|
Weighing
the morality of your meal
August 10, 2006
Suzanne Havala Hobbs
What
goes into your food choices?
For most of us, things like flavor, texture, appearance, cost
and nutritional value factor big into what we order at restaurants
or put on our tables at home. Convenience and tradition are
important, too.
But some people also think about the moral or ethical implications
of what they eat.
Two new books explore diet from a philosophical viewpoint.
They come from different perspectives but arrive at similar
conclusions about what we should – and should not –
eat.
“The Hallelujah Diet” by Shelby, N.C.- based Rev.
George Malkmus has as its foundation an eating style fashioned
after the author’s interpretation of what the Bible
says we should eat. Malkmus runs Hallelujah Acres, a Christian
ministry that advocates a raw foods, strict vegetarian diet
for the treatment and prevention of chronic diseases and other
conditions.
That means most of the foods on the diet are eaten in their
natural, uncooked state, and meat is off the menu.
“I rejected the world’s way and went God’s
way,” said Malkmus in a statement accompanying the release
of his book. “I turned to the Bible, adopted God’s
original diet found in Genesis 1:29.”
Malkmus attributes his recovery from colon cancer in 1976
to his plant-based diet. His program grew out of a restaurant
and health food store he opened in 1992, which has since evolved
into a lifestyle center that includes on-site seminars, cooking
classes, a walking trail, café, organic garden and
greenhouse. Information about Hallelujah Acres can be found
online at http://www.hacres.com.
A second new book takes an even broader view of the moral
implications of food choices.
In “The Way We Eat: Why Our Food Choices Matter,”
Princeton University ethicist Peter Singer and Jim Mason,
an attorney and animal rights activist, examine the differing
lifestyles and eating habits of three typical American families.
Drawn from these examples, Singer and Mason analyze and discuss
a wide range of issues including the working conditions in
food processing plants, the consequences of buying locally
grown foods, the meaning of such terms as “certified
humane” and the health and nutritional aspects of raising
children on a vegan diet.
Given the ethical ramifications of our food choices, the authors
propose a set of principles for readers to consider in deciding
what to feed their families and themselves.
What these two books share in common, in addition to a focus
on the moral implications of food choices, is an emphasis
on a diet based on foods of plant origin – grains, fruits,
vegetables, legumes, seeds and nuts. Fortunately, the authors’
conclusions about ethical food choices are generally consistent
with what science tells us is good to eat. There is scientific
consensus that plant-based diets, including vegetarian and
even vegan, or strict vegetarian, diets protect health.
However, two studies of the raw food, strict vegetarian diet
advocated by Malkmus suggest the diet may be inadequate in
vitamin B12 unless supplements are taken. (More research is
needed, and anyone considering eating a raw foods, vegan diet
longterm should get diet counseling from a registered dietitian
to ensure nutritional adequacy.)
History is full of examples of people who considered the ethics
of what they ate.
Mahatma Ghandi said, "The greatness of a nation and its
moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated."
Thomas Edison: “Non-violence leads to the highest ethics,
which is the goal of all evolution. Until we stop harming
all other living beings, we are still savages.”
Most people seldom think about the ethical implications of
what’s for dinner. But if Malkmus, Singer and Mason
are any indication, for a growing number of people, moral
and ethical considerations may be becoming bigger factors
in determining what to eat.
|
