I disagree with Pollen’s argument. Just because a food has been processed, it doesn’t mean that it is no longer healthy. To prove my point, let us think about one of the most processed products that people consume. Vitamins. They literally are made by removing the “healthy” parts from multiple ingredients and smashing them together to form one small highly processed pill. For generations people have been consuming vitamins, and the majority of people who do are children. What evidence can Pollen possibly provide that would show us that these processed packets of nutrition actually make us fatter, sicker, and more poorly nourished?
Throughout his book, Pollen tries to convince us that we have been deceived. He tries to make us believe that food with labels, such as low fat, are actually less healthy for us. He tries to make us feel cheated. Why would he spend so much time in his book making us angry? He does it because he knows that he does not have evidence or facts that would change peoples’ minds about what they eat. However, if he can make them think with their emotions instead of reason, then he has a chance. What he lacks in proof, he makes up for with pure deception.
It is human instinct to want to blame someone else for our problems. Pollen plays off this natural human emotion. He starts by making you think that your health problems are caused by someone else instead of your own decisions. Since he has told you something that you instinctually want to hear, you are now more likely to believe all of what he has to say and ignore the holes in his argument.
In Defense of Food by Michael Pollen offers its readers twisted facts, evidence taken out of context, and radical opinions. What it does not offer its readers is believable support for its arguments, unbiased observations, and most importantly, an actual, attainable solution to the nutritional crisis he claims is happening.
Is the “western diet” a serious health concern? I don’t think so. But that is also just an opinion. Can I prove with science and studies and facts that I am one hundred percent correct with this assumption? Of course not. There are too many variables for anyone to know for sure either way. Even though he tries to convince us otherwise, Pollen is no different. He does not know if what he claims is certain, undeniable fact. We must remember this when we read anything that tries to convince us that our eating habits are wrong. It is up to you to make your own decision about the way you eat. But do you want to believe someone who uses deception more readily than facts?
Pollen’s arguments are wrong. But I will take one piece of his advice. Don’t always believe what you read when it comes to food. I will take this to heart, starting with In Defense of Food by Michael Pollen.
Michael Pollan is too extreme. I guess most people would believe some of his suggestions are reasonable, but whether follow them or not is a totally different story. Although we know what is right, we sometimes just can help but to do the wrong things like eating fast food.
ReplyDelete