are slightly younger than my parents, are a generation we can examine to see the effects of the modern American diet -- and the news seems to be good. The boomers are incredibly vital as they approach retirement age. If current statistical projections hold, they will push the life expectancy average farther than it has ever been pushed before.

←

I know plenty of families -- I mean, middle class people I went to law school with -- whose kids eat almost exclusively processed foods, starting with things like Pop Tarts in the morning, moving on to awful public school lunches, to various convenience foods for dinner, with chips, cookies and other snacks in between. They rarely eat a piece of fruit or a salad. And they're in great shape.

Barely a month goes by that there isn't a story like "Heavy People May Beat Critical Illness More Often" or "Some Extra Heft May Be Helpful, New Study Says" in the New York Times. Yet these reports, and there are many, are simply ignored by those who are invested emotionally (or financially) in the conventional wisdom.

If you follow the health reporting in the whole paper [NY Times], what you'll find in the past few years is revelation after revelation that the conventional wisdom about diet, nutrition, fitness, obesity, etc. is turning out to be wrong time and again. ... Why is it so hard to believe that man-made foods can be as good or better than natural ones? What's so great about natural foods, other than that people really, really want to believe they're great

Edited February 5, 2007 by markk (log)

[annecros]

OK, here I go.

Malnutrition is almost non existant in the United States right now. Our food supply amply provides for the dietary needs of the vast majority of our citizens. If an individual is suffering from malnutritition it is almost always due to a physical problem - malabsorption issues, ulcerative colitis, Crohn's disease, anorexia, bulemia, etc. etc.

In the meantime, there are real people starving in the world. Suffering the real results of malnutrition, who wouldn't care (and it wouldn't really matter) if you offered them a bag of corn chips or a bag of cheetos to supplement a diet that has barely enough calories to keep a heart beating, and sometimes not even enough to do that.

I think it is worth considering when debating with oneself wether you should order that two piece original recipe with a biscuit or that broiled swordfish. I don't think it is worth agonizing over, by gosh.

Just my two cents.

[Milagai]

Markk: replying to one specific point below (I hope I've

got that quote thingy correct):

The study that the media jumped all over,

which reported that slightly heavier people may have

a survival advantage, was flawed in its design

and execution.

The study didn't exclude the super-thin

people who are skinny due to terminal disease (e.g. cancer).

So yes, compared to a group that has many of

the ill super skinny, the heftier people have a

survival advantage!

The researchers caught their boo-boo later and

have been trying to backpedal, but the media

doesn't like to report that....

Milagai

Barely a month goes by that there isn't a story like "Heavy People May Beat Critical Illness More Often" or "Some Extra Heft May Be Helpful, New Study Says" in the New York Times. Yet these reports, and there are many, are simply ignored by those who are invested emotionally (or financially) in the conventional wisdom.

←

[markk]

Do you care about nutrition?

Do thoughts about getting a full range and desirable amounts of vitamins, minerals, protein, etc. affect the choices you make shopping, cooking or eating?

Yes, I care greatly about nutrition. I think we need a balanced amount of nutrients, vitamins, minerals (etc.?) in our diet, and I don't think that we can get all these from processed foods. I think that in the processing, they eliminate trace elements of things that we lose when they put back in those vitamins that they have identified, but only those specific ones. So I shop for nutritional variety when I plan my meals, and I avoid processed or refined foods and ingredients as much as I can.

I think that your body gets its nutrition by digesting on things that give your innards a bit of a workout, during which time your digestive tract wrings every nutritional bit out of the food that mother nature put in there. So I also think that things that are not refined are healthier, both because they don't have nutrients refined out of them, and because in their unrefined state, they keep your digestive system active. I think that innards can indeed atrophy over the years if you only ask them to process things like Wonder Bread and foods with no fiber content. So I eat a lot of foods in their "whole" state - brown rices, grains, nuts and seeds, as well as a lot of fresh, organic fish and meat, and I eat a variety of oils. It's not a low calorie diet, but I hope it's a healthy one, but I still cheat and eat more cholesterol than I'd like to.

I've never liked refined sugar, because it grosses me out. I think that sugar should be part of something that contains it naturally, like fruit; I'm not diabetic, but the whole idea of sugar-spikes in my blood turns me off. While I love gastronomic extravagance, and while my ideal would be to live in France and eat both fancy and rustic French food out, both of which I think are very close to the land, I still shy away from the desserts that are made of refined white flour and white sugar - that's just a personal anomaly for me. There are very rare exceptions, however, when my usually dormant sweet tooth overtakes me, but they're rare.

I also try to avoid cholesterol-laden foods, because I've had more of them in my lifetime already than any three random people you might find. I also avoid saturated fats for that reason.

I'm really hoping that all the studies saying that foods high in saturated fat and cholesterol aren't bad for you are true after all. I'd go back to eating lots of fatty steak. I do love the taste and texture, the "substance" and the mouth-feel of 'whole' foods, so I won't switch from whole grains to refined foods soon though.

[Mikeb19]

I can only speak about my personal experiences, so here goes.

I'm still quite young, 22, I work as a professional cook (and have since I was 18). I'm in great shape (6'1" 190 pounds, around 8 percent body fat, very muscular). Anyhow, I'm pretty strict about my diet, I eat ONLY natural foods, but I will eat somewhat higher fat items (butter, bacon, fatty cuts of meat, olive, nut, fish oils, etc...). I also regulate my portion sizes according to how much physical activity I do, and try to eat a balanced diet (this includes the occasional burger, but a real burger, not fast food garbage), everything in moderation (including alcohol consumption). Seems to be working, I'm in great shape, I've seen a doctor maybe 2-3 times since I've turned 18 (didn't really need to, but wanted to get back to work ASAP).

Now, some of you will say I'm still young so it's easy, which is somewhat true, however EVERYONE I grew up with, they all eat lots of processed foods, junk food, drink pop, etc... And they're all in much worse shape than I - always seeing the doctor, higher body fat, even my buddy who logs many more gym hours than I is in much worse shape due to his diet. Many are even fat/pushing obese at their young age...

Now, I look at my grandfather, and his family. He comes from a Ukrainian farming family, eats traditional Ukrainian food (and has his whole life), no processed food. He's 84 years old, without a single physical ailment, and is still strong as an ox. He has lower blood pressure than most middle aged men. His father lived to be 93 years old, the average life expectancy of my Ukrainian ancestors of that generation was around 90 years. All of them ate a peasant diet, no processed foods.

My French ancestors, same story. Grandparents are both 83 years old, still going strong. They've eaten a traditional diet their whole lives. Their parents lived into their late 80's and 90's. I still remember visiting my great-grandfather when he was 93 years old (he died at 94)...

I look at my parents and others in my family of their generation, who eat plenty of processed foods, and already you can see the effects of their diet and lifestyle. Middle aged with medical conditions already, many are obese...

Nowadays people are living long lives, but that's due to medical science and sanitation, not diet. A diet consisting of natural foods IS better (note - this doesn't mean the hippie-vegan health nut diet some people try to push on us...).

[srhcb]

Nowadays people are living long lives, but that's due to medical science and sanitation, not diet.

←

Coming from a civil engineering background, (dad, brother, uncle, three cousins), I can't tell you how many times I've about heard how civil engineers, through the design of water and wastewater treatment systems, deserve more credit than the medical profession for wiping out disease and extending the human life span.

SB (maybe so? )

[annecros]

Nowadays people are living long lives, but that's due to medical science and sanitation, not diet.

←

Coming from a civil engineering background, (dad, brother, uncle, three cousins), I can't tell you how many times I've about heard how civil engineers, through the design of water and wastewater treatment systems, deserve more credit than the medical profession for wiping out disease and extending the human life span.

SB (maybe so? )

←

Easily. Clean water source, proper sanitation. The lack of both are killing millions worldwide.