Comments on: Michael Pollan: Some Rules Are Meant To Be Broken

By: JAKE

JAKE — Thu, 10 Mar 2011 08:18:26 +0000

“What separates us from other animals on this earth is that we sometimes eat for just the pure fun and enjoyment of it all.” — David Grotto, RD

Um, have you ever met a dog? A huge number of non-human animals do this. There are creatures who eat rotten fruit to get drunk, too. And countless other examples of consumption for fun.

Our reasons for eating are not unique or complicated in the animal kingdom. We just have far better access to and control of food, so we can enjoy the stuff way beyond basic survival.

By: JAY SEIFF-HARON

JAY SEIFF-HARON — Fri, 03 Sep 2010 18:44:57 +0000

Janet, I agree with most of what you say but think you may have missed Pollan’s point a bit. He did not say that everything in the center of a supermarket is bad for you, nor was he proposing that these rules were definitive. He was offering, as he says in the intro, quick & dirty “algorithms” for eating healthy, overall, without having to stand in the aisle trying to decipher the nutritional information and ingredient lists on the back of a product. And, actually, a lot of the examples you give are actually not so great for us: the average American eats astonishingly larger quantities of carbs (”whole grain pastas, boxes of brown rice, bags of nuts, canned beans, soup, frozen vegetables and dried fruit”) than is healthy, and the more popular items are even less healthy: for example, peanuts as compared to other nuts, or dried fruit as compared to fresh… or pasta as compared to fresh vegetables. He also says, quite clearly, that an occasional treat is different from your weekly trip to the supermarket in general. I think he would agree with much of what you have written, but is recommending a global make-over of our diet that, of course, would be a big change at first.

By: KYLIEONWHEELS

KYLIEONWHEELS — Sat, 01 May 2010 08:03:35 +0000

I read through this post, and other blogs about this post, and the comments on this post, and the comments on the blogs about the post, and something has dawned on me.

The thing is, the content or validity of Michael’s rules aren’t the key factor here. The fact that we are all here, discussing the rules, talking about how we would apply the rules, agreeing and disagreeing with various rules, this is what makes it work. If people follow his rules, they can eat well. If people discuss them like we are now, they can also eat well. Having not even read the book, I still think it seems to be doing a good thing!

By: LISA RAUM

LISA RAUM — Sat, 30 Jan 2010 19:34:09 +0000

As several others said, I don’t think his comments are meant to be taken so literally and in such a terribly narrow context, as some people are interpreting them. If easy for us that already KNOW and understand all that he is trying to convey to analyze the finer nuances of his message, but we really need to look at it form the perspective of the “ignorant massess.” – those everyday people that “don’t have a clue” about where food comes form, what is in it, the evils of processing, caloric density, etc.
I think he is simply trying to open the door to thought processes that might not otherwise occur. He is getting people to question things they never questioned, and in turn people are learning things. That’s ALL good.
Those of us in the field of nutrition tend to be very Type A personalities, so perhaps we tend to over-analyze things a bit. We need not scrutinize every detail of how his messages differ from reality, so much as embrace the value of the general message and then EXPLAIN to people the what and why behind his words. He is giving us apltform upon which to expand.

As for cooking comments…of course we can all cook/prepare all of our meals at home. the only people who find that challenging are those without kitchen skills; what they then need are schooling in kitchen skills. You don’t have to mill your grain to be eating nutritious foods at home. You can bake your own bread though…try it – it’s INCREDIBLY easy. The time YOU actually invest is minimal ; the bread does its rising and such all on its own. It takes about 10 mnutes of your actual hands on time to make a few loaves of bread.

By: JESS

JESS — Mon, 25 Jan 2010 03:04:34 +0000

Great post. I haven’t bought the book yet and am not sure I will, much as I respect Michael Pollan’s viewpoints and enjoy his writing. I think he manages to make big nutrition concepts very approachable to people outside the field, which is really important. However, I feel, as you do, that the words and phrases like “avoid,” “stay away from,” “eat only,” and “limit” are sending too many negative messages. I think that can create even more stress around food, which is probably the last thing we need!

I just stumbled across your blog today and really enjoyed it, so much that I added it to a list of other blogs on my own site, http://jess-keepingitrealfood.blogspot.com/

By: HEATHER MANGIERI, MS, RD

HEATHER MANGIERI, MS, RD — Fri, 22 Jan 2010 14:07:52 +0000

Thank you Janet for this well written blog post. I really respect Michael Pollan and enjoy reading his books but I agree giving information does not lead to behavior change. As an instructor of cultural foods, I regularly stress the social, cultural and enjoyable part of eating. Educating the public on eating for health and long term success is dependent on more than just eating to survive- after all, we are humans!

By: RACHEL PEREZ

RACHEL PEREZ — Thu, 21 Jan 2010 04:15:22 +0000

Thank you Janet for this post! I am reading the book right now, and my first instinct was to turn and see what other dietetics professionals were saying in response. I agree that some of the rules are unrealistic for behavior changes, though memorable and catchy.

By: FREDDIE WOLNER

FREDDIE WOLNER — Tue, 19 Jan 2010 19:44:34 +0000

I disagree. His rules are not negative, they are common sense. They just seem that way because there are so many food products to avoid so it seems like food avoidance. The truth is there are lots of healthy choices and nobody needs to be restricting themselves from enjoying lots of goodies that are either real food themselves, or made from real food. I have two small boys and we never run out of options no matter where we eat or what I cook at home. It wouldn’t be negative at all but big business is marketing this stuff to us and its believable to the masses – especially kids. So we are back to avoidance. Easily summed up by one piece of advice – “don’t eat crap.”

By: SHE-FIT

SHE-FIT — Tue, 19 Jan 2010 02:40:30 +0000

What an interesting post! I love it. Yes, they have made eating healthy so complicated and I’m sure it’s why so many people just throw up their hands and say why try. This book sounds great. I am going to have to check it out. Thanks for the review

By: ELIZABETH WARD, MS, RD

ELIZABETH WARD, MS, RD — Mon, 18 Jan 2010 14:29:53 +0000

I like Pollan’s approach, but I’ve always found this so-called healthy eating “rule” maxim hard to swallow.

Shop the peripheries of the supermarket and stay out of the middle.

Pollan is spot on in so many other ways, that I wonder why he doesn’t acknowledge the excellent choices that supermarkets offer in the aisles, including oatmeal, whole grain bread, and whole grain ready to eat cereals, and pasta; canned fruit in its own juice; reduced-sodium canned beans, which are so convenient, nutritious, and economical; popcorn, a delicious whole grain snack; and dried fruit.

Nutrition is relative and concrete rules about food are often self-defeating.