Ariel

 Horton  
HLTH  1020  

Nutrition  Perspectives  Paper  

 
In  Defense  of  Food:  An  Eater’s  Manifesto  
By  Michael  Pollan  
 
       The  book  I  chose  to  read  and  report  on  was  In  Defense  of  Food:  An  Eater’s  
Manifesto,  by  Michael  Pollan.  I  chose  this  book  because  of  the  reviews  I  read.  It  is  a  
highly  rated  book  according  to  Goodreads.com.  The  site  rates  it  as  a  4.08  out  of  5,  
based  on  over  93,000  ratings.  This,  I  figured,  was  a  good  indication  that  the  book  
would  be  both  interesting  and  highly  informative  (Goodreads,  2008).  The  New  York  
Times  calls  In  Defense  of  Food  “a  tough,  witty,  cogent  rebuttal  to  the  proposition  that  
food  can  be  reduced  to  its  nutritional  components  without  the  loss  of  something  
essential”  (Maslin,  2008).  The  main  point  of  the  book  is  described  in  one  line  as  “Eat  
food.  Not  too  much.  Mostly  plants  (Maslin,  2008).  I  was  intrigued  by  this  brief  
summary  because  this  is  an  idea  I  have  always  considered  to  be  true.  Of  course  we  
have  to  eat  food.  Eating  too  much  food  is  not  healthy.  And  plant-­‐based  foods,  I  
thought,  were  the  most  healthy.  I  was  excited  to  read  an  entire  book  based  off  
principles  I  already  considered  to  be  true,  hoping  to  gain  even  more  insight  into  the  
reasoning  behind  these  statements.  
       In  Defense  of  Food:  An  Eater’s  Manifesto  is  written  by  Michael  Pollan.  Pollan  
initially  wrote  an  essay  for  the  New  York  Times  Magazine,  refuting  some  of  the  day’s  
most  popular  nutritionist  viewpoints.  He  was  a  contributing  writer  for  the  New  York  
Times  Magazine  at  the  time  (Maslin,  2008).  In  his  book,  Pollan  points  out  the  
importance  of  journalists  in  the  popularization  and  publication  of  nutritional  facts  
and  recommendations.  Consequently  his  book  serves  as  its  own  example  of  this,  
since  he  is  making  his  opinion  and  nutritional  knowledge  available  to  the  public.  
Pollan  has  been  writing  nutritional  essays  and  books  for  over  30  years,  another  of  
which  is  the  best-­‐selling  “An  Omnivore’s  Dilemma,”  also  focused  on  nutrition.  While  
Pollan  has  a  Master’s  degree  in  English  and  has  won  several  awards  for  his  writing,  
he  really  does  not  have  any  formal  education  in  nutrition.  Keeping  this  in  mind,  it  
was  easy  to  see  that  In  Defense  of  Food:  An  Eater’s  Manifesto  was  purely  based  on  
his  opinion  and  personal  experience  with  the  nutrition  industry  (About  Michael  
 Ariel  Horton  
HLTH  1020  

Pollan).  He  does  however  provide  very  logical  arguments  in  his  book  and  explains  
his  ideas  in  a  clear  and  concise  manner  making  his  points  very  believable.    
       In  Defense  of  Food:  An  Eater’s  Manifesto  was  published  in  2008,  and  reflects  
viewpoints  concurrent  with  the  early  2000’s.  A  lot  of  the  main  nutritional  theories  
that  he  focuses  on  disproving  are  from  the  late  1900’s.  Reading  this  now,  over  10  
years  later,  it  is  easy  to  look  back  and  remember  those  popular  nutritional  theories  
and  see  how  they  have  continued  to  be  disproved  through  the  years.  I  think  this  
would  have  been  a  much  more  controversial  and  exciting  book  when  it  was  
published  in  2008  because  the  ideas  he  wrote  about  would  have  been  up-­‐and-­‐
coming  viewpoints.  Now  it  2019,  many  of  his  points  have  already  been  proved  and  
commonly  accepted  in  American  culture,  so  the  book  serves  more  as  an  overall  
explanation  of  how  these  ideas  first  popped  up.  For  example,  Pollan  spends  a  large  
section  of  the  book  devoted  to  disproving  the  theory  that  fat  is  bad  for  you.  He  
explains  how  in  the  late  1900’s  fat  got  a  bad  rap  from  the  nutritionists,  so  the  food  
scientists  started  developing  fat-­‐free  and  low-­‐fat  options.  He  points  out  that  fat  is  
not  in  fact  all  that  bad  for  you,  and  that  the  alternatives  may  be  worse.  His  text  
basically  raises  the  question:  which  is  worse?  eating  a  little  natural  fat  from  a  
naturally  raised  animal  source,  or  eating  twice  as  much  sugar  and  processed  carbs  
that  are  labeled  by  the  food  industry  as  low-­‐fat?  Looking  back  over  the  past  20  
years,  I  can  remember  a  timeline  of  how  fat  has  gone  from  a  bad  rap  to  being  more  
accepted  today.  When  I  was  younger,  the  media  was  all  about  publishing  how  bad  
fat  was  for  your  health.  I  remember  having  it  ingrained  into  my  nutritional  beliefs  
that  fatty  foods  made  you  overweight,  caused  cardiovascular  disease  and  all  sorts  of  
other  health  problems,  and  were  to  be  avoided  at  all  costs.  As  time  has  passed  
however,  fat  has  been  proved  to  be  essential  in  our  diet  and  not  as  bad  as  it  was  
made  out  to  be.  Most  recently  the  popular  nutritional  ideas  seems  to  be  that  sugar  is  
the  worst  food  component  out  there.  I  think  In  Defense  of  Food:  An  Eater’s  Manifesto  
is  a  little  outdated  today  simply  because  popular  beliefs  have  evolved  over  the  past  
10  years,  but  it  was  still  interesting  to  read  and  be  able  to  look  back  to  my  childhood  
and  connect  Pollan’s  writings  to  what  I  remember  learning  as  a  child.  
 Ariel  Horton  
HLTH  1020  

I  do  think  some  of  Pollan’s  themes  are  still  applicable  today.  He  makes  a  lot  of  
good  points  about  the  food  science  industry.  I  had  never  thought  about  the  purpose  
of  the  food  science  industry  being  monetary  gain  until  I  read  this  book.  Pollan  points  
out  that  their  main  purpose  in  developing  new  food  products  is  to  make  more  
money  while  still  remaining  within  the  FDA’s  requirements.  This  made  a  lot  of  sense  
when  I  read  it  and  I  believe  it  is  an  applicable  point  in  our  day  still.  As  with  any  
industry,  people’s  jobs  depend  on  the  new  products  created  and  marketed.  The  food  
science  industry  needs  to  label  their  new  creations  with  the  popular  health  
viewpoints  of  the  day  in  order  to  sell  them.  
In  Defense  of  Food:  An  Eater’s  Manifesto  has  a  couple  viewpoints  that  are  
different  from  the  textbook,  Wardlaw’s  Contemporary  Nutrition.  Both  viewpoints  
have  solid  reasoning  behind  them,  but  seem  to  be  differences  in  opinion.  For  
example,  Wardlaw’s  Contemporary  Nutrition  informs  us  that  we  should  limit  our  
intake  of  saturated  fat  to  only  10%  each  day  (Wardlaw,  pg  46).  In  Defense  of  Food  on  
the  other  hand,  explains  that  saturated  fats  are  not  as  bad  as  they’ve  been  made  out  
to  be.  Pollan  uses  the  example  of  Eskimo  cultures  who  eat  a  diet  almost  completely  
of  meat,  fish  and  whale  blubber  which  is  high  in  saturated  fat.  The  Eskimo  
population  had  a  much  lower  rate  of  heart  disease  and  other  health  problems  which  
are  quite  common  in  the  United  States,  despite  their  diet  high  in  saturated  fats.  
Pollan  explains  that  the  real  culprit  for  most  of  these  health  issues  is  trans  fat,  rather  
than  saturated  fat  (Pollan,  2008).    
However  a  lot  of  the  points  in  the  textbook  and  In  Defense  of  Food  are  similar.  
One  point  that  stood  out  to  me  from  both  books  is  the  idea  that  nutrients  are  not  as  
effective  when  removed  from  their  original  food  source.  Pollan  explains  in  his  book  
that  nutrients  must  be  considered  in  the  context  of  the  foods  they  are  found  in.  He  
explains  that  we  cannot  tell  exactly  how  a  specific  vitamin  affects  us  if  we  do  not  
also  consider  the  other  aspects  of  its  containing  food.  He  writes  about  the  changes  in  
nutrition  that  have  taken  place  due  to  the  industrial  era  and  the  refinement  of  foods.  
We  no  longer  get  vitamins  from  a  plant  which  was  grown  in  nutrient-­‐rich  soil  and  
picked  that  day  to  eat.  Our  food  is  often  harvested  before  it’s  ripe  (a  time  when  the  
vitamins  and  nutritional  content  of  the  food  hasn’t  yet  matured),  transported  and  
 Ariel  Horton  
HLTH  1020  

stored  for  weeks  on  end,  processed,  then  has  additional  vitamins  and  minerals  
added  to  replace  the  ones  that  were  removed.  These  added  vitamins  and  nutrients  
do  not  act  the  same  way  nature  intended  them  to,  working  as  a  whole  with  the  fiber  
and  other  parts  of  the  plant  from  which  they  came  (Pollan,  2008).  Wardlaw’s  
Contemporary  Nutrition  also  recommends  that  we  try  to  get  our  vitamins  and  other  
nutrients  directly  from  the  food  source  rather  than  from  vitamin  supplements.  
Although  vitamin  supplements  contain  the  vitamins  themselves,  they  do  not  act  in  
the  same  way  that  naturally  ingested  vitamins  do.  The  actual  foods  themselves  also  
contain  nutrients  such  as  phytochemicals  that  cannot  be  packaged  and  distributed  
in  pill  form  like  vitamins.  The  only  way  to  get  these  nutrients  is  by  eating  the  
original,  unprocessed  food  (Wardlaw,  pg  39).  
A  point  made  in  Pollan’s  book  In  Defense  of  Food  that  was  not  mentioned  in  
Wardlaw’s  Contemporary  Nutrition  is  how  the  health  of  the  entire  ecosystem  affects  
us.  Pollan  explains  how  nutrients  are  not  equally  present  in  all  foods  because  of  the  
way  in  which  the  food  was  grown  (Pollan,  2008).  I  will  list  two  examples  of  chicken  
breast  in  which  the  same  food  may  have  very  different  nutritional  content.  Example  
one  is  a  chicken  breast  that  was  removed  from  a  chicken  raised  in  a  natural  
environment.  The  chicken  was  free-­‐roaming  and  subsisted  off  grubs,  insects  and  
seeds  it  found  while  foraging.  The  grubs,  insects  and  seeds  all  grew  in  a  natural  
environment  with  plenty  of  sun,  nutrient-­‐rich  soil,  and  fresh  water.  Example  two  is  a  
chicken  breast  that  was  created  for  profit.  The  chicken  was  raised  in  a  cage,  never  
moving  more  than  a  few  inches  and  surrounded  by  sickness  which  spreads  rampant  
in  a  barn  filled  with  thousands  of  chickens  in  close  proximity  in  their  cages.  The  
chicken  was  treated  with  antibiotics  its  entire  life  in  order  to  reduce  loss  for  the  
farmer.  It  was  also  fed  specially  formulated  chicken  feed  which  was  designed  to  
make  it  gain  as  much  weight  as  possible  during  its  short  life.  The  chicken  feed  was  
grain-­‐based  and  processed  in  order  to  maintain  a  long  shelf  life.  The  chicken  was  
also  injected  with  hormones  regularly  in  order  to  make  it  grow  even  bigger.  Both  
chickens  were  eventually  slaughtered  and  their  meat  sold  as  chicken  breasts.  
Example  two  weighed  more  and  was  therefore  more  profitable  than  example  one.  
However  which  chicken  breast  do  you  think  contained  more  nutrients?  Pollan  
 Ariel  Horton  
HLTH  1020  

explains  that  we  need  to  focus  on  the  big  picture.  Even  though  both  chicken  breasts  
in  the  example  were  essentially  the  same  food,  they  will  have  very  different  
nutritional  contents.  This  is  also  the  reason  it  is  hard  to  count  nutritional  elements  
in  our  diet.  One  piece  of  food  may  contain  many  more  or  less  nutrient  levels  than  the  
same  type  of  food,  so  it  may  affect  a  person’s  body  in  a  very  different  way.  
I  learned  quite  a  bit  about  how  nutrients  work  together  and  how  important  it  
is  to  focus  on  food  as  a  whole,  rather  than  just  the  basic  building  block  nutrients.  I  
used  to  think  that  I  could  eat  whatever  I  wanted  and  then  take  a  multivitamin  every  
day.  After  reading  In  Defense  of  Food:  An  Eater’s  Manifesto,  I  now  see  food  in  a  
completely  different  way.  I  have  started  eating  more  fresh  fruits  and  vegetables  and  
trying  to  cut  down  on  the  processed  foods  I  eat.  I  hope  to  continue  this,  as  well  as  try  
to  make  more  food  from  scratch  rather  than  buy  processed  versions.  Hopefully  this  
will  allow  my  body  to  gain  the  nutrients  it  needs  in  a  more  effective  manner  and  will  
help  me  to  be  healthier  overall.  In  Defense  of  Food:  An  Eater’s  Manifesto  really  
opened  my  eyes  to  how  much  nutrition  and  food  itself  has  changed  over  the  last  
century,  and  how  much  it  affects  your  future  health.  
 
 
 
Works  Cited  
 
“About  Michael  Pollan.”  About  Michael  Pollan  «  Michael  Pollan,  
michaelpollan.com/about/.  
 
“In  Defense  of  Food:  An  Eater's  Manifesto  by  Michael  Pollan.”  Goodreads,  Goodreads,  
1  Jan.  2008,  www.goodreads.com/book/show/315425.In_Defense_of_Food.  
 
Maslin,  Janet.  “Book  Review:  'In  Defense  of  Food'.”  The  New  York  Times,  The  New  
York  Times,  3  Jan.  2008,  www.nytimes.com/2008/01/03/arts/03iht-­‐
03masl.9006634.html.  
 
Pollan,  Michael.  In  Defense  of  Food:  an  Eater's  Manifesto.  Penguin  Books,  2008.  
 
Wardlaw,  Gordon  M.,  et  al.  Wardlaw's  Contemporary  Nutrition:  a  Functional  
Approach.  McGraw-­‐Hill  Education,  2018.