Now, keep up to date
with daily feeds of newly posted stories
about America's Seniors...click on the box
to the left
CAREGIVING RESOURCES FOR
CAREGIVERS, ELDERLY...IMPROVING THE QUALITY
OF LIFE AND EASING THE ROLE OF THE
CAREGIVER, CLICK HERE
An
'All Natural" Diet? There's no such thing,
book says
Newswise,
June 14, 2011-- From the paleolithic diet to
the raw food diet, many health-conscious
Americans now want to eat the way they
believe our ancient ancestors ate.
But some of these dietary prescriptions make
little sense for modern humans, according to
a new book on the evolution of the use of
food and eating habits among prehistoric
people.
While there is much we can learn from what
our ancestors ate, many of our more modern
foods and diets were developed for very good
reasons, said Kristen Gremillion, associate
professor of anthropology at Ohio State
University.
Gremillion is author of the new book
"Ancestral Appetites: Food in Prehistory"
(Cambridge University Press, 2011), which
explores how humans have adjusted the food
they eat and the way they prepare it in
response to new knowledge and new
environments.
“Humans are omnivores and we can eat a wide
range of things,” Gremillion said.
“Rather than try to base a healthy diet on
what we think people used to eat thousands
of years ago, it would probably make more
sense to look at our nutritional
requirements today and find the best way to
meet them.”
One issue that Gremillion has with many new
diet fads is the claim that they are somehow
more “natural” because they focus on a time
before modern culture spoiled our eating
habits.
“That time never existed,” Gremillion said.
“Human dietary behavior can’t be reduced
just to our biology. Culture has always
played a part in what we eat and how we eat
it. And people have always been innovating,
finding new foods to eat and new ways to
prepare them. There’s no way to say that
there’s only one way we are supposed to
eat.”
One popular diet today is the so-called
“paleo” or “paleolithic” diet, sometimes
also called the caveman diet. This diet is
based on what people ate before the
introduction of agriculture. There is an
emphasis on lean meats and fruits and
vegetables, and avoiding processed foods and
grains of all kinds.
Gremillion said the paleo diet is
scientifically based and a healthy way to
eat. But it is not somehow more natural than
other diets.
“It’s not unnatural for humans to eat
cereals and grains, despite what some people
may claim. Humans started agriculture
because it was difficult to get enough food
through hunting and gathering. Cereal grains
provided a stable source of calories,” she
said.
Cereal grains can’t be the sole basis of a
diet, but they can be part of healthy meals,
she said.
While the paleo diet does have a scientific
basis, Gremillion said the raw food diet
does not. This diet emphasizes getting most
calories from uncooked, unprocessed foods.
“There is not really anything to be gained
by eating only raw foods. We have been
cooking food for hundreds of thousands of
years,” she said.
While cooking does remove some nutrients
from foods, it also breaks down the
compounds in foods to make some nutrients
easier for our bodies to extract. In
addition, it is much easier on our teeth and
jaws than tearing and crushing hard and
fibrous foods.
“Cooking caught on for a reason, and there
is no real reason to give it up.”
The concern for returning to a more natural
state often involves not only what we eat,
but how and where we grow foods and
domesticate animals.
Much of Gremillion’s own research involves
the origins of agriculture in eastern North
America, and how the early peoples in North
America interacted with the environment.
“There’s been a tendency in American culture
to think the pristine wilderness is somehow
totally separate from people. But it is a
misconception that the landscapes we want to
bring back were untouched by people,” she
said.
Humans have been managing the environment in
North America from the moment they stepped
foot on the continent, she said. One of the
earliest ways Native Americans managed the
environment was through the use of fire to
clear areas for their use. Later on, they
also adopted small-scale agriculture.
Since their numbers were small, their
overall impact on the landscape was limited,
according to Gremillion. They probably
realized they had to protect the environment
to a certain extent, so it would be
available to their children and
grandchildren.
“But it was not just a spiritual attachment
to nature. It was a practical way to live
off the land,” she said.
Gremillion said that in everything related
to eating – from what foods we eat, to how
we grow it to how we prepare it – there is
no one natural way.
“Humans are flexible. That’s what we do
better than any other animal, and that means
we can adapt to conditions, she said.
“There’s not some natural way to eat that we
need to get back to. Culture informs
everything we do.”
... ..
...
...