{"id":29497,"date":"2021-03-29T11:09:39","date_gmt":"2021-03-29T18:09:39","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/medfitnetwork.org\/public\/?p=29497"},"modified":"2021-03-24T11:38:46","modified_gmt":"2021-03-24T18:38:46","slug":"what-makes-a-diet-good%e2%80%8b","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/medfitnetwork.org\/public\/all-mfn\/what-makes-a-diet-good%e2%80%8b\/","title":{"rendered":"What Makes a Diet “Good”\u200b?"},"content":{"rendered":"

When\u00a0Mark Bittman<\/a>\u00a0and I were working on\u00a0<\/em><\/strong>How to Eat<\/em><\/strong><\/a>,\u00a0<\/em><\/strong>we spent several full days just talking through every question either of us had ever raised, or received, about all things food.\u00a0For those who know the book, you will recognize its pedigree in this free-flowing discussion, for the book itself reads like pulling your chair up to our coffee table and joining in the conversation.\u00a0Of course, the book offers a disciplined structure, the brevity of good editing, and a logical flow its parental chat all lacked- but still, the apple fell in proximity to the tree.<\/p>\n

\"\"Among the topics that consumed the most time was this:\u00a0what one thing, above all else, makes a diet \u201cgood\u201d?<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

We agreed on a one-word answer (with nothing but love for the famously apt seven from\u00a0Michael Pollan<\/a>), and I will share it momentarily.\u00a0But first, let\u2019s be careful about \u201cgood.\u201d\u00a0In our polarized world, with our cultural heritage of Manichaeism, \u201cgood\u201d all too readily takes on moral overtones.\u00a0Dietary guidance should not adorn the wag of an admonishing finger.\u00a0Dietary guidance\u00a0should not populate the bark of dogma, or be the scion of sanctimony.\u00a0The \u201cgood\u201d in question is of the \u201cgood is as good does<\/em>\u201d variety, not of the \u201cgood versus evil<\/em>\u201d variety.\u00a0That distinction gets all too murky all too often in the opposing, self-righteous assertions that dominate the pop culture of this social media moment.<\/p>\n

Diet good is as diet good does.\u00a0What good is that?<\/p>\n

First, diet tends to be good as a noun (as in \u201cdietary pattern\u201d), and far less good as a verb. When diet implies its gerund- \u201cdieting\u201d- there is little lasting good in the offing. I won\u2019t belabor this, but a lot of truly \u201cbad\u201d ideas can work well for short-term weight loss, all but inevitably followed by weight regain with interest. There is so much wrong with \u201cdieting\u201d that the case could be made – indeed,\u00a0I\u2019ve made it<\/a>\u00a0– that \u201cdieting\u201d should die. We \u201cdi-et\u201d alone, we live it- together.\u00a0Together is better.\u00a0Together would be good.<\/p>\n

But what of that one-word answer?\u00a0Our choice was:\u00a0balance<\/em><\/strong>.\u00a0No, not carbs; not saturated fat; not sugar; not sodium.\u00a0Balance.<\/p>\n

To be clear, this is not “balance” of the “all things in moderation” variety; that is a slippery slope toward all manner of dietary debacle. This is “balance” of the good causes require good effects variety, conjoined to a balanced view of what effects truly matter.<\/p>\n

A dietary pattern is good if it represents the balanced array of nutrients from an assembly of wholesome foods, mostly plants, that serves our native adaptations.\u00a0The critical balance is between dietary composition, and metabolic needs.\u00a0Those vary, of course, by species; a balanced diet for wildebeest involves a lot of grass, while a balanced diet for lions may involve a lot of wildebeest.\u00a0At its origins, food is about sustenance and survival, and those needs are\u00a0bounded by the adaptations of a given kind of animal<\/a>.\u00a0Protest though we may, we humans are\u00a0a kind of animal<\/a>, with\u00a0a particular suite of adaptations<\/a>\u00a0governing the fundamentals of our nutrition requirements.<\/p>\n

There is a balance, as well, between health and pleasure.\u00a0As many of you likely know, Mark, while\u00a0famously knowledgeable about food systems<\/a>, is perhaps best known as an\u00a0expert cook and foodie<\/a>.\u00a0The pleasure factor of \u201cgood\u201d food is an essential part of the requisite balance that reconciles concepts of how we \u201cshould\u201d eat with how we prefer eating.\u00a0There are\u00a0bridges that can be built<\/a>\u00a0between\u00a0loving food, and food that loves us back – and on the other side, a balance worth pursuing.\u00a0Good food gives pleasure; so does good health.\u00a0Other things being equal, healthy people have more fun.\u00a0Take a moment, chew on that.<\/p>\n

There is, too, a balance in perspective integral to any valid concept of \u201cgood\u201d food.\u00a0Can food be \u201cgood\u201d if sourcing it is predicated on\u00a0overt abuse and torment<\/a>\u00a0of our fellow creatures?\u00a0Few if any decent people want gratuitous cruelty on their menu.\u00a0Modern dietary patterns\u00a0conceal a great deal of just that<\/a>– to creatures that think and feel in all the ways the dogs and cats we call members of our families think and feel. That is an extreme expression of imbalance, a case of cognitive dissonance. The only way to account for behaviors that condone cruelty by people with consciences that renounce it \u2013 is a failure to acknowledge what should be common knowledge. Mass-producing animals on factory farms is an unbalanced assault on the sanctity of life.<\/p>\n

We must, of course, be in balance with the rest of nature if we are to fill our plates and bellies but\u00a0not empty the world of its great treasures<\/a>: fish in the seas, birds in the air, the stunning breadth of biodiversity, pristine aquifers, open grasslands, teeming rainforests.\u00a0Eating in balance with the competing requirements of a vital planet is not negotiable- for by any other means, we are eating not only our food, but\u00a0our children\u2019s food, too<\/a>.\u00a0When dinner as usual ruins the destiny of our own kind and all others, diet has gone \u201cbad\u201d by any valid connotation.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

There is, in addition, the obvious:\u00a0a \u201cgood\u201d diet confers good health<\/a>.\u00a0This is intrinsically all about balance.\u00a0For someone suffering from protein malnutrition, any concentrated source of protein would lead toward a better balance, and thus- be good.\u00a0For those of us who\u00a0routinely get far more protein than we need<\/a>\u00a0and far too little fiber, it is vegetables, fruits, legumes, and whole grains that tip balance toward the good.\u00a0As a general rule, getting more of what we get in excess already, or less of what is deficient relative to the set points of adaptation, is movement toward imbalance, and thus bad for that (rather than a moral) reason. There is, for instance, nothing intrinsically pernicious about saturated fat or sodium- but more of these is “bad” when prevailing diets deliver them in excess.<\/p>\n

Even sugar isn’t immanently “evil;”\u00a0in its place<\/a>, it might fuel the periodic requirements of fight or flight, or feed occasional and relatively innocuous delight. It is rendered decisively “bad,” however, by context, dose, and its contributions to hyperendemic obesity, insulin resistance, pre-diabetes, and their dire, downstream consequences, both chronic, and\u00a0acute<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Kale and spinach are so good because modern diets deliver such a deficit of leafy greens. Even these, however, would lose their luster in a diet of only kale. Toward balance is good, toward imbalance is bad. This is universal.<\/p>\n

We may concede that the\u00a0willful engineering of addictive junk food<\/a>, placing corporate profit ahead of public health, is an egregious imbalance in societal priorities. That is fundamentally bad.<\/p>\n

Good and bad are…as good and bad do.<\/p>\n

Accordingly, what\u2019s good for the goose may not be what\u2019s good for the gander, if the goose is starving as the gander succumbs to obesity, type 2 diabetes, and coronary artery disease.\u00a0Balance is good for both goose and gander, but the means of redressing the existing imbalance will vary by circumstance.<\/p>\n

Finally, \u201cgood\u201d is at least partly in the palate of the beholder.\u00a0Legitimate definitions of dietary good allow for variations in taste- often linked to upbringing,\u00a0ethnicity<\/a>, and experience.\u00a0We don\u2019t fuss over the fact that there is more than one good way to be physically active; we should accommodate the same, balanced perspective about eating.<\/p>\n

So much of our discourse on diet is both unduly dogmatic and truly misguided. The prevailing inclination to adjudicate diet quality by invoking macronutrient thresholds- this much fat or that; that much carbohydrate or this- is nearly analogous to judging the merits of exercise by the color of your shoes. More on such macronutrient malarkey –\u00a0among the great boondoggles of modern nutrition<\/a>– next time.\u00a0For now, suffice to say there is more than one way to eat badly- and modern society seems dedicated to exploring them all.<\/p>\n

We are fortunate that where so much hangs in the balance- human health and pleasure,\u00a0planetary health<\/a>, the treatment of our fellow creatures, the\u00a0sustainability of food production<\/a>\u00a0– \u201cgood\u201d\u00a0populates a confluence<\/a>.\u00a0We should not take this for granted; it might have been otherwise.\u00a0If we were more like great cats- our dietary requirements would diverge from the imperatives of biodiversity and sustainability.\u00a0We great apes can- if we honor the requisite balance- take good care of ourselves, and the rest of the planet, too.<\/p>\n

That would be\u2026good.\u00a0Because while there are many variations on the basic theme of eating well, there is only one Earth.<\/p>\n

Free Webinar with Dr. Katz<\/strong><\/h4>\n

The truth about food \u2013 for the health of people and planet alike \u2013 hides in plain sight, like that infamous elephant in the room no one manages to see. Why is simple truth so hard to perceive? Why does it struggle to prevail?<\/p>\n

Join Dr. Katz for this free webinar, The Truth about Food: Of Science, Sense, and Expert Consensus \u2013 And All that Conspires Against Them<\/a>.\u00a0<\/em><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

\n

Article reprinted with permission from Dr. David Katz.<\/em><\/p>\n

Dr. David Katz<\/a> is a board-certified specialist in Preventive Medicine\/Public Health.\u00a0He is the Founder and CEO of\u00a0Diet ID<\/a>, a company advancing an entirely new way to assess and personalize nutrition, and working to make \u201cdiet\u201d the vital sign it deserves to be; and President of the\u00a0True Health Initiative<\/a>, a non-profit advancing diet and lifestyle as the best of medicine where science, sense, and global expert consensus meet.<\/em><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

When\u00a0Mark Bittman\u00a0and I were working on\u00a0How to Eat,\u00a0we spent several full days just talking through every question either of us had ever raised, or received, about all things food.\u00a0For those who know the book, you will recognize its pedigree in this free-flowing discussion, for the book itself reads like pulling your chair up to our coffee table and joining in the conversation.\u00a0Of course, the book offers a disciplined structure, the brevity of good editing, and a logical flow its parental chat all lacked- but still, the apple fell in proximity to the tree. Among the topics that consumed the most time was this:\u00a0what one thing, above all else, makes a diet \u201cgood\u201d? We agreed on a one-word answer (with nothing but love for the famously apt seven from\u00a0Michael Pollan), and I will share it momentarily.\u00a0But first, let\u2019s be careful about \u201cgood.\u201d\u00a0In our polarized world, with our cultural heritage of Manichaeism, \u201cgood\u201d all too readily takes on moral overtones.\u00a0Dietary guidance should not adorn the wag of an admonishing finger.\u00a0Dietary guidance\u00a0should not populate the bark of dogma, or be the scion of sanctimony.\u00a0The \u201cgood\u201d in question is of the \u201cgood is as good does\u201d variety, not of the \u201cgood versus evil\u201d variety.\u00a0That […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":372,"featured_media":25553,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":false,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2}},"categories":[1],"tags":[193,139],"class_list":["post-29497","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-all-mfn","tag-healthy-aging","tag-nutrition"],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/medfitnetwork.org\/public\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/29497","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/medfitnetwork.org\/public\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/medfitnetwork.org\/public\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/medfitnetwork.org\/public\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/372"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/medfitnetwork.org\/public\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=29497"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/medfitnetwork.org\/public\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/29497\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/medfitnetwork.org\/public\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/25553"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/medfitnetwork.org\/public\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=29497"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/medfitnetwork.org\/public\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=29497"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/medfitnetwork.org\/public\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=29497"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}