Impactful Article: "Science Compared Every Diet, and the Winner Is Real Food"
alexg2490
Posts: 2 Member
https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2014/03/science-compared-every-diet-and-the-winner-is-real-food/284595/
Part of the struggle for me is that I *hate* all these newfangled fad diets and diet product marketed as "health food". Total eyeroll moment for me. If Dr. Oz has ever recommended a human being do something, it feels like an instant red flag to me, like I instantly think it's a bad idea. I realize that's a bias as well, and I'm sure not all of his advice is bad, but some of it has been proven to be based on some pretty awful science, backed up by even worse reporting.
It's just that a lot of the diets out there feel unbalanced and overly restrictive, or heavily marketed towards "health food" products.
Don't get me wrong, if any of those make you happy, and you're getting the results you want to see with them, then go for it! But if you're like me, and you felt like this didn't have to be that hard, science has your back, because it can be simpler than that.
Here were a few quotes from the article that stuck out to me:
A diet of minimally processed foods close to nature, predominantly plants, is decisively associated with health promotion and disease prevention.
...
It’s not that nutrition science is corrupt, just that the empty promises of memetic, of-the-moment diet crazes are themselves junk food. To Katz they are more than annoying and confusing; they are dangerous injustice.
...
The subjects of media headlines and popular diet books are dark places for Katz. "It’s not just linguistic, I really at times feel like crying, when I think about that we’re paying for ignorance with human lives," he told me. "At times, I hate the people with alphabet soup after their names who are promising the moon and the stars with certainty. I hate knowing that the next person is already rubbing his or her hands together with the next fad to make it on the bestseller list."
...
A nod to the fact that popular media is not totally lost, Katz borrows from the writer Michael Pollan, citing a seminal 2007 New York Times Magazine article on "nutritionism" in concluding that the mantra, "Eat food, not too much, mostly plants" is sound. "That’s an excellent idea, and yet somehow it turns out to be extremely radical."
Part of the struggle for me is that I *hate* all these newfangled fad diets and diet product marketed as "health food". Total eyeroll moment for me. If Dr. Oz has ever recommended a human being do something, it feels like an instant red flag to me, like I instantly think it's a bad idea. I realize that's a bias as well, and I'm sure not all of his advice is bad, but some of it has been proven to be based on some pretty awful science, backed up by even worse reporting.
It's just that a lot of the diets out there feel unbalanced and overly restrictive, or heavily marketed towards "health food" products.
- "Yeah, my diet allows me to eat whatever I want as long as I have 4 cups of steamed broccoli with every meal."
- "I have to have salmon three nights a week and take these Acai supplements from China."
- "The secret to my success is these KooVoo Multigrain UltraLean Kale-Infused Multivitamin Gluten-free Locally Sourced Greek Yogurt Flaxseed Hemp Crackers that I use as a midmorning snack. There's only 10 in a box and they cost $57 but they sure taste... okay!"
- "Oh yeah, all you have to do is eat raw meat and nuts like a caveperson! Then you'll be really healthy!"
Don't get me wrong, if any of those make you happy, and you're getting the results you want to see with them, then go for it! But if you're like me, and you felt like this didn't have to be that hard, science has your back, because it can be simpler than that.
Here were a few quotes from the article that stuck out to me:
A diet of minimally processed foods close to nature, predominantly plants, is decisively associated with health promotion and disease prevention.
...
It’s not that nutrition science is corrupt, just that the empty promises of memetic, of-the-moment diet crazes are themselves junk food. To Katz they are more than annoying and confusing; they are dangerous injustice.
...
The subjects of media headlines and popular diet books are dark places for Katz. "It’s not just linguistic, I really at times feel like crying, when I think about that we’re paying for ignorance with human lives," he told me. "At times, I hate the people with alphabet soup after their names who are promising the moon and the stars with certainty. I hate knowing that the next person is already rubbing his or her hands together with the next fad to make it on the bestseller list."
...
A nod to the fact that popular media is not totally lost, Katz borrows from the writer Michael Pollan, citing a seminal 2007 New York Times Magazine article on "nutritionism" in concluding that the mantra, "Eat food, not too much, mostly plants" is sound. "That’s an excellent idea, and yet somehow it turns out to be extremely radical."
0