VERY good question and believe me, I have wondered that many times. It already starts with Vitamin supplements. There is a lot of talk about 'having' to take them to make you 'FEEL BETTER'...some claim that they have no value. I guess it is like this with the food industry too. Every one is different and what is good for one may not neccessarily be good for the other, hence so many BAD reaction to GOOD food. Like you, I personally stick to my Organic fruit and vegetables, also to my waterfilter and meat free diet as I do believe that we are what we eat and that is the DNA of what we consume.....

 

viola www.dare2baware.com www.shamanicjourney.com www.home-schooling-uk.com www.fun-tavels.com

Why take dietary advice from a sociologist? 

 All you have to do to prove that the standard American diet full of processed foods matched with the sedentary lifestyle many of us lead (I'm as guilty as the next person) is unhealthy is to look around at all of the unfit people. 

 

I think that eating and living healthfully isn't about extending your life---when your number's up, your number's up.  It's about the QUALITY of life while you're living!  This book, as well as the recent study reported in LIME about antioxidants not making you live longer, is meaningless.  You can eat crap and feel crappy and look terrible, or you can make healthful lifestyle choices and look and feel great.  That has already been proven.  Life expectancy is a different matter, relating more to metaphysical and spiritual issues.  Living healthfully simply affects how you want to experience your life, however long---or short--it lasts.

Well I've been seeing the teeter tottering of messages like this for as long as I can remember. But as the old saying goes, "the proof is in the pudding" (no food pun intended ). I've basically have adopted the practice of seeing how people around me- family members, close friends, people I work closely with, etc.- tend to feel (physically, spiritually, mentally). We often share what's happening in our lives, thus we are able to make practical choices based not only on what we read or hear on the news, but also about what our personal experiences teach us. 

As I am studying to be one, I believe the nutritionists who teach people how to feed their individual bodies.  There's no right way for everyone.

I think it's better to eat organic fruits and veggies, grass-fed milk and meat, wild fish, whole grains, and very little processed foods.

The best is advice is to stop listening to the mass media.  The FDA and the federal government are in the pocket of BIG BUSINESS.  They will never tell us the truth.

Read www.newstarget.com and the daily NewsTarget Insider as well as Dr. Mercola for the real truth about what to eat and what to eat.

Mercola is trying to make money from the products that he sells but he's honest and tells you like it is.

 

Suz

Why take a chance with not eating healthy and than hear years later that the research was wrong.  By then it will be a little too late. I am getting very confused as well with all the information coming at us.  I try and go by common sense.  If it makes me feel better and usually healthy produce does, I will continue to eat it.  I do think you are what you eat.  On this subject, I am going on faith.

I remember, only too well, when my dad developed sudden health issues in the mid-sixties and was ordered to lose weight immediately.  He was, and still is, a 'dairy pig', loving all things made with cows' milk.  As a result of his health crisis, he switched from whole milk to 2% and then to nonfat milk, and cut down on his meat portion size.  He also switched from eating butter to margarine - and replaced saturated fat with trans fats, which we now know probably didn't help anything.  My mother embraced the dietary changes, as we all did, and had elevated cholesterol issues to go with it, along with an allergy to caesin that didn't help.

 

My point is that nutritional information seems to "loop".  I vividly remember the "no fat, no fat of any description!" edicts of the 80's, the "gospel according to oat bran" of the 90's and, of course, the "apples are bad for you" advice of the extremist Atkins diet proponents.  For an author to say that it's all pretty much useless information might not be too much of an exaggeration as far as food nutrition goes.  Additives, preservatives and unnaturally processed ingredients are, though, a different issue, as far as I can tell.

 I try to buy organic *and* locally produced food whenever I can.  While I cannot vouch for its added nutritional value, I am purchasing organic produce more for what it *doesn't* contain:  the pesticides, herbicides, chemical residues and, in the case of buying local foods, the larger cost to the environment in terms of carbon dioxide produced from shipping over distance.  I can, however, vouch for added flavour; I have found that organic foods taste better - more like what they are supposed to be.  I also try to avoid, whenever possible, additions of trans fats, HFCS and hormones/antibiotics to foods.  I just don't see how they can be beneficial for my health.  I am willing to pay more for the products, and, in turn, this might help because I end up eating less of foods, such as beef, that aren't beneficial in large quantities.

So... I would like to read the book, because it does become confusing and almost demoralizing to try to include what is touted as "good for you" and omit everything that is "bad for you" from a daily diet.  I shall, however, continue to avoid artificially derived ingredients and opt for those whole, single ingredient choices - produced ethically - whenever possible.

Blessings,

Magistra

I do believe that food manufacturers have jumped on the bandwagon and I can't help but wonder if "green" is being used to make green.  That is one thing that I do agree with in his article.