Analysis Of Michael Pollan 's ' Escape From The Western Diet '

In the essay Food as Thought: Resisting the Moralization of Eating by Mary Maxfield, a graduate student in American Studies at Bowling Green State University summarizes Journalist Michael Pollan’s theory about Americans’s unhealthy population preoccupied with the idea of eating healthy.

While nutritionism is suppose to scientifically guide us to eat healthy, Pollan points out that there is no scientific evidence to back it. Instead, he provides research conducted by Harvard nutrition scientist that proves the opposite. "In the public's mind [...] words like 'low-fat' and 'fat-free' have been synonymous with heart health. It is now increasingly recognized that low-fat campaign has been based on little scientific evidence and may have caused unintended health consequences." (Pollan 43). In Based off these observations, Pollan uses inductive reasoning to draw the conclusion that nutritionism is more harmful then helpful.

In Michael Pollan’s essay “Escape from the Western Diet,” he informs Americans about the western diet and believes they need to escape from it. The reason Americans should escape the western diet is to avoid the harmful effects associated with it such as “western diseases” (Pollan, 434). To support his view on the issue, Pollan describes factors of the western diet that dictate what Americans believe they should eat. These factors include scientists with their theories of nutritionism, the food industry supporting the theories by making products, and the health industry making medication to support those same theories. Overall, Pollan feels that in order to escape this diet, people need to get the idea of it out of their heads. In turn he

He probes them to learn the what, where, and how of dinner – knowing what is going into the body, knowing where that food came from, and knowing how that food was made. By first knowing what is being consumed, people can make better informed decisions about their purchases. Nutrition, or lack thereof, is a key component in the battle against obesity. Food giants are hoping to hide the often unnecessary filler present in their products by use of dodgy claims and socially engineered advertisements. In general, most consumers probably couldn’t say where their food came from. This usually boils down to the fact that shoppers typically don’t think about it. Breaking this reliance on mass-grown foods is the second part of Pollan’s proposition. The third and equally important element is how the food is produced. More specifically, Pollan is concerned whether or not the food has been produced in a sustainable manner. Preserving the biodiversity of food, maintaining fertile land for future generations, and ensuring consumers receive food that does not compromise health are all factors of sustainability. Without informed consumers, what, where, and how will continue to be unanswered questions. Whether it is for nutritional or ethical choices, a particular food’s history is something that needs to once again become common

He advises us to eat only things our grandmother would recognize. Foods without any unpronounceable ingredients or high fructose corn syrup. He tells us to stop eating on the go or in front of a television. Pollan also warns us to beware the dangers of reductionist science, especially when it is applied to food. It is this part of Pollan's advice that I believe to be the most critical and informative much more than avoiding high fructose corn syrup or taking time with meals. It is the most challenging because it requires us to change the way we approach food. It requires a change not what loaf of bread we choose to buy or the places and time we spend eating, but a change in the way we think. It requires us to think in terms of relationships. But if we can start to discuss food and health concerns along with health care, environmental, and immigration issues, recognizing that they is a problem, maybe we can come closer to finding a

As a culture and as individuals, we no longer seem to know what we should and should not eat. When the old guides of culture and national cuisine and our mothers’ advice no longer seem to operate, the omnivore’s dilemma returns and you find yourself where we do today—utterly bewildered and conflicted about one of the most basic questions of human life: What should I eat? We’re buffeted by contradictory dietary advice: cut down on fats one decade, cut down on carbs the next. Every day’s newspaper brings news of another ideal diet, wonder-nutrient, or poison in the food chain. Hydrogenated vegetable oils go from being the modern alternatives to butter to a public health threat, just like that. Food marketers bombard us with messages that this or that food is “heart healthy” or is “part of a nutritious meal”. Without a stable culture of food to guide us, the omnivore’s dilemma has returned with a vengeance. We listen to scientists, to government guidelines, to package labels—to anything but our common sense and traditions. The most pleasurable of activities—eating—has become heavy with anxiety. The irony is, the more we worry about what we eat, the less healthy and fatter we seem to become.

Healthy, unhealthy, good food, bad food, fat, skinny, diet, weight: all these words have been used to define what society views as the key to a balanced or unbalanced life. In the essay, Food for Thought: Resisting the Moralization of Eating, Mary Maxfield takes a look into the stigma of eating habits, health, and dieting in western society. Maxfield supports her claims by analyzing and refuting Michael Pollan’s essay, Escape from the Western Diet. Although it is common knowledge that many people struggle to understand what is essentially “healthy” and “unhealthy”, there are many experts in the field of nutrition that claim to have the key to a perfect diet. Maxfield ultimately disclaims these ideas by bringing to light information that

Michael Pollan says in his argument that the western diet is chiefly to blame for a majority of health deceases, he says “the scientist who blame our health problems on defiances of these micronutrients are not the same scientist who see sugar-soaked diet leading to metabolic syndrome and from there to diabetes, heart deceases, and cancer” (421) Due to all this negative impact to our health Pollan says that the food industry needs new theories to better redesign processed food and the medical community to make new drugs to beget deceases.

In Michael Pollan’s essay, “The American Paradox”, Pollan argues that American’s hold falsified ideas if one is more focused on nutrition. Americans have too much going on in their head with trying to be healthy, that they do not actually become healthy. The notion that “a notably unhealthy population preoccupied with nutrition and the idea of eating healthy” (Pollan 268) is what Pollan defines as the “American paradox”. The amount of time spent focusing on healthy eating habits decreases the joy one contains. Pollan identifies many issues that contribute to what is wrong with the way Americans think about eating today. For instance, we spend too much time and money trying to be healthy, we have strayed away from the past as new inventions occurred and last being we listen to “flawed science”. Despite the fact that many may say they see positive results from focusing on nutrition and health, Americans actually receive negative outcomes from nutrition and health.

Take a gander around your local mega-mart today, and what do you see? An epidemic of food like substances taking over the supermarket shelves; an epidemic that has substituted real food for fake, shown links to obesity, and has altered our eating habits. There is, however, a solution that allows you to stick to the healthy foods you want to eat and avoid the foods you don’t.

At the same time, there are differences of opinions about what is considered to be healthy foods. This is because the Western diet is focused on serving limited amounts of nutrients that are laced with

Michael Pollan blames on food industry and medical industry for the diseases and unhealthy body. He says that the food industry is making new products which are all about processing the food and medical industry are also making new drugs to treat chronic diseases. I agree with Michael Pollan that, food Industry and is responsible for this because it make more processed food just to make money and to make publicity about their restaurants. “A hallmark of the Western diet is food that is fast, cheap, and easy.” This type of diet is becoming more and more common in America these days and it comes with consequences. If the food is cheap people will definitely buy it daily and that's how they spoil their

It’s no secret, Americans love their processed, energy-rich foods. And undeniably, this love affair has led to an obesity epidemic. In spite of the evidence against processed food, however, there are some who believe the problem may hold the key to the solution. David Freedman, author of “How Junk Food Could End Obesity,” criticizes Michael Pollan for his argument in support of unprocessed, local foods due its impracticality. Freedman’s criticism is based on the idea that “It makes a lot more sense to look for small, beneficial changes in food than it does to hold out for big changes in what people eat that have no realistic chance of happening” (Freedman Sec. 1). He contends that processed foods already play a big part in our diets, so instead of trying to expand the wholesome food business, we should try to make processed foods healthier. Freedman’s argument, however, overlooks many negative effects of processed foods and conventional farming. Michael Pollan’s wholesome food movements takes into account not only the obesity problem, but also the quality of the environment and the rights of farmers. Although Pollan’s solution to obesity may not seem the most efficient or time effective, the trades offs it provides in terms of environmental sustainability and the well-being of farmers outweigh the loss of efficiency.

The question of how to eat well, while maintaining good health has always been a big worry for Americans. The two articles I've reference call my gift to vastly opposing views all what "eating healthy "means and how we should be done. Wow pollan says that One should avoid processed foods and not over eat, Macksville points out that not eating is also Phaedo in that peoples will be able to eat healthy on their own given the chance. I have my own view on the debate that will probably be somewhere in the middle that you can probably can be done through many ways, and that one's health can be maintain and a variety of methods.

Nutrition science rather reductionist science is the study of micronutrients. Various curious nutritionists are conducting research so as to identify the probable nutrient due to which western diet is accused to be the source of chronic diseases. Michael Pollan explores different theories in an effort to resolve the issue. The western lifestyle has made it difficult to avoid intake of processed or industrialized food. The eating habits have significantly changed over the due course of time. Individuals maintaining a western diet are observed to be more prone to chronic disease than those who follow traditional diet. The key to healthy life is to create a filter against processed food, may it be meat or vegetables. A complete change in culture and adaptation of three rules will bring a dynamic change.