|
It's
time to call bad foods bad
Nov. 29, 2007
Suzanne Havala Hobbs
It’s
one thing to say we should all eat more fruits and vegetables.
It’s quite another to say lay off the sausage biscuits.
Government-sponsored studies of people’s reactions to
dietary recommendations such as “eat less sugar”
or “choose more fiber-rich foods” suggest that
most of us want, and need, more specific advice about which
foods we should eat more of and which we should avoid. People
want nutritionists to name names. Specific advice often meets
resistance, though. Label any food “bad” and somebody
is likely to lose, whether a business with a financial interest
or any of us who have an emotional attachment to a favorite
food.
Last month, I described a new report, Food, Nutrition, Physical
Activity, and the Prevention of Cancer: A Global Perspective,
published jointly by the World Cancer Research Fund and the
American Institute for Cancer Research. The report said red
meat and processed meats “are convincing or probable
causes” of cancer and advised us to rarely or never
eat processed meats such as sausage, bacon, and smoked or
cured meats.
That drew this response from a reader:
“Surely people in Germany have been eating sausage for
years and are still healthy. My paternal grandfather was born
in Germany and immigrated to the U.S. He ate sausage quite
regularly and lived to be 93. I eat sausage in moderation
and, although on cholesterol meds, my cholesterol levels are
perfect.”
This reader’s comments are a good illustration of several
important points to consider when we talk about dietary advice:
* Recommendations are for populations. Dietary advice given
out to entire groups of people – including that dispensed
in the WCRF/AICR report or by the U.S. government –
are general in nature. For large groups of people, the information
is true, but there can be exceptions on the individual level.
For each of us, advice meant for populations is a good place
to start when making food choices. Beyond that, advice needs
to be tailored for individuals, taking into consideration
individual risk factors for disease. (Your physician or dietitian
can help you with that.) Grandpa may have lived to be 93,
and you may have inherited his genes. Or not.
* Good genes are no guarantee. Whether or not we become obese
or develop coronary artery disease or cancer likely depends
upon the interplay of many factors and can be difficult to
predict. Grandpa lived in a different time, with different
lifestyle, activity and environmental factors that may have
influenced the expression of his genes. Our own experiences
may be different, and the outcomes may be different as a result.
* Health is a relative thing. You or I may be walking and
talking and feeling fine today, but the cumulative effect
of our lifestyle choices and other determinants of health
– some within our control and others not – may
not become apparent until years later. Doing what you can
to support health can help ensure as many disease- and disability-free
years as possible in late life.
And listen to nutritional mantras with a critical ear. One
of the most enduring – “There are no good foods
or bad foods” – came into being in the 1980s,
the brainchild of industry and industry-dominated professional
societies, such as the American Dietetic Association. Their
purpose was to squelch advice that singled out specific foods
for criticism.
It’s a simple, plain truth: There are foods that are
better for you than others. Broccoli is better for you than
ice cream. Beans are better than biscuits. There are even
foods that aren’t good for you in amounts commonly –
or moderately – eaten. Sausage, bologna, hot dogs, bacon
and hamburgers are examples.
If someone didn’t tell you, you might never know. That’s
why sometimes it’s necessary and appropriate to name
names.
|
