Michael Pollan – Food Rules for Healthy People and Planet

thank you very much thank you so much thank you both for that kind introduction and thanks to the RSA for sponsoring this talk today I brought some groceries I don't think I have quite enough to share here but I went to Tesco and I'm always fascinated by supermarkets yours in particular and I want to just I want to talk a little bit about the dilemma we face in the supermarket today because I think it's tied to problems of Agriculture types of problems of health and certainly tied to problems in the environment so I'm mostly concentrated on yogurt which i think is a very interesting case of of where our confusion begins this is been a call we don't have this it's very hard to tell from the name and everything about it whether this is a drug or a food it's proven to reduce cholesterol which sounds really good although of course we haven't quite proven that cholesterol is a cause of heart disease but we all think less of it is better and it does this with plant Stendhal esters I'm going to just put this out here and then we have the kids version of yogurt fruits we call this go-gurt this is a very kind of processed yogurt product in a tube it sort of looks like toothpaste at least yeah here too and quite a wonder how you get this into your body and then I've got low-fat toffee yogurt Tesco's own brand and one of the interesting things about all three of these yogurts which are all sold in one way or another as a health food as something that's going to improve your help because they have probiotics and sometimes prebiotics and soon we'll have post biotics for the dead but in fact they all have more sugar in them per unit per 100 grams than coca-cola more twice as much in the case of the Tesco low-fat yogurt so you can sort of see why a consumer would be confused around this question of health and in fact as we've removed fat from products we've amped up the sugar and many people under the assumption that if you don't eat fat you can't get fat but of course sugars can do a very good job of that and I just for contrast I brought an apple and a mango and whoever asked the first question can have their pick I want to talk about the roots of this confusion because I think that a lot of our problem around food traces to the ideology we bring when we walk through a supermarket or navigate a restaurant menu and the word I use the label I use for that ideology and of course ideology is just a fancy word for the the unspoken assumptions that organize your experience of something is nutritionism it is an ism it's not a science although it's purportedly based on the science of nutrition and let me just lay out what I see is the the four main tenets of nutritionism and see if they don't reflect your cultures understanding of food today or perhaps your own these tenants don't seem very controversial but I want to argue that they should be if they're not the first is is the important thing about any food are the nutrients it contains and that foods are basically delivery systems for this more important category called the nutrient which is much more scientific much more precise and that you know you should stare past the foods you should stare past the yogurt to the to the sugar into the lactose and whatever else is in there and that's really what matters and that's what affects your health now that seems kind of uncontroversial nutrients for the scientific understanding of foods but as soon as you accept that premise you find yourself on the train and the Train is taking to the next stop and the next stop is that since nutrients are invisible who among us except a scientist has ever actually seen a nutrient therefore you need experts to tell you how to eat so as soon as you accept the nutrient view of science you accept the expert driven food culture if you can call it a culture at all and I think that is a big step to take and we have certainly in the United States and to judge by these products to a large extent here as well accepted the idea that there are people with great wisdom about food and probiotics and prebiotics that can tell us precisely how to eat it's sort of like a religion in the same way if what matters about religion or God is imperceptible to us and we can't have direct communication with the Godhead we need a priesthood to navigate that relationship for us and we certainly have a priesthood now navigating our relationship to food third premise and this is true I think of many isms many ideologies it divides the world into good and evil so at any given moment we there is some satanic nutrient we are trying to drive from the food supply right now what would a satanic nutrient be fat yes saturated fat in particular used to be all fat but now we've got good fats so that's complicated things a little bit trans fat certainly and sugar right I'm glucose that's an evil nutrient right now and then every one of these evil nutrients has its good doppelganger the blessed nutrient that if you could just get enough of it in your system you would be healthy and possibly live forever probiotics now are among the the blessed nutrients what else omega-3 fatty acids are a blessed nutrient they're showing up I don't know about here but in America there they've this fish fat has shown up in milk and yogurt and orange juice it's amazing what they can do so you've got you know and then you've got of course the omega-6 fatty acid which I predict is the next evil nutrient there will be products boasting about their relative lack of omega-6 not that we don't need omega-6 it's another essential fatty acid but it fights with omega-3s and pushes it out of the cell membrane cell by cell there's a cold war going between those two fats and and so we and we're getting way too much omega-6 according to the latest wisdom so good eating becomes a matter of navigating the Scylla and Charybdis here and and you know staying that's not quite the right metaphor is it but staying away from the evil nutrients and gravitating towards the good nutrients the fourth and last premise of nutritionism I want to draw your attention to is that the whole point of eating is about health that when we eat this activity takes place on a spectrum that ranges from destroying your health on one end to redeeming your health on the other and that that's what matters now that seems kind of uncontroversial but in fact in the history of humankind it's it's a rather odd idea people have eaten for a great many other equally legitimate reasons let's see if we can remember a few of them pleasure remember that community what happens at the table when people break bread together whether it's family friends even enemies amazing things happen when people eat together and that was always been a very important reason to eat and identity many people construct an identity or part of their identity out of what they do eat and especially what they don't eat and that too is another equally legitimate use that humans have made of food and we are in danger of reducing our understanding of food to this very narrow reductionist set of nutritionism beliefs now I think we would put up with this if it worked if thinking about food is a collection of nutrients actually made us healthier but the evidence is not very encouraging the first great experiment with nutritionism I would argue is the low fat campaign that begins in the late 70s the low fat campaign is to nutritionism as the Soviet Union or Communist China was to Marxism its greatest test and most abject failure I know that language is rather grandiose let me see if I can support it but we tried to demonize one nutrient and in America it begins around 1977 1980 and we really tried to re-engineer our food supply because we we had come to the understanding and this was the scientific consensus especially in America but to some extent here although there were important dissenters in England actually that fat and animal fat especially was the problem with heart disease and that indeed it was the problem with obesity and so that if you could get fat out of the diet you would improve health now something very interesting happens during this low-fat campaign which did result in the re-engineering of our food supply a great many low-fat and reduced fat products in America we got very fat on the low-fat campaign the low-fat campaign is generally dated to 1980 and since 1980 the average American women adjusted for age has put on 19 pounds and the average American man has put on 17 pounds partly through eating low-fat food because if you look at the consumption figures what happened over that period is that people started consuming a lot more sugar I don't remember the figures but it's it's about 30% of the additional calories now we're also and as that suggests consuming between three and five hundred more calories per person per day since 1980 in America I don't know what the comparable figures are here I'm sorry but that's very interesting thing to happen during a low-fat campaign now there are two ways to explain this the fact that we got fat when we started demonizing fat one is scientifically maybe it was wrong and fat wasn't quite the culprit we thought and there is there is mounting evidence to suggest that that's true and that we unfairly demonized fat or all fats and in fact some fats are not only essential but you know help make you feel full and when you move to a low-fat product as those yogurts do you tend to make up for the dramatic loss of flavor that occurs you remove fat by by replacing it with sugar or salt and indeed we did that so that's one problem the other problem is though whenever you demonize is more this is more of a psychological problem we can talk more about the science later of fat and carbohydrates but when you demonize one nutrient you tend to give a free pass to its doppelganger nutrient so by demonizing fat we essentially gave a free pass to sugar and refined carbohydrates of all kinds and in America we had a Nabisco came out with this very successful brand of let me you know not be too charitable and call it junk food but it was called snack Wells and this was cookies crisps all sorts of snacks that had no fat at all real miracles of food science they put their best minds to it and figured out how to get all the fat out of a cookie all the fat out of a crisp and and they were incredibly popular for a few years there were entire aisles dedicated to snack wealth in the grocery store and the psychology around snack Wells was that since it had no fat in it you could eat as much of them as you liked and if one was so good for you a whole box must be better and indeed there is a lot of evidence that during this low-fat campaign we've binge Don the good nutrients so what happens is you see as soon as you break things into this good and evil nutrient you've figured out a very clever way to sell more food to people and actually get them to eat more calories so nutritionism thinking about food this way has not worked very well now the science is part of the problem one of the things I've been doing for the last two years is really studying nutritional science because I was asked by an editor to find out what do we really know about the links between diet and health really important question for all of us I think and my conclusion after two years of looking at this question was a lot less than most people realize which by the way many nutritionists will confirm they don't talk about it as much they don't publish papers on their ignorance nobody does they publish papers on that what they found out but our understanding of nutrition is still pretty primitive we've only been added about two hundred years and we are constantly being surprised to find another layer of complexity you know we started out thinking if you you know nutrition was a matter of fats carbohydrates and protein those are the macronutrients and and just as Liebig figured this out 1840s and he made a baby formula with the big nutrients in it thinking he'd simulated what what babies needed to live they died he was missing something what was it it took about a hundred years to figure it out or seventy-five years and they realized oh the vitamins there's this other kind of molecule you also need and they put MA and they put vitamins in the baby formula and lo and behold the baby still didn't thrive they didn't die but they didn't thrive they didn't do very well they had lower IQs they had all sorts of problems then they realized oh it's not just fat you've got to have the right kinds of fats and then they put the Omega threes in and the baby formula got better but perfection has been elusive we still can't simulate mother's milk with with great success and I think that stands is a good metaphor for the the whole field it's very hard work the it's not like testing drugs when you're testing foods to figure out why do vegetables heavy intake of vegetables appear in the epidemiology to help to be protective against cancer every time we've thought we found the important nutrient like beta carotene and we've taken it out of the carrots and put it in a supplement and giving it to people low and behold it doesn't do anything and in certain populations Finnish drinkers it gives them finished drinkers and smokers it gives them more along cancer we really don't understand what is going on deep in the soul of a carrot and I don't I don't mean to be mystical about that but I do mean to be humble about it and on the other end we don't really know very much about what's going on in the human digestive system which peculiarly enough did you know that your gut has as many brain cells neurons as your spinal column what are they thinking why do you need brain cells in your stomach so there's a lot of mystery on both ends of the spectrum and it's very hard to figure out it's very hard to do a double-blind study on diet because there is no placebo broccoli you either know if you're eating it or you don't and if and if you take it out of the diet to see what effect it does you don't know if the perceived effect is a result of the subtraction or the addition of whatever you've put in its place so it's not like studying drugs it's really really hard and we need to be humble about it and and to think we should be able to synthesize what we need in food and give everybody supplements that solves all their dietary problems perhaps someday I don't I don't foreclose the possibility but it's a long way off so where does that leave us how do we decide how to eat in the absence of certainty in a world where nutrition science and I hope I don't offend any nutritionists in the audience's approximately where surgery was in the year 1650 which is to say very promising very interesting to watch but not yet perhaps ready to to put you on the table or let Lee guide you're eating life and that's the question I confronted and and have been trying to answer since you know nutrition is amuro's to solve a very real problem and that is the fact that we have very high rates of chronic disease linked to diet the Western diet as some British scientists began calling a doctors about a hundred and ten years ago we have known since then populations who eat a Western diet generally defined as lots of processed food lots of refined fats and refined grains very few fresh fruits vegetables and whole grains and lots of meat people who eat that diet populations who eat that diet get very high rates of obesity of cancer of heart disease of stroke and type 2 diabetes this has been recognized for a long time Albert Schweitzer wrecking I did Robert Mackerras and Neil Burkett this whole generation of British medical workers working in the colonies watching the Western diet arrive and seeing what happened when it did made the connection and they said the Western diseases are probably caused by the Western diet what they argued about and what we're still arguing about is what about the Western diet is the problem is it the fat is it the lack of fiber is it the the sugar the refined carbohydrates each of those men took a different position on that question and that's still what we're arguing about and most of the nutritional science going on is an attempt to isolate the one variable in the Western diet so that we might fix that one variable and go on our merry way and wouldn't that be nice but they still haven't nailed it down and it's going to take a while for the reasons I'm describing because of the complexity of it so that's one key fact and in a way that's the only fact you need to know to construct a healthy diet no actually two the second fact you need to know to construct a healthy diet is something else the same people observe which is that people eating a huge range of traditional diets all around the world managed to stay healthy on it as long as they could get enough of it and and these diets have very little in common so you have in yet in Greenland subsisting by and large on seal blubber about as high a fat diet as you could have no heart disease no type-2 diabetes and then you have Maasai warriors some of the healthiest people on earth in Africa subsisting on a very high protein diet of cattle blood and meat and then you have a Native American Native Americans in Central America who subsist by and large on carbohydrates lots of carbohydrates and some protein beans and maize very different diets equally good results the one diet that reliably seems to make populations sick is this Western diet what an achievement for civilization to build to build from on all these possibilities the one diet that reliably makes its population ill so how do you build a diet on those two facts well it was I think burger tormak Harrison who said well you've got to go back a little bit you've got to go back not all the way to the bush although doing that would make you a lot healthier and there have been studies showing that but to some of the traditional dietary wisdom the cultural wisdom around food that we have basically tossed overboard and you know I realized at a certain point that science is one way of understanding the natural world one way of understanding biology but it's not the only one we have ever had and long before science helped us navigate our relationship to food and and so many other matters of biology we had something called culture and we have had that tool for many many years going back to that first you know mystical state of nature where a group of proto humans were as omnivores we're trying a little bit of everything trying to figure out what worked and one of them picked up a mushroom and ate it and keeled over and died his or her fellows would have said to themselves we've got to remember this how can we remember that you don't eat that mushroom and somebody said I've got a really good idea let's give it a name let's use this tool called language and let's give it a name that's very memorable so they thought for a while and somebody said well let's call it the deaf cap you would need anything with the word death in it and that worked pretty well so that's a very kind of high-profile example of culture helping us to navigate that but we have so many others and what I've been trying to do for this prop the project that led to this book was seeing how much of that culture was still around and how how might it serve us how might it help us get off the Western diet to whatever extent is possible and build on the wisdom of traditional diets in some sense it's a reactionary project but so far the modernist project in food has been an unalloyed disaster so we have to go with what works so I made I came up with and when I say came up with I mean I collected I wrote some of these rules but also collected many of the others and um they are I put out requests on the internet of the New York Times where I write did have allowed me to do a solicitation of their readers and I got 2500 different suggestions some of them absolutely crazy and useless like you should only have one meat per pizza I mean aesthetically I sort of see the point but biologically I'm not sure I do or don't eat anything bigger than your head you know melon I think melon is okay you can eat melons bigger than your head so I tried to kind of you know vet these for for quality and but a lot of them were really smart and really helpful I think and I think that as a way to help people tune out the conversation about nutrients and focus again on foods I'm not saying scientists don't need to deal with nutrients these are their tools these reductive tools figuring out how these very complex systems work one variable at a time that is the scientific method but for us at the eating end of the food chain until they've made a lot more progress we can safely tune this out and rely on some other forms of wisdom so what are these forms was I'm just going to give a couple quick examples they're really obvious umm don't eat anything your great-grandmother wouldn't recognize house food what would she say if you gave her a tube of that fruit would she know what to do with it or how to get it into her body and when she looked at the label and saw those 13 or 15 ingredients now she's she's pretty smart she knows that yogurt is basically milk in a bacterial culture so what are those 11 other things what's the guar gum doing there what's the BHT in the various colorings and all this kind of stuff flavorings so that suggested another rule don't eat foods with more than five ingredients processed foods recipes are fine but processed foods with more than five ingredients shop the the periphery of the supermarket and stay out of the middle to the extent you can I think this is true in England it's certainly true all over America the but that the the least processed food is usually on the perimeter because they need to restock it the most it goes bad and that suggests another rule avoid foods that never rot food is alive and it should eventually die and that you know with the exception of honey which has survived from the pyramids most foods have been perishable to one degree or another and there's a lot of stuff in the supermarket today and believe me I bought some of it I had a pair of Twinkies I don't think I haven't seen Twinkies here but it's a it's a processed angel food cake like a log filled with cream and covered with sugar and and they're they're so sweet your teeth scream and pain when you when you bite into one and they're very popular and I bought one and I was using it as a prop and I carried around for two years and it never got hard it was incredible this thing was as spongy as the day I bought it and the only reason it expired is everybody would come up after speeches and squeeze it and finally it collapsed now what does it mean to say something doesn't rot well it means something very precise it means that the other creatures with whom we share our planet the bacteria the fungus the insects the mice have no interest in it and they know something about nutrition that we don't there's not a lot of good nutrition in this and of course we found this with white flour one of the reasons we refined flour was to make it less likely to go bad and we succeeded but in the process we took out a lot of nutrition nutritional value but the focus of the book is only partly on how to choose foods and avoid foods it's also about how we eat because and I'll just leave you on this note because I really want to hear your questions how we it turns out may matter as much as what we eat so that when we're eating alone when we're eating in the car it is not the same experience as eating with other people as eating at tables portion control is enormous ly difficult for people especially when you have a food industry that has figured out how to supersize portions as a way to get us to eat more we have a lot of temptations and food culture is one way to govern those temptations when you eat alone you tend to eat thoughtlessly and eat too much certainly when you're doing it distracted in front of the television or while driving so one of my suggestions is eat all your meals at a table now that it's necessary to say such a thing in 2010 is kind of remarkable but many of us don't eat at tables anymore eat when you're hungry not when you're bored that's kind of a radical idea and that was submitted by several people and I think it's true we use food for a whole range of emotional fulfillments that have nothing to do with hunger and we're really kind of out of touch with when we're hungry and also and here's kind of the most radical idea and I'll leave you with this one and this appeal is popped up in many many different cultures stop eating before you're full – an American that's really radical we're taught to eat until we're stuffed and and the food is advertised on that basis but if you look around the world you find rules the Japanese have a rule hara hachi boo eat until you're 4 fists full and um the the Prophet Muhammad even spoke on this question and he said basically a full belly was one that was one-third food one-third liquid one-third air nothing so he's at the 2/3 range the Chinese say you did until you're 75% full the the French have this concept is encoded in their language when they're hungry they say chef M I have hunger when they're done they don't say I am full they say janae + them I no longer have hunger and that's a you know if you think about at the moment at which you no longer have hunger is a great many bites short of the moment where you're stuffed and that's so that's a very cold you know this is we're talk about cultural practice and my general point that I want to leave you with is that it may well be so far until science gets much better at what they're doing around food that culture is the key to eating well preserving our food cultures which is a matter of not only the dishes and the combinations of foods but the rules with which we surround eating in the face of a very concerted effort on the part of the food industry to undermine that culture and in fact destroy it in in favor of getting you to eat 24/7 as much as possible so on that note I'm going to leave you and leave time so we can will and I can talk and take your questions thank you very much um I quite like little xx we should talk about this is the it's not food if it arrived through the window of your car and actually when I've been treating trying to teach my son which I can't find now which is about don't um heat breakfast cereals that change the color of the milk yes yeah those tend to be the nest which is a bit tricky with my studies but the idea that was to make them sticky I mean I'm using my whatever skills I have as a writer and editor to come up with phrases that will just not that anyone's going to remember 64 these rules that's how many there are but but that 5 of them just kind of stick in your mind and give you and they're not really rules they're policies and you know a policy is a very personal policy is a very powerful thing it relieves you of having to make millions of decisions every day but on that sort of a issue about going back to culture and finding out what what culture is I suppose the problem that that sticks with me is actually if you look at America as a whole longevity is increasing mortality from things like heart disease is actually declining is there a problem or is this really um kind of attacking you know is this about middle class for food values versus the rest of America well it is true that longevity is increasing and it probably is too but if you break down those numbers you find that I think it's gone up 17 years since a hundred years ago very very impressive ten of those years are at the beginning of life basically sanitation and the RN vaccination our ability to get kids children through childhood that's where the great gain is there were plenty of people living to be in their 80s or 90s in the last century if they could survive those first couple years the seven years at the other end is by and large a result of medical intervention and yes we have come up with ingenious technologies to treat the people we have sickened and I guess we should applaud that and that and that that is the choice we have now which is to continue to medicalize the chronic disease problem the food system is creating and work on diabetes medicines and better and better diabetes you know technologies and we're doing we're investing a lot of money in that and we could go down that path we could go down a path where every you know every street corner in the inner city next to the payday loan store has a dialysis clinic but it will bankrupt us it's very expensive the way we're treating heart disease great example we are prolonging the life and mortality is down but the underlying incidence of heart disease may not be down at all there's some dispute about it but what we've gotten good at is keeping people alive once they have these diseases so the question you have to answer is is that the way you want to deal with it now capitalism loves to deal with problems by creating new industries to solve those problems and there is a very strong economic imperative to go down that path my argument is that it would be a whole lot more economical and beautiful to focus on changing the diet rather than hooking us all up to more and more effective machine I want to get straight to the thorny one of GMOs because that's obviously I mean like we've got six million people to feed all this planning and and you know it's all good to say you know Masai warriors you know have this diet that's very healthy but how can that diet sustain those kind of populations unless you adopt an industrial approach to feeding the world population well GMOs in an industrial proach are not exactly the same thing and we shouldn't let the the the interest in GMOs take up all the space in the decision about industrial approach or organic because I think that's a mistake GM is one tool it has not yet proven itself to be very powerful and the assumption built into your question that GM can improve yields of the world's crops has not been borne out yet maybe it will but everybody just takes this as an article of faith of course more technology must mean more yield they have not done that yet yields of there was a recent study put out by the Union of Concerned Scientists in America that found that on balance GM had in soy had reduced yields it offered farmers other things but not yield and that in corn under very certain circumstances and those are really the only two important crops so far under very narrow set of circumstances certain years it increased yield when there were big outbreaks of one of the corn borers what GM has done so far is not very helpful to the world's poor to anyone it which is to say it is allowed farmers to expand the size of their holdings and that one farmer can conform more land using GM than not but expanding monocultures is not contributing to our health or our happiness and it's contributing to more processed food and more meat consumption most of that grain that's being grown with GM is feeding animals in terms of having enough food to feed the world in 2008 which was a year of supposed food crisis we grew enough food to feed 11 billion people most of it was not eaten by humans as food however a great deal of it was fed to animals about half to feed our meat habit and a great deal especially the United States was fed to automobiles and because we're driving our cars on food right now about 10 percent of the the gasoline in America is used to to feed cars so it is not a question of the yield of the arable land we have so much as to what use were putting all this food were growing and that you know people say organic can't feed the world I'm not here to tell you yes it can I know it can but if you look at the research you shouldn't take that as a premise of a discussion that's an assertion and in fact there's a recent review of the literature that found that in industrial areas organic achieves 92% of the yield of industrial ok 8 percent loss in yield but you go to the developing world and it produces a hundred and eighty-two percent of current yields so if the developing world were to adapt organic production they would have a tremendous increase in yield and you know I think we need to test these ideas and and figure that out I also think we may not have a choice you know it may not be up to us to decide industrial agriculture depends on huge amounts of fossil fuel to produce this kind of processed food it takes it takes ten calories of fossil-fuel energy to produce one calorie of food energy you know this is a system ostensibly based on photosynthesis there should be a way to get more energy rather than less when you're producing food and there is under certain systems so I don't know that you know in the same way we're going to have to learn how to draw how to drive an industrial economy without a lot of fossil fuel we're going to have to learn how to create a lot of food without a lot of fossil fuel I think one of the really interesting has happened in when I was talking about the food reform movement but also that you emphasize is the food is culture it's not so much about nutrition and actually the things that become activated once you begin to use the food as a social idea as much as anything and it's very part and that food you know what from your own experience the food reform movement in America do you think it has really changed how some communities are able to think about themselves well I don't want to exaggerate how much has been accomplished yet I mean we're really at the beginning we still have an enormous problem around the food system there are the stirrings of a movement and it's very exciting to see what's happening you have a tremendous growth in local food economies in in organic food even in in bad economic times I remember people predicting when the crash came in 2008 well that's it for your sustainable food movement and it hasn't been the case people are still gravitating towards these yeah mostly middle-class but the movement is gradually democratized there's a tremendous emphasis in America we were talking about before we went on around urban agriculture and growing food in underserved areas there's and there's a problem here I was reading the gardening Guardian about you don't call them food deserts that's what we call me you have another name for them and areas that where it even if you want fresh produce you can't find it because there aren't full scale supermarkets or farmers markets and there's a lot of work being done to extend the benefits of this of this kind of food to people who can't now afford it there are tremendous issues around affordability however cheap food is you know is a blessing to the poor arguably but in fact I think what's happened as we've reduced the amount of money we have to spend on food and made food cheap I mean in America now we spend nine and a half percent of our income on food that's less than any people in history yeah here I think it's 12 or 13 or something like that in France in Italy it's 15 or 16 and then you go the developing world is 4050 percent and that seems like a good thing but in fact what's happened is that in America cheap food has subsidized the decline of wages so that savings has been captured by employers more than in individuals and also you know it is what allows people to buy lots of computers and CDs and all that kind of stuff so the challenge is to figure out how to make food affordable not necessarily cheaper but more affordable and that may mean giving people more money to buy higher-quality food rather than cheapening everything inside you


  1. got an ad for uber eats before this video

  2. Go Vegan – ditch the diary. Watch Earthlings, Dominion, Cowspiracy, Forks over Knives, etc.

  3. Food with integrity. Now that’s a good idea. https://Flour.Farm

  4. Good talk. i would like to know the data on the low fat campaign. what was the actual fat intake before, during and after? Because a campaigne doesnt neccesarilly change that. thats why i wish Mr. Pollan would have mentioned the numbers.

  5. Very informative……

  6. It's simple – the easier it is to get from nature the more you should eat, the harder it is the less you should eat. If it's impossible to get from nature then avoid it like the plague!

  7. Go to WooPep diet website page and learn how to do the diet.

  8. Replace food with political ideas and we're still stuck, less by our understanding of a subject and more by the shortcomings in human behavior, by this desire to create super-goods and super-bads. We need a good old fashioned species-wide brainwashing to help develop our critical thinking.

  9. "Medicalize" = "monetize" for the capitalist.

    Excellent program, and I have already broken free of "Westernized" eating, and better already.

  10. So inspirational!
    The way the system functions is failing us all, GMOs have not improved the food chain for the needs of anyone.
    The food regulations has failed dramatically, regulating what????
    The Health system in my opinion is never addressing the root causes of diseases, nor addressing the immune system!
    Holistic approach is frowned upon due to the mainstream system having a monopoly on the populations staying diseased ridden!
    The whole system is failing the whole worlds prosperity!

  11. food should be eaten for fuel not to get sleepy

  12. Great speech. People should also take their time eating and chew their food well. People are in a rush to eat because of their busy schedules. This also increases cortisol when contributes to weight gain. GMO corn seeds contain roundup which is proven as a carcinogen. Not to mention GMOs are illegal in a lot of countries. More people are starting to grow their own food because they don't trust commercial food products.

  13. I have been following up on Michael Pollan's work and I find him so enlightening!

  14. He has answered the questions now, you guys should check the latests video 2016, what a brilliant work

  15. just watch the documentary

  16. simple
    no meat of any kind
    no milk
    no cheese
    seeds organic
    veggies and fruits organics
    almond milk
    nothing made by a third person
    I make it myself
    so I know what I am putting in my mouth and then my temple body.
    I don't believe in supermarkets!
    they don't care about your health
    you have too

  17. excellent

  18. 2:06: "soon we'll have post biotics for the dead" hahaha
    btw, America has no culture, so no wonder thay have no food rules.

  19. Out of the ones I listened to which I found inspired and were great, this one I like the least. A little too much knocking on science here. And I know Mckenna used to do it (I don't know if Pollan heard of him, but they share some philosophical ideas) but Mckenna was more convincing about it. Nutrition isn't something that I think of as a cultural practice. Fast food is our culture, it literally is our culture, and that should not guide us. Drinking beer is part of our culture, but it's a horrible idea. Comparing nutritionists to a priesthood is a horrible analogy.

  20. When one explains his point with using few words shows his wisdom on the matter. When he resorts to long explanations tells you he is not sure himself or is trying to condition you to except his agenda. Wisdom is crying out in the streets, you just have to listen for it.

  21. този не знае ли български, че тръгнал да обяснява

  22. I have an extra credit report on this video. My teacher has asked me to write a short paragraph on topics she picked from this video. Two of them I cant seem to figure out after watching this video twice. "2. Food Industry Efforts to Prevent release of information about food origins" the other is "3. Pollan’s statement “…the logic of industry and the logic of biology are in conflict. When that happens, biology always wins”."  Does anyone know the part of the video where M.Pollan talks about food industry efforts and the part where he is quoted? I dont remember seeing him saying anything about industry and biology conflict.

  23. Make your own yoghurt! It is so cheap, easy and delicious – and healthy 🙂 Start with actually buying some natural yoghurt – one with no sugar and does contain lactobacillus. Heat fresh milk (not UHT stuff) to just under boiling, (180F) leave it at that temperature for 15-30 mins. Cool it to around 110F if you have a thermometer, add and stir around 3 tbsp of the yoghurt, wrap in blankets with a couple of hot water bottles, let it sit keeping warm and still for 7-8 hours. It will look solid with yellow-green fluid on top, Either spoon some of that off for the dog, who loves it, or stir, put in fridge overnight, and enjoy!! (Sarah Slade)

  24. He is a modern day savior.

  25. True. But just missed a practical conclusion! Stick to the food of a locale. Preferably the one into which you are born in. (Excluding the unfortunate ones who were born into a cosmopolitan culture!) Never mix foods from different cultures/region. Because the food also has got evolution. The local food and the humans in that enviro has developed together for thousands of years. You will find the checks and balances mostly unsaid and inherent in the regional foods taken together. When you mix all these are getting upset. The western (American for example) food is a mixture of food from different cultures and that is its defect!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *