Ray Claude
Sun, Jul-04-04, 19:17
This is the third part of Eating: A Matter Gone Awry (Ray
Claude, Copyright
2004). I am not familiar with the protocol of Newsgroups, but
it is my impression that it is not a proper medium for
long monologue; hence my procedure.
CHAPTER 2
RECOGNIZING ABSURD AND FALSE CLAIMS
If we are to become adept at recognizing absurdity, emptiness,
and falsity in claims being made for nutrition or nourishment,
we must work from a sound basis. Much of that basis lies in
the understanding that nourishment is the effect of one's
total intake and that such effect contributes or detracts from
the eater's well-being according to the manner in which one's
total intake meets the individual's unvoiced but unmistakable
demands for nourishment. We will add other insights as their
need becomes evident.
TOTAL INTAKE AND ITS EVALUATION
We have indicated that the qualities of one's total intake
determine how well he gains and maintains a state of
well-being. We need to consider how we might assess those
qualities and thereby determine whether our intake is
compatible with our demands. We must begin by describing
demands in considerable detail. The description must identify
the nutrients that are demanded and the quantity by which each
is demanded. Although nutritionists are still wrestling with
certain details of this task, enough has been done to provide
us with a quite excellent description of demands. We as
individual eaters don't have to repeat their effort.
Given a description of demands, we must continue our quest by
calculating the total amounts of (at least) the most critical
of the nutrients provided by that intake. We will need two
categories of information. First, we need a complete record of
intake. The record must identify the foodstuffs that comprised
the intake and indicate the amount by which each was consumed.
Second, we need to identify the nutrients provided by each of
those foodstuffs and the quantity provided by each. Again,
although nutritionists have yet to complete such
identification and measurements, they have provided enough
data to assure that we can evaluate our total intake and
predict its effect on our well-being with a great deal of
confidence.
So far, we have identified three aspects of evaluating intake.
We need detailed information on the body's demands for
nourishment. We need detailed information regarding our
consumption of foodstuffs and regarding the amount of each
going into our total intake. We need detailed information on
the nutrients provided by the foodstuffs we consume. The
nutritionist fills two of these needs. We must do the rest
ourselves.
We need to step back a moment at this point. By now, you are
probably greatly surprised or dismayed at the possible
magnitude of the effort associated with evaluation. A certain
degree of skepticism and dread on your part is justified. Not
to worry. There yet remains a middle ground. We will get to
that, but we need to first consider other aspects of the
evaluation problem.
The advantage of at least limited evaluation and control was
recognized gradually, probably beginning with early
discoveries that certain foodstuffs were effective in fighting
certain maladies. An example is the classic insight on the
benefit of vitamin C in holding off scurvy. The gaining of
other insights and formulation of numerical data led to
comprehensive 'catalogs' of foodstuffs and their nutrients in
the latter half of the 20th century. At that time, it was
expected that the data would be put to use to assure that
nominal aspects of nourishment could be addressed with
confidence. The catalog's most frequent user was the
dietician.
Unfortunately, the catalog has, over time, become critical in
another, more insidious aspect, one that is anything but
nominal. Since the last major update of the catalog's content,
we have added many new foodstuffs. We have added many new
ingredients to foodstuffs. Many of the ingredients have
characteristics not accompanied by reliable data. In effect,
we can no longer be quite certain of what we are eating. To
such extent, we can no longer be quite certain of the manner
by which modern intake meets human demands for nourishment.
In spite of such difficulty, there are those of us who do
quite well. They present a picture of well-being. They lead
vigorous, productive lives. (Among this group, however, is a
segment whose well-being is being played out, as though they
are on the far end of a burning fuse. The ability of the body
to tolerate certain undesirable features of intake for
indefinite periods will be brought up in a discussion to
follow.) The rest of us seem to be subject to malady too
often, to lack the energy to pursue our daily routine, to not
be ready to exercise our libido, or a hundred other
complaints, some specific, some not. Until reliable data is
forthcoming, the only solution available to this group lies in
consumption of only foodstuffs already having such data. (This
solution is equally appropriate also for those who merely
tolerate adverse intake in the interim available to them.)
There are two approaches to the matter of restricting intake
according to data reliability. We can continue to eat much as
we have been wont to do except for revising our selections to
minimize intake of those having unknown characteristics. In
such procedure, we would do well to honor also some
time-honored precepts on eating. We would likely do quite
well. Or, having made such revision, we can choose to evaluate
our new intake package. This will allow us to fine-tune our
intake and in that way gain fuller confidence that our actions
will indeed be propitious to our well-being.
Choice remains. One eater will discount the significance of
the unknown elements of modern intake and thereby justify his
present course. Another will escape the unknown aspects of his
intake by abandoning offending foodstuffs. This eater might
wish to evaluate his intake or not, according to his desire
for certainty. Do not make your own decision until you have
finished reading. Whatever your decision, you will benefit by
being able to distinguish nonsensical claims from sensible,
rational advice.
EXAMINING CLAIMS IN THE LIGHT OF TOTAL INTAKE
A POSITION FROM WHICH MERITS OF CLAIMS CAN BE ASSESSED
We can now move on to discussion of a sound position from
which we can recognize absurdity, nonsense, and falsity as
mentioned at the head of the chapter. We begin by collecting
already-discussed key facts, facts ultimately related to
total intake.
Both quantitative and qualitative aspects of total intake must
be considered to make determination of that intake's worth
relative to meeting an individual's demands for nourishment.
The degree to which total intake meets an individual's demands
for nourishment can not be evaluated without reliable data
from the field of nutrition.
The degree to which total intake meets an individual's demands
for nourishment can not be evaluated without an accurate
record of the foodstuffs comprising intake.
[The need to make repeated use of the word total is an
indication that the matter of nourishment and its evaluation
are properly matters of holistic consideration and procedure.
The field of nutrition (by necessity, not solely concerned
with total intake) is not so wholly bound to holistic
considerations. This is another important distinction between
study and application (nutrition and nourishment).]
CLAIMS AND THEIR MERITS
In the presentation that follows, often-heard advice and
claims for nutrition and nourishment are expressed within
quotation marks. Each claim or claim pair is followed by
discussion of merits.
"Eat more of this. It will give you a lot of energy."
This tidbit, innocent or not, is a criticism of your intake.
Unless its source has detailed knowledge of your total
intake, it can have no valid relation to your well-being. If
heeded, the suggestion might even be debilitating. When made
without the necessary insight, such statements are wholly
without merit.
"Eat this. It is a nutritious foodstuff."
This is little different from the first claim. However, it
uses a common, seemingly innocent phrase: nutritious
foodstuff, one deserving separate consideration here. It is
among the most misleading of all among those that bombard our
senses. What could be better than a nutritious foodstuff,
especially if it is tasty? Plenty, depending on which of two
definitions you use. One, the definition advertisers want you
to use, suggests that the foodstuff is nutrient-laden and that
you should eat it without question. The other, the definition
favorable to the eater's interests, suggests that the
foodstuff's nutrients (rich or not) might contribute favorably
to the eater' s total intake. Thus, if your total intake
already supplies the nutrients in question in their needed
quantities, the foodstuff is of no value to you. Consideration
of the eater's definition makes it apparent that a given
foodstuff might be seen as highly nutritious by one eater,
moderately nutritious by another, and categorically nutritious
to none. The claim is often an empty one. It is never
categorically valid.
Such consideration makes it clear also that there is no proper
basis by which a caterer (including the restaurateur) can
claim that their offerings are unqualifiedly nutritious. (This
is not to say that we should not go out to eat. Instead, the
eater needs to recognize that it is his responsibility to
consider how his selections contribute to his total intake.)
The author regards that, given the unavoidable need to
consider total intake when looking into the matter of personal
nourishment, the term nutritious lacks practical value except
when describing a specific case.
Claude, Copyright
2004). I am not familiar with the protocol of Newsgroups, but
it is my impression that it is not a proper medium for
long monologue; hence my procedure.
CHAPTER 2
RECOGNIZING ABSURD AND FALSE CLAIMS
If we are to become adept at recognizing absurdity, emptiness,
and falsity in claims being made for nutrition or nourishment,
we must work from a sound basis. Much of that basis lies in
the understanding that nourishment is the effect of one's
total intake and that such effect contributes or detracts from
the eater's well-being according to the manner in which one's
total intake meets the individual's unvoiced but unmistakable
demands for nourishment. We will add other insights as their
need becomes evident.
TOTAL INTAKE AND ITS EVALUATION
We have indicated that the qualities of one's total intake
determine how well he gains and maintains a state of
well-being. We need to consider how we might assess those
qualities and thereby determine whether our intake is
compatible with our demands. We must begin by describing
demands in considerable detail. The description must identify
the nutrients that are demanded and the quantity by which each
is demanded. Although nutritionists are still wrestling with
certain details of this task, enough has been done to provide
us with a quite excellent description of demands. We as
individual eaters don't have to repeat their effort.
Given a description of demands, we must continue our quest by
calculating the total amounts of (at least) the most critical
of the nutrients provided by that intake. We will need two
categories of information. First, we need a complete record of
intake. The record must identify the foodstuffs that comprised
the intake and indicate the amount by which each was consumed.
Second, we need to identify the nutrients provided by each of
those foodstuffs and the quantity provided by each. Again,
although nutritionists have yet to complete such
identification and measurements, they have provided enough
data to assure that we can evaluate our total intake and
predict its effect on our well-being with a great deal of
confidence.
So far, we have identified three aspects of evaluating intake.
We need detailed information on the body's demands for
nourishment. We need detailed information regarding our
consumption of foodstuffs and regarding the amount of each
going into our total intake. We need detailed information on
the nutrients provided by the foodstuffs we consume. The
nutritionist fills two of these needs. We must do the rest
ourselves.
We need to step back a moment at this point. By now, you are
probably greatly surprised or dismayed at the possible
magnitude of the effort associated with evaluation. A certain
degree of skepticism and dread on your part is justified. Not
to worry. There yet remains a middle ground. We will get to
that, but we need to first consider other aspects of the
evaluation problem.
The advantage of at least limited evaluation and control was
recognized gradually, probably beginning with early
discoveries that certain foodstuffs were effective in fighting
certain maladies. An example is the classic insight on the
benefit of vitamin C in holding off scurvy. The gaining of
other insights and formulation of numerical data led to
comprehensive 'catalogs' of foodstuffs and their nutrients in
the latter half of the 20th century. At that time, it was
expected that the data would be put to use to assure that
nominal aspects of nourishment could be addressed with
confidence. The catalog's most frequent user was the
dietician.
Unfortunately, the catalog has, over time, become critical in
another, more insidious aspect, one that is anything but
nominal. Since the last major update of the catalog's content,
we have added many new foodstuffs. We have added many new
ingredients to foodstuffs. Many of the ingredients have
characteristics not accompanied by reliable data. In effect,
we can no longer be quite certain of what we are eating. To
such extent, we can no longer be quite certain of the manner
by which modern intake meets human demands for nourishment.
In spite of such difficulty, there are those of us who do
quite well. They present a picture of well-being. They lead
vigorous, productive lives. (Among this group, however, is a
segment whose well-being is being played out, as though they
are on the far end of a burning fuse. The ability of the body
to tolerate certain undesirable features of intake for
indefinite periods will be brought up in a discussion to
follow.) The rest of us seem to be subject to malady too
often, to lack the energy to pursue our daily routine, to not
be ready to exercise our libido, or a hundred other
complaints, some specific, some not. Until reliable data is
forthcoming, the only solution available to this group lies in
consumption of only foodstuffs already having such data. (This
solution is equally appropriate also for those who merely
tolerate adverse intake in the interim available to them.)
There are two approaches to the matter of restricting intake
according to data reliability. We can continue to eat much as
we have been wont to do except for revising our selections to
minimize intake of those having unknown characteristics. In
such procedure, we would do well to honor also some
time-honored precepts on eating. We would likely do quite
well. Or, having made such revision, we can choose to evaluate
our new intake package. This will allow us to fine-tune our
intake and in that way gain fuller confidence that our actions
will indeed be propitious to our well-being.
Choice remains. One eater will discount the significance of
the unknown elements of modern intake and thereby justify his
present course. Another will escape the unknown aspects of his
intake by abandoning offending foodstuffs. This eater might
wish to evaluate his intake or not, according to his desire
for certainty. Do not make your own decision until you have
finished reading. Whatever your decision, you will benefit by
being able to distinguish nonsensical claims from sensible,
rational advice.
EXAMINING CLAIMS IN THE LIGHT OF TOTAL INTAKE
A POSITION FROM WHICH MERITS OF CLAIMS CAN BE ASSESSED
We can now move on to discussion of a sound position from
which we can recognize absurdity, nonsense, and falsity as
mentioned at the head of the chapter. We begin by collecting
already-discussed key facts, facts ultimately related to
total intake.
Both quantitative and qualitative aspects of total intake must
be considered to make determination of that intake's worth
relative to meeting an individual's demands for nourishment.
The degree to which total intake meets an individual's demands
for nourishment can not be evaluated without reliable data
from the field of nutrition.
The degree to which total intake meets an individual's demands
for nourishment can not be evaluated without an accurate
record of the foodstuffs comprising intake.
[The need to make repeated use of the word total is an
indication that the matter of nourishment and its evaluation
are properly matters of holistic consideration and procedure.
The field of nutrition (by necessity, not solely concerned
with total intake) is not so wholly bound to holistic
considerations. This is another important distinction between
study and application (nutrition and nourishment).]
CLAIMS AND THEIR MERITS
In the presentation that follows, often-heard advice and
claims for nutrition and nourishment are expressed within
quotation marks. Each claim or claim pair is followed by
discussion of merits.
"Eat more of this. It will give you a lot of energy."
This tidbit, innocent or not, is a criticism of your intake.
Unless its source has detailed knowledge of your total
intake, it can have no valid relation to your well-being. If
heeded, the suggestion might even be debilitating. When made
without the necessary insight, such statements are wholly
without merit.
"Eat this. It is a nutritious foodstuff."
This is little different from the first claim. However, it
uses a common, seemingly innocent phrase: nutritious
foodstuff, one deserving separate consideration here. It is
among the most misleading of all among those that bombard our
senses. What could be better than a nutritious foodstuff,
especially if it is tasty? Plenty, depending on which of two
definitions you use. One, the definition advertisers want you
to use, suggests that the foodstuff is nutrient-laden and that
you should eat it without question. The other, the definition
favorable to the eater's interests, suggests that the
foodstuff's nutrients (rich or not) might contribute favorably
to the eater' s total intake. Thus, if your total intake
already supplies the nutrients in question in their needed
quantities, the foodstuff is of no value to you. Consideration
of the eater's definition makes it apparent that a given
foodstuff might be seen as highly nutritious by one eater,
moderately nutritious by another, and categorically nutritious
to none. The claim is often an empty one. It is never
categorically valid.
Such consideration makes it clear also that there is no proper
basis by which a caterer (including the restaurateur) can
claim that their offerings are unqualifiedly nutritious. (This
is not to say that we should not go out to eat. Instead, the
eater needs to recognize that it is his responsibility to
consider how his selections contribute to his total intake.)
The author regards that, given the unavoidable need to
consider total intake when looking into the matter of personal
nourishment, the term nutritious lacks practical value except
when describing a specific case.