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

181–190 of 191 posts

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

#181

Post by problems »

pmoriarty wrote: post #169
problems wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Store bought orange juice does not taste better because of the deoxygenation. In fact, quite the opposite. "Once the juice is squeezed and stored in gigantic vats, they start removing oxygen. Why? Because removing oxygen from the juice allows the liquid to keep for up to a year without spoiling. But! Removing that oxygen also removes the natural flavors of oranges. Yeah, it's all backwards. So in order to have OJ act…

Well... taste is subjective, so yes, yes it does.

Basically, their flavor packs taste better to me than actual orange juice, something about the acidity I think is quite appealing to me.

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

#182

Post by pmoriarty »

problems wrote: post #181
pmoriarty wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Store bought orange juice does not taste better because of the deoxygenation. In fact, quite the opposite. "Once the juice is squeezed and stored in gigantic vats, they start removing oxygen. Why? Because removing oxygen from the juice allows the liquid to keep for up to a year without spoiling. But! Removing that oxygen also removes the natural flavors of oranges. Yeah, it's all backwards. So in order to have OJ act…

Well... taste is subjective, so yes, yes it does. Basically, their flavor packs taste better to me than actual orange juice, something about the acidity I think is quite appealing to me.

My point was that it's the flavor packs that make it taste better, not the deoxygenation.

Deoxygenation alone, without the flavor packs, make it taste worse.

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

#183

Post by wutbrodo »

wyager wrote: post #7
wutbrodo wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Authoritative recommendations" aren't the only thing we get out of science. In the absence of the ability to make them, science's job is to attempt to give us a best guess at what the most likely answer to a question is. In the 50 years between now and your hypothetical in which nutrition is "solved", advice like Pollan's is a good balance between simple and as effective as we can hope for at this pt.

> "Authoritative recommendations" aren't the only thing we get out of science. I know, but when is the last time you saw a diet recommendation article of the form "Our Bayes factor on kale doing such and such is..."? The only things 99.9% of people pay attention to (or know how to interpret) are authoritative-sounding recommendations, so that's what diet writers write. > science's job is to attempt to give us a best…

> I know, but when is the last time you saw a diet recommendation article of the form "Our Bayes factor on kale doing such and such is..."? The only things 99.9% of people pay attention to (or know how to interpret) are authoritative-sounding recommendations, so that's what diet writers write.

Attacking writers (to no disagreement from me) is a pretty odd response to a defense of science's role in society. Science coverage is garbage, but that has approximately nothing to do with your point, nor my response to it.

> No, I think you actually misunderstand what science can do for us here. Science can give us confidence intervals that let us maximize expected utility given what we know. We don't just assume that the most likely hypothesis is true.

Oh for the love of God, this is a masterpiece of pedantry. You're mistaking "I assume everyone here is intelligent enough to understand what I'm getting at despite my lack of precision in a brief three-sentence comment" for "I don't understand what I'm talking about". Just because you don't fit the former statement doesn't mean I fit the latter.

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

#184

Post by rubber_duck »

coldtea wrote: post #174
rubber_duck wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>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. >excess…

> 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. That would be relevant if I had said that they wouldn't be walking around (that they'd die immediately, etc.). But what I said is that they are so…

I just think the tone of your overall argument is too alarmist. I eat processed foods from time to time - cookies, potato chips, hot dogs, ice cream, McDonald's etc. They aren't in my regular diet but if the situation is right I'll eat it, I don't think they are unhealthy because my body can probably cope with whatever is unhealthy in them, just like I drink alcohol from time to time but I don't do it on a daily basis.

I don't think anyone is advertising cookies, potato chips or ice cream as healthy diet choices. McDonald's has some actually balanced things on their menus (from macro nutrient perspective) like their breakfast egg burger was ~25g of protein/carb/fat - but if you order 3 + 1/2 liter of cola and fries along with that then yeah it's not going to be good for you.

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

#185

Post by Freestyler_3 »

wruza wrote: post #55
Freestyler_3 wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can eat anything and wont gain weight. It really seems like there is too much diversity in how we handle food inside our body. The best diet is to try some things(experiment) and do whatever works best, not what feels best. Too many of these diets read like they are the most fun thing to do in the world. Also a lot of people have the tendency to get their goal and then stop the diet only to gain weight again (then…

This worked for me too, I could eat any amounts of anything and weight even less than normal. Then I realized (well, my gastroenterologist did) that my liver had a pretty common pathology all that time and it started to make harm. We quickly fixed that and now I have to choose what to eat, because gaining, say, 5kg in one week is a no-brainer now. This is the story of one specific issue with a human body, that has te…

Its surprising how fast things can change.

If it ever changes for me I know ill have it hard because I eat a lot of snacks and delicious sandwiches.

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

#186

Post by Freestyler_3 »

sametmax wrote: post #70
Freestyler_3 wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can eat anything and wont gain weight. It really seems like there is too much diversity in how we handle food inside our body. The best diet is to try some things(experiment) and do whatever works best, not what feels best. Too many of these diets read like they are the most fun thing to do in the world. Also a lot of people have the tendency to get their goal and then stop the diet only to gain weight again (then…

This is not exactly true. Yes, there is a big variance in the way people process food. But people also usually exhibits common characteristics: - they don't eat that much on average. While they may sometime eat a lot, if you what the quantity during one week, you'll see they eat less than most people. - they eat slowly. Those 2 things alone allow you to process a certain amount of unbalanced diet. BTW, if anybody wan…

But I eat lots more and am not gaining or losing weight. When I do nothing and stay home for a week I will eat even more and still not gain. Which is frustrating because my ideal weight would be 80kg, but I cant get much above 75.

It isn't high on my priority list so I have not tried many things. I just go around life and enjoy the food I want to enjoy, but my concious is there telling me "don't eat too much bad stuff, you want to stay healthy" Because even though I don't gain weight it is still bad to eat lots of fats etc.

So yes I do eat plenty of green, and other variations of things.

(also earlier I said "what feels good" I meant psychologically not physically)

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

#187

Post by problems »

criddell wrote: post #158
bogomipz wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>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.

This usually results with going to wikipedia and then going "man, these preservatives are pretty cool shit" while I eat them.

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

#188

Post by acedinlowball »

rubber_duck wrote: post #184
coldtea wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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. That would be relevant if I had said that they wouldn't be walking around (that they'd die immediately, etc.). But what I said is that they are so…

I just think the tone of your overall argument is too alarmist. I eat processed foods from time to time - cookies, potato chips, hot dogs, ice cream, McDonald's etc. They aren't in my regular diet but if the situation is right I'll eat it, I don't think they are unhealthy because my body can probably cope with whatever is unhealthy in them, just like I drink alcohol from time to time but I don't do it on a daily basi…

> I don't think they are unhealthy because my body can probably cope with whatever is unhealthy in them

So, in your opinion, what is "healthy" or "unhealthy" should be determined by what YOUR body can cope with?

You're delusionsal....

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

#189

Post by acedinlowball »

problems wrote: post #181
pmoriarty wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Store bought orange juice does not taste better because of the deoxygenation. In fact, quite the opposite. "Once the juice is squeezed and stored in gigantic vats, they start removing oxygen. Why? Because removing oxygen from the juice allows the liquid to keep for up to a year without spoiling. But! Removing that oxygen also removes the natural flavors of oranges. Yeah, it's all backwards. So in order to have OJ act…

Well... taste is subjective, so yes, yes it does. Basically, their flavor packs taste better to me than actual orange juice, something about the acidity I think is quite appealing to me.

Your comments in this thread lead me to believe you're a retarded person.

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

#190

Post by rhelsing »

unknown_apostle wrote: post #124

For those interested: Nassim Taleb extends this kind of epistemological conservatism to other complex domains, such as economics, finance, religion and psychology. "You would not have read this far into this article if your food culture were intact and healthy; you would simply eat the way your parents and grandparents and great-grandparents taught you to eat. The question is, Are we better off with these new authori…

Can you post a link to some of his work where he discusses those topics?
Post reply on HN