Saturday, July 25, 2009

Eaters of the World Unite!

So I just finished reading this book...

It fits into two new interests of mine; healthy eating and non-fiction. It got me pretty fired up. Poor W has born the brunt of it.

The book was In Defense of Food. It laid bare some very interesting points about the culture of eating we're caught up in today. Its killing us. Its really killing us. Due to modern medicine people today are dying less and less from infectious disease such as the bubonic plague or small pox but now we are dying of diet related illnesses: Obesity, diabetes, heart disease and cancer. Yuck right? These things can be hereditary but for the most part they are diet related. Is it a coincidence that these diseases have been on the rise ever since fast food, and processed food have taken the place of home cooking in our lives? I submit that it is not. Ever since we let the food industry, government , and Ronald McDonald tell us what to eat and kicked Mom out of the kitchen we've become the fattest and possibly the most unhealthy eaters in the world. Never before has such a well fed population been so malnourished. What a giant contradiction!

Why have we started listening to nutritionists and scientists to find out what we should eat when for thousands of years humans have flourished on trusting their own senses and eating what their mothers feed them? Why are we suckered into one eating fad after another? They tell us to eat a diet low in fat, low protein and high carb, then low carb and high protein, now antioxidants and omega 3s are all the rage. Could it be that scientists can't see the whole picture? Why do we keep trusting them when they are continually proving themselves wrong or at least finding out that they don't know as much as they thought they did.

So here's the skinny (pun!):

If it has a health claim on it you should avoid it. For real. Take margarine for example; when margarine hit the scene it was hailed as a miracle because it took the place of butter but cut out all the reasons butter is bad for us. Fast forward 30 years and scientists are finding that the heart attacks they thought margarine was saving you from its actually causing. Because, think about it this makes a lot of sense, once the "bad fats" that are in butter are eliminated they have to replace it with something else. This something else turns out to be something synthetic, man made. That's right, a man engineered fat that is far worse for you than the original fat (which actually turns out to be good for you) in butter. Whoops. How could the human body be expected to deal with something that doesn't occur in nature better than something its been eating forever. So really if it claims to be low or reduced fat...stay away from it...you're better off with whatever nature provides...

Which brings me to my next point. Fruits and veggies can't make health claims. The biggest sin we might be commiting in our diets today is the sin of omission. Vegetarians aren't healthier because meat is bad for you they are healthier because they eat more fruits and veggies. Our poor diets might be less the result of what we ARE eating but more a result of what we ARE NOT eating. If you've got a 12oz steak on your plate is there much room for anything else? Poor fruits and veggies can't wear shiny labels that say "Now with more vitamin C!" or something to that effect. A carrot is a carrot is a carrot and it will always be good for you.

So much of what we are eating is the result of clever marketing. The food business is just that: a business. They are not interested in your health they are interested in making a profit. And the worst part is is that not even the government is looking out for you! Companies will pay big bucks to get the FDA to label something or word something a certain way in their favor. When nutritionists found out that eating grains where good for us (duh!) Cold cereal makers hit the big time. Its all about money. And we fall for all of their marketing ploys.

Another thing that was startling to me is that today the average American is getting somewhere near 80% of their calories from only three sources: corn, wheat and soy. This is a scary thought when you consider we are omnivores. We require a diverse diet to get all of the nutrients we need. If it comes in a box or a bag you can count on it having one of those three grains in them. Yikes.

So how do we avoid all of the traps laid for us? Follow these simple rules:

1. Don't eat anything your great great grandmother wouldn't recognize as food. When I read this I thought of Cheetos. Would someone who hasn't been alive for the past twenty years know that a Cheeto was edible? I don't think so. The book cited Go-gurts. You could tell Grandma it was yogurt but if you look at the ingredients is it really just yogurt?

2.Which leads me to the next guideline: Don't eat anything packaged with more than 5 ingredients. Take bread for example. Bread is made from flour, yeast, water, salt, maybe some butter or oil. Next time you buy bread check out the ingredients label. What is all that stuff?!

3. Don't eat anything you can't pronounce. If you can't pronounce it you probably don't know what it is. If you don't know what it is how do you know its good for you?

4. Stop snacking. Its a lot of calories, a lot of food we don't need. Never sit down with a box or a bag.

5. Don't eat alone (if you can help it). One of the things that has changed dramatically from our greatgradmothers time is not just what we eat but HOW we eat. We eat increasingly on the run. In our cars...quickly in between tasks at work. Its not healthy. We're losing our food culture. And our society is suffering as a result. Think of all the things that are/can be/should be taught at a family dinner table. How many families really take that opportunity? Also if you don't eat alone you are more likely to be aware of how much you are eating because of those around you.

6. Cook more. The book pointed out that never before has a society spent so little time and so little money on what it eats. Think back 150 years ago. If providing food for yourself and your family wasn't your full time job (farming) it was the second most time consuming element in your day. By spending a little more time and a little more money everyday we will be eating healthier. If you cook for yourself you never have to wonder what's in what you're eating. After having a frustrating experience in the kitchen W asked me why I like to cook. I told him its because I like being able to enjoy (and have others enjoy) something I created. When put like that he could see how it could be rewarding. But besides work what should take up the most time in our day to day? Food of course! But does it? DOES IT?!

So that's it for the most part. I'll climb down from my soap box. Since reading the book I definitely haven't kept to these guidelines 100% but I am more aware of what I'm eating and that's the first step to being healthier.

Sorry my posts are so long. If I were you I don't know if I could make it :) Thanks for reading.

Saturday, July 4, 2009

An Open Mind

An Open Mind

Recently I had someone I care about tell me that it didn’t take him very long after meeting me to realize that I was a religious person. He worried that because he thought that I was religious there was a good chance that I would be close minded…

When did these two ideas become associated with each other?

And from what I understand about religion shouldn’t this be the other way around? I am religious therefore I am open-minded? Doesn’t someone believing in something greater than themselves, putting their trust and faith in something unseen, being humble enough to admit that they don’t know all the answers or have control over everything sound pretty open minded? Is this not a good description of a religious person?

For me, someone who can’t see beyond himself /herself or has to see something to believe it…that is a close-minded person.

What determines a religious person anyway? Their values? How much faith they exhibit? The ordinances they participate in? How often they go to church?

What’s funny is that before I moved away from Utah I never considered myself to be a religious person. I know that that sounds crazy to some people who know me but I really didn’t. If I imagine a friend describing me to someone it would go something like, “she’s kind of tall, likes to read, big family, doesn’t drink or swear, history major, teacher, makes a mean batch of muddy buddies…” but not “She’s religious.” Maybe it’s because the culture I come from is religious…I couldn’t see the forest for the trees or something. I’ve just always considered myself a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints but not a “religious person”. Once I moved away though I realized that I was unique. Not because I had a religion but because I was a DEVOUT member of that religion. I was surprised to learn that not everybody who is religious is devout.

So maybe I’m a devout person but not a religious one?

I try to be an obedient person. Maybe that’s what makes me religious. To me obedience isn’t and never will be a bad thing. I tend to cringe at the term “blind obedience” which is something that people of my faith are often accused of. Is it so hard to believe that I live my life a certain way because I KNOW it will make me happy? I don’t think that it might, or guess and cross my fingers, or (worst of all) ignorantly follow a kind, old, charismatic leader. I KNOW it’s right. And even if I don’t have a full understanding I have faith that someday I will. And I guess that’s what gets me about debates over issues where religion is on one side and “open-minded” people are on the other…I feel like non-religious people never take into consideration the fact that there is an element of faith to our reason. There is an unseen power that you can’t begin to understand unless you’ve felt it for yourself. And most critics of religion don’t take that into account let alone try to really understand it.

Religion doesn’t stick to tradition because its all that it knows and is scared to progress. Is it so hard to believe or consider that traditional values are good because they are founded on true principles? And its my humble opinion that in the scope of human history tradition often becomes progressive.

Truth is truth no matter where you encounter it. Its not right or wrong, good or bad. You can’t have an opinion on it, or make excuses for it. Its truth.

Maybe instead of open or close minded a more correct term in this situation would be tolerant or intolerant?

Last thing I want to say is that I know some really terrible things have been done in the name of religion. And that makes me sad because some things people do in the name of God I know God would never put his name on. Hatred, fear, violence, these are things God would never approve of let alone endorse. I believe He is incapable of such ugly feelings. He is by definition, love.

I asked a lot of questions in this post which may have seemed rhetorical. If you feel however that have the answers to some of the things I asked please way in.

Oh and once I saw a t-shirt that defined a liberal as someone so open minded their brain had fallen out. Harsh but clever!