Documentos de Académico
Documentos de Profesional
Documentos de Cultura
Michael Allen
So, what are the best foods to eat? And the ones to avoid?
This essay tells the story of one man’s forty-year attempt to
sort out the facts from the folklore, and the reliable
information from the outright lies. It may be useful to you.
It’s free, and you can send it to your friends if you wish.
2
CONTENTS
Introduction 4
2. Sugar Blues 14
5. Body by Science 29
7. In Defence of Food 44
9. Mr Rumsfeld’s conundrum 58
Part One
EVIDENCE
4
Introduction
Do you find food confusing? I certainly do. There are so
many conflicting opinions. And that’s why I’ve written this
essay: it’s an attempt to sort out my own ideas. And I’ve
posted it on Scribd, as a free document, in the hope that it
might be useful to other people too.
There is only one certain fact about food: if you don’t eat
anything, you will die. You may not die quickly, because your
body will consume itself to keep going – and let’s face it,
some of us have a lot more body to consume than others. But
eventually, if you don’t eat anything at all, you will starve to
death.
That much is certain. Everything else seems to be
controversial. Some books/scientists/doctors/diet experts
say one thing, some another. Some say sugar is harmless,
and some say it’s poison. Vegetarians don’t eat meat, but
advocates of the hunter-gatherer diet eat lots of it.
And so on. It’s all very confusing, to put it mildly.
In this essay I’m going to describe my forty-year effort to
find some reliable information which would help me to
decide what to have for my own breakfast, not to mention
lunch and dinner. I’m going to do this mainly by describing
the contents of a series of books which I have found
particularly useful over that forty-year period. Since this is a
record of my own non-scientific research into food, I’m going
to have to refer to myself quite a lot. This may be tedious, but
I think it’s unavoidable. Sorry about that.
Because I live in England, the context of a lot of my
remarks is English, but food is much the same everywhere
these days.
This is not a scholarly publication, so I have not provided
footnotes giving the source of every statistic and fact. But you
have my assurance that I have not quoted a figure unless it
comes from what I regard as a reputable source, rather than
from some wide-eyed ranter.
5
1
Adelle Davis: Let’s Eat Right to Keep Fit
1.1 Summary
Nearly forty years ago, Adelle Davis’s book Let’s Eat Right to
Keep Fit solved a serious problem for me. She showed me
how to stop feeling tired all the time.
Perhaps more importantly, Adelle Davis exposed the fact
that, even in the 1940s and ’50s, the major food-processing
companies were pursuing profit at the expense of public
health; and she was brave enough to criticise them for it. And
guess what – in the last sixty years or so, nothing much has
changed!
Let’s Eat Right to Keep Fit was first published in 1954 (1961
in the UK), so bear in mind that most of the author’s research
would have been done about sixty years ago.
Various revised editions of this book subsequently
appeared, but the author died in 1974, aged 70, so she wasn’t
around to revise anything after that date. The book is now
out of print.
Towards the end of Let’s Eat Right to Keep Fit, Adelle Davis
gives the recipe for a concoction which she called Pep-up, or
fortified milk. This is a drink made up of eggs, lecithin, cold-
pressed oil, calcium lactate, yogurt, brewers’ yeast, and a few
other things. This drink, she claimed, provided all the
necessary nutrients in one dose.
10
Wikipedia entry
The Adelle Davis Foundation
Adelle Davis revisited
14
2
William Dufty: Sugar Blues
2.1 Summary
Dufty begins his book with some personal history. His work
regularly brought him into contact with celebrities, and one
day he arrived late at a meeting and found himself sitting
next to Gloria Swanson, one of the most famous film stars of
the day. He was served coffee, and was just about to put
sugar in it when Miss Swanson hissed in his ear: ‘That stuff is
poison. I won’t have it in my house, let alone my body.’
Well, Dufty didn’t take a lot of notice, but he certainly
didn’t forget. His diet up to that time had been about as
unhealthy as it is possible to imagine, and his various
illnesses got worse. Thoroughly miserable, he trailed from
doctor to doctor, seeking a cure. ‘I cannot recall a single
doctor,’ he says, ‘who ever displayed the slightest curiosity
about what I ate and drank.’
One day he came across a book which stated that sugar
was more lethal than opium and more dangerous than
atomic fallout. He then remembered that Gloria Swanson
16
had warned him that everyone had to find out the truth
about food for themselves – the hard way. And he certainly
had.
Dufty there and then made the fairly drastic decision to
give up sugar, and all other ‘drugs’ such as aspirin, caffeine,
and all the chemical additives in food which he had hitherto
consumed unthinkingly. He found the next few days very
difficult. Going cold turkey made him extremely ill, but then
he began to improve. In five months he lost 70 lbs in weight
‘and ended up with a new body, a new head, and a new life.’
Dufty then gives us a history lesson. He describes how
sugar was first introduced to the human diet, and how, from
the very beginning, it was seen to have damaging effects on
health. However, as the sugar trade generated ever greater
profits, the harder it became to criticise the use of sugar.
Powerful business interests were involved, and, as usual, they
didn’t like losing money. The government also took taxes, so
there was little incentive for politicians to curb its use.
For me, the most interesting parts of Dufty’s book are the
chapters in which he documents the growth in the
consumption of sugar, and compares that with the increase
of disease, particularly diabetes. For example, sugar
consumption in Denmark rose from 29 lbs per person per
year in 1880 to 113 lbs in 1934. Over the same period, the
death rate from diabetes rose from 1.8 per 100,000 to 18.9
per 100,000.
Of course, correlation is not the same thing as causation,
as any scientist will be quick to tell you. In other words,
figures such as these (and there are many other examples) do
not prove that sugar causes diabetes. In fact, to this very day,
the official Party Line of the medical establishment is that we
do not know what causes diabetes.
If you go to official sources of information – try the BBC,
for example, since it still has some reputation for telling the
truth – you will find that the cause of diabetes is ‘not clear’.
Could be a virus, or chemical toxins, or cow’s milk.
17
If you try the UK’s National Health Service web site, you
will find that there is no real attempt to identify a cause of
the disease, in terms of anything outside the body. The NHS
states simply that diabetes is brought about by too much
glucose (sugar) in the body. Turn to the pages on treatment
and diet, and you will find no suggestion that you should
cease to consume even the white refined stuff, let alone other
sources of sugar.
In 1911, the Encyclopaedia Britannica entry on diabetes
stated that ‘The excessive use of sugar as a food is usually
considered one of the causes of the disease’, but science has
moved on since then. The web site of the UK Sugar Bureau is
quite clear on the issue. Diabetes, they say, ‘is certainly not
caused by eating too much sugar.’ So that’s definite then,
isn’t it? Well, maybe. It just so happens, of course, that the
Sugar Bureau is ‘supported’ by British Sugar, which is the
leading supplier of sugar to the UK market. Not exactly a
neutral observer.
Far be it from me to sow doubts in your already troubled
mind, but it is my view that, when looking at reports of
research into anything relating to food and health, it is
always a good idea to ask yourself: Who funded this
research?
Such caution applies to the research on drugs in
particular. Doug McGuff, whose book Body by Science I shall
discuss shortly, says bluntly: ‘If, for instance, a
pharmaceutical company or a [food] supplement company
funded a study, any data derived may be suspect, and serious
doubt will have been cast on its conclusions.’ This is true, but
is not often so baldly stated. The only reason why McGuff can
make such a statement is because he works as a hospital
doctor and his career does not depend on obtaining research
funding.
18
3
Jean Joice & Jackie Le Tissier:
Food Combining for Health Cookbook
3.1 Summary
4
Lyndel Costain: Diet Trials – How to
Succeed at Dieting
4.1 Summary
For years and years I had no idea how much I weighed. If you
had asked me, I would probably have guessed somewhere
between 12 and 13 stone (168 to 182 lbs, if you think in
American). I was actually about 190 lbs. But the precise
figure didn’t interest me.
How I felt, and how much energy I had to spare, certainly
did interest me, and the time came when I began to feel too
heavy. After retirement I started going to a gym two or three
times a week (more about exercise in section 5, below). And
one day, while I was doing some gentle jogging on a
treadmill, I decided I was overweight. Not by most people’s
standards, but by my own.
I had the beginnings of a beer belly, which I could feel
swinging around as I jogged; and I had a pair of emergent
bosoms which would have thrilled some twelve-year-old girls
to bits.
Just as an experiment, I later filled a couple of buckets
with stones and carried them up and down the garden a few
times. It’s quite an instructive thing to do, and after this
experiment I decided that I could certainly lose about 30 lbs
of fat without doing myself anything but good.
I went in search of a good book about ‘dieting’. At that
time (around 2002/03) the fad for the Atkins diet was at its
peak, so I read the latest edition of the manual.
Dr Atkins, of course, had been around a long time. His
first diet book was published in the UK in 1973, and in the
late ’70s he found new readers by plugging a ‘super-energy
diet’. That sounded interesting to me, and I had a look at it
then. But I certainly didn’t feel inclined to act on his
recommendations.
27
5
Doug McGuff & John Little: Body by
Science
5.1 Summary
ideas on diet are fully described on his web site, but if you
want access to all his thoughts you need to pay a
subscription. (Professor De Vany is not an economist for
nothing, you know.)
It’s worth noting that Arthur De Vany has a book on diet
scheduled for publication in 2011. The advance publicity
suggests that it is going to be marketed as just another quick-
fix lose-weight book, which is a pity, because I suspect it will
be rather better than that.
In Body by Science, the adoption of the paleo diet is
recommended, but it is only briefly described, and there isn’t
even a great deal about it on the book’s web site; but, in an
article entitled ‘Internal Starvation’, Doug McGuff outlines
how he came to favour it – eventually.
McGuff is a hospital doctor by profession, working in
A&E, and it was his experience with obese patients which
showed him the perils of the Party-Line diet. He then came
across a reference to Arthur De Vany, and it was that which
converted him to the potential benefits of the paleo diet. The
conversion process was, he admits, rather slow, but he got
there in the end.
Since the paleo diet is essentially a low-carb diet, it has
much in common with the famous Atkins diet. Well, as I
mentioned earlier, I read the good Dr Atkins’s book very
carefully, getting on for ten years ago.
Atkins, of course, doesn’t mention the stone age. Of course
not. His diet is NEW! And it’s REVOLUTIONARY! Nothing
old-fashioned about him.
Well, new or old, I considered his recommendations in
some detail, and I was ultimately unconvinced. Then I too
came across Arthur De Vany, and other references to the
paleo diet. Once again, I took a long hard look at the
underlying theory, and I remained unconvinced.
Stated crudely (and perhaps unfairly) the idea is that, in
the stone age, man lived in a kind of paradise. He was
perfectly adjusted to the available food, and as a result lived a
32
Some time after I had written the above, McGuff and Little
published The Body by Science Question and Answer Book,
a follow-up to their first book. This second work includes a
section on diet – or, to be precise, on nutrition.
The new section is much longer and more informative
than the brief references in Body by Science. The key point,
perhaps, is this: McGuff and Little don’t recommend cutting
out carbohydrates altogether, but they do suggest restricting
carb intake to fruit and veg, and avoiding carbs which are
grain-based and refined in nature. They argue that eating
refined carbs ‘produces not just increased insulin levels, it
also produces other negative side effects in terms of systemic
inflammation.’
By contrast, consumption of natural foodstuffs, or ‘real
food’, ensures that humans can tolerate widely variant
macronutrient mixes without ill consequences. This is an
important point for anyone, like me, who just finds the whole
paleo thing a step too far.
Finally, it’s worth noting that the two authors admit that
there were periods of years during their lives when their
respective diets were ‘absolutely terrible’, but they didn’t get
fat or develop diabetes because of the beneficial effect of their
high-intensity physical training.
For details, read the book.
34
6
Barry Groves:
Trick and Treat
Natural Health and Weight Loss
6.1 Summary
Well, I’m going to give up soya for a start. And the list goes
on. Groves has unpleasant stories to tell us about almost
every item you can think of on the supermarket shelf. In fact
he believes that no more than 2 per cent of supermarket
products are fit for consumption.
Oh, and if you’re short of something else to worry about
(which I doubt), bear in mind Groves’s conclusion on
ordinary flour. ‘The flour from which our bread is made is
probably more highly contaminated than anything else to be
found in the food industry.’
7
Michael Pollan: In Defence of Food
7.1 Nearing the end
7.2 Summary
Pollan, like Groves, has things to say about soy (or soya). The
average American now takes 20 per cent of her calories in the
form of soy. I wonder if she knows that? Ten years ago I’d
barely heard of soy, but having looked at the index to Sugar
Blues I see that William Dufty predicted in 1975 that its use
would grow. Why? Because it’s cheap to grow, and you can
feed it to cattle. But do we really want to take 20 per cent of
our calories from soy?
48
Part Two
CONCLUSIONS
52
8
Is it really safe to eat breakfast?
8.1 Here’s the answer (and about time too)
You’re probably thinking that it’s about time this essay came
to an end. Well, we agree on that. In fact, I think it is high
time my forty-year search for a healthy diet came to an end.
What I would really, really like to do is settle on a few simple
rules for eating which would (a) give me a fighting chance of
achieving my maximum potential for longevity and good
health, and (b) serve me for the rest of my days so that I don’t
have to bother about this problem any longer.
So, let’s go back to my original question. Is it safe to eat
breakfast?
Hell, no.
Don’t be silly.
It’s bloody dangerous.
Let us just suppose, for the sake of illustrating my point,
that you have accepted the argument of Barry Groves and
others that you should go for a low-carb, high-fat diet. And
you cook yourself a traditional English breakfast of bacon
and eggs, mushrooms, tomatoes, and maybe a sausage.
Sounds OK in principle. But if you take my question about
food safety seriously then you are immediately faced with
another question, one which Adelle Davis raised all those
years ago. Which apricot? she asked. Grown where? What
did they do to it on the tree? And what did they do to it after
it left the tree?
These questions could be, and in theory should be, asked
about every constituent part of what is prima facie a healthy
breakfast.
Who grew the mushrooms and the tomatoes in our
traditional English breakfast? Did they use fertilisers and
53
8.2.1 Ignorance
and gossip – what they are told by friends, the television, and
their grannies.
I would like to have a magic wand to transform their lives,
but I don’t. I feel very sorry for those who, often through no
fault of their own, are imprisoned in a mountain of fat. But, if
you are fortunate enough to have had an education, then
living your life on the basis of ignorance is not, in my
opinion, a helpful way to proceed. You need to find a few
facts – if you can.
8.2.2 Panic
As we have seen, anyone who puts even a toe into the lake of
information about food soon discovers that there are wildly
conflicting theories and many apparently contradictory
research findings. One week the Daily Mail will tell you that
drinking coffee will kill you, the next that it will extend your
56
9
Mr Rumsfeld’s conundrum
9.1 It makes sense if you think about it
10
A personal strategy, likely to be of little
interest to anyone else
10.1 Introduction
Making sure that your body has the right blood-sugar level
has numerous benefits. First, you will have adequate energy
to work efficiently and enjoy life. Second, you will be calm
and relatively clear-headed, and thus better able to deal with
the emotional stresses of life. Third, if you avoid the sudden
spikes in blood-sugar level which result from high intakes of
refined carbs, you will not put on weight. And fourth –
perhaps most important of all – by avoiding those high
glucose spikes you will not over-stress your insulin
mechanism and therefore you will reduce your risk of
diabetes.
Diabetes shortens your life by twelve years, on average;
and it involves medical costs (US figures) of $13,000 a year.
Whether this is paid for by the individual, through insurance,
or through the UK’s taxpayer-funded National Health
Service, it’s still a cost which is incurred, and it would be nice
to avoid it.
weak heart’ when he was 54. This background may affect me,
as it seems that there is some genetic component in most
forms of heart disease; but obviously I can do nothing about
that.
Neither can I rewind history and eat a different diet for
the past few decades. So, if there is any genetic or dietary
damage to my heart, that damage is already done; all I can do
to protect my heart now is try to stay fit and healthy in
general terms.
years now. (For details of why this is a good thing, see Your
Body’s Many Cries for Water by F. Batmanghelidj.)
Ever since reading Adelle Davis and books about the Hay diet
I have tried to follow a number of basic rules as regards food,
most of which are endorsed by Michael Pollan. These
include:
Ever since getting rid of 30 lbs of fat, a few years ago, I seem
to have got out of the habit of drinking milk. And Groves’s
69
Ah yes, the dreaded carbs. What should one do about all the
various carbs, so feared and despised by the paleo guys?
Well, after taking into account all kinds of warnings and
theories, I’m going to carry on as I have for a good many
years now. I shall avoid refined flour and white rice, eat
minimal quantities of pasta and brown rice (which I don’t
much like anyway), and stick to wholemeal bread. Porridge I
can cope with, especially of a winter morning.
If you need any convincing of the connection between
high carb consumption and diabetes, read any account of Sir
Steven Redgrave’s diet as an Olympic athlete, for example
this one.
McGuff and Little believe that a high-intensity training
programme, as outlined in their book, provides the body with
a bit more latitude in coping with carbs; in fact, overall, such
training creates a metabolic environment which favours lean
tissue over body fat. All of which is another good reason for
following such a programme.
McGuff and Little also point out that if we consume
natural foodstuffs (real food, and not edible food-like
substances), then the body can cope with a wide variant of
mixes. They recommend avoiding grain-based carbs, but
with that proviso the carb intake can vary between 0 per cent
and 60 per cent of calorie intake without ill consequences.
71
‘Well, yes,’ said Adelle with a smile. ‘That’s true. But I like
coffee. And besides, everyone is free to go to hell in their own
sweet way.’
10.3.17 Vale
11
Spread the word
11.1 Tell your friends