As far as we Know (Blog Post #4)

Michael Pollan summarized his new book In defense of food in the first line of text, “Eat food. Not too much. Mostly plants” (1). After reading this line and the rest of the first page it seems that there would be no reason to read the remaining 244 pages of this book. He has told the reader what his points are and some brief reasoning. However, if you do continue past the first page you will find that what you thought the first few lines meant at the beginning is nowhere close to what they mean at the end of the book. In between the beginning and the end of this interesting book Pollan argues that in the last half of the 20th century mankind depreciated the value of what he calls natural foods and instead emphasized more on creating foods that have better nutritional value, last longer on the store shelves, and make us healthier . He continues to state that this change has brought a rise to the age of nutritionism and the “western diet” which has caused unforeseen health consequences that are very common today.

No one likes to be told that what they know is all wrong, especially in a way that that is bewildering and sometimes sarcastic. And that is exactly what Pollan does almost every page of his book. Pollan tears apart what we believe today are the common causes of obesity, heart problems, and overall health and uses specific parts of new research to disprove them. Pollan’s literary technique for disproving facts is quite common. He states what a previous study concluded compared with a new study that disproves the old study. In most cases this is an effective argument of basic logic; however Pollan’s facts are continuously drawn under fire throughout the entire book. The questionable integrity of his facts mostly stem from the fragility of the studies he presents.

Because many of the studies he presents occurred within the last ten year most of the information is not completely understood and Pollan acknowledges this fact many times. For example when talking about meat based diets and how they affect the heart he states at the end of the argument, “We just don’t know”(68) . While I commend him on being honest about the lack of understanding, he is his own worst enemy. It is quite ironic that what he is trying to disprove is misunderstood and he is using new misunderstood science to prove it wrong. This works against his credibility in the book and ultimately undermines his whole argument. What Pollan really needed to do to disprove these food mysteries was find a solid piece of evidence that can connect most of the questions, a sort of theory of relativity for food or put simply, the bigger picture.

Throughout the book Pollan mentions that the problem with food theory and nutrients is that you have to study it using scientific reductionism. He states that “[Scientific reductionism] is an undeniably powerful tool, but it can mislead us too…”(62). Not only does this call in to question yet again the foundation of some of his scientific facts, but also calls for an investigation into possible other related matters. Pollan fails to include facts about exercise, lifestyles, or even genetics when talking about the western diet and how it makes us sick. These are the things that health teachers and researchers have been telling us for a long time are important factors to having good health. Not including an analysis of this makes it seem like Pollan is trying to hide something, or infer that he has not thought his theory through.

While substance to an argument is important, the way you present is almost equally so. Overall In defense of Food was an easy read. Pollan for the most part used basic words with a few of unfamiliar words scattered around the pages. Most of these unfamiliar words were the names of the nutrients or food additives. Even with such basic words and structure Pollan is able to create an engaging curiosity of food through the ease of read and logical flow of ideas. Although the pace of reading is sometimes held up by bewildering scientific facts, the parts in between are quite entertaining.

Pollan is no doubt a good author. His inquisitive nature creates the foundation of a great and engaging book; however the undermining credibility of his scientific facts works against him. Missing related health topic such as lifestyles and exercise also contribute to his questionable knowledge on the topic. It reminds the reader that the man behind the book is merely an author and not a scientist. While the parts in between the scientific arguments are quite entertaining but it does not fix the fact that this book’s content is only speculation into a field that is filled with uncertainty and what ifs.


Work Citied:
Pollan, Michael. In Defense of Food. New York: Penguin Books, 2008. Print.