Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Eat food. Not too much. Mostly plants. (2007)

michaelpollan.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 191 posts

Re: Eat food. Not too much. Mostly plants. (2007)

#151

Post by [deleted] »

coldtea wrote: post #94
problems wrote: post #31

Some of the conclusions seem a little quacky here to me - like "avoid ingredients you can't pronounce" and a lot of "avoid processed anything". While I'm sure there's some arguable benefits to these things, I think it's paranoid or stupid to dismiss something just for being "processed". What the heck does that mean anyway? All our food is processed in one form or another and nothing about something being more process…

> While I'm sure there's some arguable benefits to these things, I think it's paranoid or stupid to dismiss something just for being "processed". What the heck does that mean anyway? It mostly means, "a whole industry of greedy scum that added all kinds of useless and often harmful crap to the food it sells to make it last longer -- and increase their margins--, be more addictive --and increase their margins--, be pr…

[deleted]

Re: Eat food. Not too much. Mostly plants. (2007)

#152

Post by problems »

afandian wrote: post #144
mac01021 wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's an example of a process done by the food industry that you would not be happy to do yourself if you could do it for free?

Not parent commenter but these are things I wouldn't want to do to my own food, even if I could. - peroxide bleaching of flour https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flour_bleaching_agent - acid-enzype process for HFCS: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_fructose_corn_syrup#Proce... - de-oxygenation of orange juice for long term storage: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orange_juice#Not_from_concentr... (I'm sure these are nomin…

I actually really like the deoxygenation of orange juice thing. The result tastes better than fresh squeezed, more of a sour taste that I prefer. Maybe it just amounts to dumping more citric acid in it or something, but it's delicious in any case.

Re: Eat food. Not too much. Mostly plants. (2007)

#153

Post by belorn »

jschwartzi wrote: post #64
audunw wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Eat less calories than you burn and loose weight. This mantra annoys me, because it's like saying that to go to space, all you need to do is to burn rocket fuel and keep the nozzle pointed down (and then to the side). It's technically true, but every single sane person know that it's true, and it doesn't really help you get to where you want. It ignores how food affects motivation, digestion, metabolism etc. You ca…

People keep repeating it because once you figure out your motivation and dial in a calorie goal that lets you lose weight without feeling like crap, it actually works. You're right that you can't ignore all that other stuff, but you also can't lose sight of the essential fact that you lose weight by eating fewer calories than you burn. The process of dieting requires you to perform tasks that support that goal. It's…

Part of "that other stuff" is that the body do not burn or metabolize consistently when you change diet. For example, the body can go into a starving cycle which increase metabolism, lower energy usage, and make you less sated, and which reportedly takes a rather long time to recover from. It should not be that surprising that the human body has evolved to adapt when food availability change.

Re: Eat food. Not too much. Mostly plants. (2007)

#154

Post by monort »

igravious wrote: post #101
to3m wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Carnivore meat you can eat: cat, crocodile, alligator. I'm sure there are others. Not very common in the west - if nothing else, herbivores and omnivores are easier to factory farm - but people do eat them. What about fish? Tuna, salmon, shark - they all eat meat.

Come on. Who eats cats? Dogs yes, but cats? Crocodile and alligator I can imagine that that's a thing.

Cat meat is popular in Asia, especially in Vietnam.

Re: Eat food. Not too much. Mostly plants. (2007)

#155

Post by rubber_duck »

coldtea wrote: post #145
rubber_duck wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Unfortunately a lot of people are so naive as to think that corporations are basically ethical and would never do those things, or that if something involves technology (e.g. food chemistry) it is necessarily good, even if said technology is used against them to pad profits. I've never actually seen people like this, in fact I've only seen people who are the exact opposite - and you seem to give off such vibe - wher…

> in fact I've only seen people who are the exact opposite - and you seem to give off such vibe - where something is "evil by default" because it's not "natural/organic/whatever buzzword here". I don't speak for organic, Whole Foods etc BS. That's another racket. You can buy perfectly fine non-organic vegetables, meat, cheese in Walmart if you go and look for it. But american popular mass produced food is of the wors…

>What part of what I wrote looks like "paranoia" to you? That big manufactures like Nestle, etc. are greedy and would sell any kind of crap?

Citing isolated instances in an industry that provides services to billions and saying you should be scared because of that is paranoia - on such a large scale you are guaranteed to have bad outcomes. Meanwhile most people eat processed food and are still walking around.

>excessive sodium, tons of sugar, BS preservatives

Preservatives have legally regulated ranges and there's nothing wrong with high sugar/salt if you're healthy and are within your calorie limit.

>Those things are orthogonal

Of course they are - that's kind of my point.

Re: Eat food. Not too much. Mostly plants. (2007)

#157

Post by problems »

coldtea wrote: post #94
problems wrote: post #31

Some of the conclusions seem a little quacky here to me - like "avoid ingredients you can't pronounce" and a lot of "avoid processed anything". While I'm sure there's some arguable benefits to these things, I think it's paranoid or stupid to dismiss something just for being "processed". What the heck does that mean anyway? All our food is processed in one form or another and nothing about something being more process…

> While I'm sure there's some arguable benefits to these things, I think it's paranoid or stupid to dismiss something just for being "processed". What the heck does that mean anyway? It mostly means, "a whole industry of greedy scum that added all kinds of useless and often harmful crap to the food it sells to make it last longer -- and increase their margins--, be more addictive --and increase their margins--, be pr…

With regards to your first link, note that the resulting "truffle oil" is now dirt cheap. Those profits are not just taken by the producer but passed along to the consumer. And according to most of the article you linked, the taste works.

If so I see nothing wrong with it as long as it's listed on the ingredients. A lot of things aren't made exactly the way their name may make you think.

There's definitely some scummy stuff going on in the food industry, but I don't think a little fakery that saves the consumer money and creates a good flavor is that bad of a sin.

Re: Eat food. Not too much. Mostly plants. (2007)

#158

Post by criddell »

bogomipz wrote: post #136
problems wrote: post #31

Some of the conclusions seem a little quacky here to me - like "avoid ingredients you can't pronounce" and a lot of "avoid processed anything". While I'm sure there's some arguable benefits to these things, I think it's paranoid or stupid to dismiss something just for being "processed". What the heck does that mean anyway? All our food is processed in one form or another and nothing about something being more process…

>Some of the conclusions seem a little quacky here to me - like "avoid ingredients you can't pronounce" Indeed, quinoa and acai - two super foods before they became Whole Foods staples would have met this criteria.

I really hate the pronunciation test because it seems anti-intellectual. By all means, read the labels on your food and if something is unfamiliar, find out what it is and why it was added.

Re: Eat food. Not too much. Mostly plants. (2007)

#159

Post by CPLX »

tptacek wrote: post #143
CPLX wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not really. If I was in an argument with a UFO theorist where I said the US government wasn't actually hiding live aliens, and someone came along and pointed out that we have illegal aliens in custody, I would point out that this is true and irrelevant. The word toxin is widely used in "wellness" circles, but the concept so described does not exist. The fact that there is a correct, jargon-specific, scientific usage…

Wellness people also have weird beliefs about vitamins, and vitamins are in fact complicated, but that doesn't mean I make little air quotes every time I refer to vitamins.

Does this also apply to startup vitamins?

[0] https://www.startupvitamins.com

Re: Eat food. Not too much. Mostly plants. (2007)

#160

Post by reflexive »

matt4077 wrote: post #120
reflexive wrote: post #39

Pollan's famous "maxim" manages to be condescending, unhelpful and inaccurate - all at the same time. Eat food: duh Not too much: again, thanks? Mostly plants: Oh you mean like, sugars and starches - the most toxic constituents of the modern diet. Pollan is the prototypical Bay-Area insufferable foodie. His documentary was a cringe-fest of pseudo-spiritual fawning. Rene Girard talks about how food has become a new st…

You're wilfully misrepresenting Pollan's argument. He gives specific definitions of "food", "not too much", and "plants" that directly address your objections. And the fact that these recommendations are somewhat generic is exactly his point: don't listen to the latest fad specifying the exact relation of n-3 to n-6 fatty acids, but concentrate on heuristics that have remained unchanged for 60 years+.

> You're wilfully misrepresenting Pollan's argument.

I'm not. His argument is very simply that we should eat less meat and more grains. From TFA:

it might be wise to eat more plants and less meat.

most of the plants we have come to rely on are grains

Vegetarians are healthier than carnivores

All of this is garbage. Grains (eaten to the scale we do in the industrialized world, which is as the bulk of our calories) are poison. Yes, he does say a few things that are not false, such as "eating leaves is good". However I think you'd get better dietary advice by saying "eat things that begin with letter S".

Post reply on HN