Food chosen for health or pleasure?

Silverkittycat
Silverkittycat Posts: 1,997 Member
edited October 2024 in Food and Nutrition
What would you eat if every food on earth was "healthy"?

I was thinking about it after reading this -
Quite often, healthy foods are perceived as not being tasty. Almost everyone gains a sense that they have to find some sort of compromise between pleasurable eating and healthy eating. Rather than simply finding the foods that they honestly enjoy, they select foods that have some arbitrary balance between “health” and “pleasure.” Rather than selecting foods because of this arbitrary balance, particularly when nutritional balance isn’t really known at all, doesn’t it make more sense to eat foods based upon what brings the most value to your life? Here’s what I mean – one of my favorite foods on earth is homemade salsa. It’s not only healthy, but it also has a lot of family history as well, as my father and grandfather both made it. Why don’t I just make a lot of homemade salsa and eat it – and trust myself? I asked my wife what she would eat if every food on earth was healthy. She said, “After I had my fill of ice cream and chocolate, I’d eat a lot of asparagus.” Why not just trust ourselves and eat what we most deeply enjoy?

And this -
No wonder we have become, in the midst of our astounding abundance, the world’s most anxious eaters. A few years ago, Paul Rozin, a University of Pennsylvania psychologist, and Claude Fischler, a French sociologist, began collaborating on a series of cross-cultural surveys of food attitudes. They found that of the four populations surveyed (the U.S., France, Flemish Belgium and Japan), Americans associated food with health the most and pleasure the least. Asked what comes to mind upon hearing the phrase “chocolate cake,” Americans were more apt to say “guilt,” while the French said “celebration”; “heavy cream” elicited “unhealthy” from Americans, “whipped” from the French. The researchers found that Americans worry more about food and derive less pleasure from eating than people in any other nation they surveyed.

Compared with the French, we’re much more likely to choose foods for reasons of health, and yet the French, more apt to choose on the basis of pleasure, are the healthier (and thinner) people. How can this possibly be? Rozin suggests that our problem begins with thinking of the situation as paradoxical. The French experience with food is only a paradox if you assume, as Americans do, that certain kinds of foods are poisons. “Look at fat,” Rozin points out. “Americans treat the stuff as if it was mercury.” That doesn’t, of course, stop us from guiltily gorging on the stuff. A food-marketing consultant once told me that it’s not at all uncommon for Americans to pay a visit to the health club after work for the express purpose of sanctioning the enjoyment of an entire pint of ice cream before bed.

Replies

  • Rilke
    Rilke Posts: 1,201 Member
    My diet has changed so much that healthy food tastes so much better to me now. Fake food tastes like chemicals.

    BUT . . . I admit I'd eat a lot more pasta and ice cream.
  • sinclare
    sinclare Posts: 369 Member
    Maybe I should move to France? :)

    Seriously, great post !
  • ninerbuff
    ninerbuff Posts: 49,039 Member
    What would you eat if every food on earth was "healthy"?

    I was thinking about it after reading this -
    Quite often, healthy foods are perceived as not being tasty. Almost everyone gains a sense that they have to find some sort of compromise between pleasurable eating and healthy eating. Rather than simply finding the foods that they honestly enjoy, they select foods that have some arbitrary balance between “health” and “pleasure.” Rather than selecting foods because of this arbitrary balance, particularly when nutritional balance isn’t really known at all, doesn’t it make more sense to eat foods based upon what brings the most value to your life? Here’s what I mean – one of my favorite foods on earth is homemade salsa. It’s not only healthy, but it also has a lot of family history as well, as my father and grandfather both made it. Why don’t I just make a lot of homemade salsa and eat it – and trust myself? I asked my wife what she would eat if every food on earth was healthy. She said, “After I had my fill of ice cream and chocolate, I’d eat a lot of asparagus.” Why not just trust ourselves and eat what we most deeply enjoy?

    And this -
    No wonder we have become, in the midst of our astounding abundance, the world’s most anxious eaters. A few years ago, Paul Rozin, a University of Pennsylvania psychologist, and Claude Fischler, a French sociologist, began collaborating on a series of cross-cultural surveys of food attitudes. They found that of the four populations surveyed (the U.S., France, Flemish Belgium and Japan), Americans associated food with health the most and pleasure the least. Asked what comes to mind upon hearing the phrase “chocolate cake,” Americans were more apt to say “guilt,” while the French said “celebration”; “heavy cream” elicited “unhealthy” from Americans, “whipped” from the French. The researchers found that Americans worry more about food and derive less pleasure from eating than people in any other nation they surveyed.

    Compared with the French, we’re much more likely to choose foods for reasons of health, and yet the French, more apt to choose on the basis of pleasure, are the healthier (and thinner) people. How can this possibly be? Rozin suggests that our problem begins with thinking of the situation as paradoxical. The French experience with food is only a paradox if you assume, as Americans do, that certain kinds of foods are poisons. “Look at fat,” Rozin points out. “Americans treat the stuff as if it was mercury.” That doesn’t, of course, stop us from guiltily gorging on the stuff. A food-marketing consultant once told me that it’s not at all uncommon for Americans to pay a visit to the health club after work for the express purpose of sanctioning the enjoyment of an entire pint of ice cream before bed.
    BIngo. I no longer emphasize diet to my clients because of the "displeasure" of cutting out foods they enjoy. I just have them concentrate more on calorie limits. There are no foods that are denied, they just have to be disciplined on just not over doing it. Since I've taken up this philosophy, my clients don't regain weight, are HAPPY and I still get them results. That all adds up in a win for everyone.
  • Hilary_85
    Hilary_85 Posts: 12 Member
    I personally eat for pleasure more then health! I just stay within my calorie limit! Yes I resist some things! If everything was good for me I would live off of candy bars and pizza ! Buys that's not the case! Lord I dream to eat like a teenage boy it seems! Lol! But really I have learn that if I keep the pleasurable foods out of my grasp I will fail on my journey! I still say no to plenty...but enjoy much more in moderation! And lastly let me point out that the things I say no to on any given night is because it won't fit into the calories I have left for that day! Usually if I'm still craving it the next day I will eat a small amount before all my calories are gone!
  • arispawild
    arispawild Posts: 155
    I realized steamed veggies are my favorite food.
  • kyylieeeeee
    kyylieeeeee Posts: 197 Member
    I choose foods for both reasons, and I never cut out foods I love.

    I've lived in the US (NY) and France (a very small city in eastern France), and the biggest two differences I see in food are these:

    Food is enjoyable and pleasureable in France, because it's not rushed. In the US, people rush to get out the door in the AM, have a short lunch break, work until late, then are somehow too busy to cook dinner at night. In most families, both adults in a household work full time, making meal situations even more stressful. In France, lunch breaks are longer and meant to be a time of day to relax; lunch isn't a time to run errands or catch up on other work, because everyone is doing the same thing-- eating lunch.

    And the other HUGE difference that I noticed-- no one seems to spend their day snacking in France. There are meal times. And that's that. Also, dessert comes right after dinner rather than a few hours afterwards, so one's dessert portion is much smaller since it's an accompaniment to dinner rather than a big snack on its own.

    That's my observation. French-produced foods are also not ridden with fake sugars, preservatives, modified oils, etc, so they're a lot more 'healthy' in general, even when it is dessert.
  • Rae6503
    Rae6503 Posts: 6,294 Member
    Sushi for me is one of the most pleasurable foods and it's healthy. I eat it often.
  • Silverkittycat
    Silverkittycat Posts: 1,997 Member
    My diet has changed so much that healthy food tastes so much better to me now. Fake food tastes like chemicals.

    BUT . . . I admit I'd eat a lot more pasta and ice cream.

    My diet includes plenty of ice cream but pasta is something I'd like to eat more frequently. And cake! :love:
  • Silverkittycat
    Silverkittycat Posts: 1,997 Member
    I realized steamed veggies are my favorite food.

    Lucky you! :smile:
  • Fairysoul
    Fairysoul Posts: 1,361 Member
    If every food on earth was healthy, I would be in heaven, I hate the temptations of unhealthy foods, and personally I belive that the creation of the junk is a travesty. I wish I could totally ban it from my life.
  • kimiel51
    kimiel51 Posts: 299 Member
    I think the key is exploring more food options, instead of getting stuck on the same foods day after day. How do we know, unless we have tried, that a favorite healthy food is lurkiing right around the corner. There are endless combinations to how foods can be prepared to make them tastier.
  • Silverkittycat
    Silverkittycat Posts: 1,997 Member
    Another article I enjoyed -
    Food and pleasure
    BY DAVID ROBERTS
    27 AUG 2006

    I'm too lazy to find any actual poll numbers on this, so I could be wrong, but my strong guess is that most U.S. consumers involved in the recent growth of organic food are choosing organic for health reasons. One might even think of the organic boomlet as a subspecies of the general American health mania -- the same one that sent customers herding toward fat-free and low-carb food.

    If this is true, we wouldn't expect consumers to particularly care about how far the food has traveled or what size farm it was grown on. They see "organic" as another health label; if it has any specific content to them at all (as opposed to vaguely healthful connotations), they probably associate it with lack of pesticides, and pesticide-free is pesticide-free, whether from an industrial farm in Chile or Farmer Bob's family farm down the road.

    How can we get U.S. consumers to care about the broader food system? There are two basic ways.

    One would be to develop a label or certification program related to food miles traveled. That way consumers who do care about local food could act on their convictions, and those who don't might at least pause to give it some thought. This option has been discussed quite a bit.

    But there's another: getting American eaters interested in flavor. Meats, fruits, and vegetables can travel thousands of miles and sit for days or weeks in delivery trucks and on warehouse shelves and still be organic, but they can't do that and still taste good. Real, quality flavor cannot be faked; it comes from farms where animals and plants are produced in a healthy environment, and it's eaten shortly after being harvested.

    If we could get Americans interested in quality food -- demanding it -- much of the rest would take care of itself.

    The problems with this strategy are legion, though. Americans' dysfunctional relationship with food, well-documented by Michael Pollan and others, is longstanding. For one thing, we think of time spent seeking out and carefully preparing food as time wasted. And we think of money spent on higher quality food as money wasted.

    Also, it takes time to cultivate a sophisticated palette. Just as a novice beer drinker will think all stouts taste the same -- perhaps dimly sensing differences -- someone who loves beer will instantly be able to distinguish a quality stout from a cheap one. Most Americans are raised on a diet of fatty, salty food and have developed a craving for that kind of tawdry instant rush.

    You could even put the point more broadly: Puritanism and the protestant work ethic are alive and well in U.S. culture. We simply do not take pleasure seriously. We take very little vacation time and compartmentalize our recreation. We have the same conflicted binge/shame relationship with food that we do with drugs and sex.

    We're not good at leisure, and as Europeans know, well-done leisure is a skill like any other.

    Anyway, I have no big answer here. It just strikes me that we're always discussing the food system in moral and environmental terms, when we could get to much the same destination via the sensory and savory.

    In this, as in so many other areas, the green life is not drudgery and difficulty, but delight and gratification. That, I fear, is precisely why America has not taken to it.
This discussion has been closed.

Categories