In Defense of Food Response

In the book Defense of Foods Michael Pollan has many interesting arguments. He believes that Nutrition experts are not correct. He believes that Nutritionists don't know enough and can't properly tell the American population what is actually healthy. He also argues that processed foods are bad for you. (For example processing wheat and making white bread) He says that people should be more concerned about how much they eat and not with what they eat. Humans used to traditionally eat whatever their culture and ancestors ate. He says in his book that humans used to eat a variety of different diets and thrive on many diets. He says that humans can and used to be able to thrive on basically every diet except the Western diet. He believes that eating for bodily health is a bad idea. He suggests that people should eat for enjoyment and in a social setting. He says "that our nation has an unhealthy obsession with eating healthy."

I agree with Michael Pollans point he makes about how processed foods are bad for you. I don't like the fact that manufacturers take the healthy aspect of foods out of the food to make them taste better. I believe that the government needs to disallow companies to make super unhealthy, unprocessed foods. I also support his claim that nutritionists don't know enough about foods to tell people what they should and should not eat. Science is always evolving and changing and what was once healthy today may not be down the road. Take for example William Prout. He thought he had food completely figured out when he discovered Macronutrients. He didn't. It is simply to hard to know if what Nutritionists are telling you is completely true and accurate. I absolutely agree with the fact that America has a problem with being obsessed with eating healthy as well.

http://junkfoodscience.blogspot.com/2007/06/processed-foods-arent-real-food.html