As I sit here reading, buried in a pile of books broaching all levels of the nutrition spectrum, I’m absolutely, definitely, undoubtedly overwhelmed by the immense amount of contradictory information that there is in this field of science. Each night, I escape to my bed with an open mind to read a different theory, falling in love with each concept as I begin to understand it. The problem is that, well, the love affair got complicated, quickly.
You see, I was researching Naturopathic Nutrition, the Raw Foods Movement, Oriental Medicine, Ayurvedic, Juicing Therapies, etc., while simultaneously studying Western Nutrition, which naturally rules out many of the possible theories the above proposes. When all the schools of thought met in my bed where I study, it wasn’t nearly the romantic scene I had envisioned.
The fantasy ended. The worlds are just too polarized at present to make peace. While nutrition is the youngest science when compared to its peers, it’s hard to beat hundreds and hundreds of years of global, cultural medical therapies, good old-fashioned common sense, and what intuitively feels right (not “ice cream feels good”, right, but being able to listen to your body, right), whether the scientists told us one way or another. Science is science, but clinical and lab trials can’t account for everything, and in my novice opinion, a lot of what they deem “safe” seems counterintuitive, especially in comparison to Naturopathic Nutrition. By no means am I ignoring the value of science, but I think a balance and acceptance is sorely needed in Western thought. It’s getting better than it used to be, but we’re not there yet. On certain subjects, Western vs. Natural/Nutritional Therapies are all in agreement, on others, they couldn’t disagree more. For example the digestion of enzymes and enzyme therapy is debated by both the Western and Alternative therapy communities. Very briefly, Western thought negates any suggestion that ingested enzymes could survive the acidity of stomach pH levels, while alternative theories (namely the Raw Foods Movement) argues that enzymes in raw foods do. Plant foods’ enzymes are able to survive a higher range in pH levels than animal food enzymes. Another theory is that the enzymes in the raw food are able to help digest itself (thus relieving stress from the pancreas) in the initial stages of digestion up until they get deactivated by the HCL in the stomach. Many theories exist. The truth is that enzyme research is so new that not enough has been done to disprove that enzymes could survive digestion. Everyday, new information is being discovered. This is exactly what makes nutrition so interesting. But the more I read the more confused I get because one answer just leads to another question.
In the United States, the ubiquity of nutritional data and the latest diets is undeniable. One day you hear of a report that was just released that says how black teas are good for you. The next day, you read in a paper that another study concludes that (don’t hold your breath)…Yes, caffeine is bad for you. No wonder why most of America is confused about what to eat.
Far greater a concern than my self-induced confusion is the alarmingly baffled state of America. Turn on any television, step one foot into any Barnes and Nobles Bookstore, or open up any magazine, and you won’t have to wonder why we’ve lost touch with our roots (and yes, I meant both figuratively and the beets).
Mar 3rd, 2008 at 3:08 pm
Hi Sophie, I loved your piece because thats exactly how ive been feeling lately too. I read so many different theories and each time can’t wait to put them in to practice to feel and see the results they promise, but then not long later I am reading about something that contradicts the previous one somehow and I am lost again. I often feel, overwhelmed and confused, because right now I am studying holistic nutrition, and feel I should be very clear in myself about what i believe is best, before I go out to help others, yet I struggle to know what is best for even me! Right now traditional diets really make sense to me, but I know that Ive passed through many different phases before so I have no idea if this too will pass or what will be next.
However I guess Im coming to the conclusion that despite lots of contradictions, many of the theories out there today basically agree that a wide range of colourful, natural, organic wholefoods are best, both plant and animal, with very limited refined sugar, salt, flour and other modern processed foods, if any at all! Not too extreme, like ALL raw, or No carbs, but all good wholesome nourishing foods in moderation; and eating seasonally and locally where possible of course……. anyway thats what ive found on a very simple level, and what feels right to me so far!! and I continue to be open to new ideas as well……
I agree its a tricky one though :)
Mar 3rd, 2008 at 9:59 pm
You hit the nail on the head Sophie! Or both Sophies ;) There is SO much information out there. I feel compelled to listen to my body and history. If it’s brand new, I’m very wary. If we’ve survived without certain things for so long, do we REALLY need to add them to our diet or lifestyle? It’s a tough call, especially when ’science’ supports evidence saying they’re ‘good’ for us. I think I’ve been burned too many times by the new food, diet movements. I’m all for staying traditional, thus the reason for my loyalty to nourished magazine!
Mar 5th, 2008 at 5:21 pm
Sophie (No. 1). Thanks ever so much for joining us. As I suspected your writing is superb: fabulously exciting and Nourishing all at once. Makes me think you’d be a great cook. Thanks for concocting this post and I look forward to the next course.
Sophie (No. 2) Eating a wide range of colours and tastes is advisable I agree. But what will happen when our choice dwindles for what ever reason? This question concerns me a little. It was answered when I tried the raw milk diet last year. I discovered that it was quite feasible to live on only one or two types of foods like the isolated Swiss that Price studied, the Masaii or the Mongolians. I did hanker for different tastes but decided it was more a case of emotional attachment than physical need because I felt to very, very Nourished.
http://editor.nourishedmagazine.com.au/articles/milk-milk-glorious-milk-the-real-raw-milk-cure
I too went through the confusion you all are speaking of. The relief I experienced when discovering Weston A Price’s work was wonderful. Before then I was under the modern spell that there is only one way. Price taught me that there are many ways humans have access the nutrition essential for superior health. All I need do is a little research to discover how my ancestors and those of the land I live in did it and replicate the best I can. Sharing that journey is what Nourished Mag is all about.
I believe respiritualising food is a great step. The ancients had sacred foods that were held in high esteem because they enabled the human form to Thrive. Our separation oriented nutritional theories are an expression of our current spiritual corruption. Often the messages we get about food are related to puritanism. “Don’t eat this, Don’t eat that. If you do it’s a sin and will result in ill health (hell).” What if we spiritualised food the way our ancestors did, “Do eat this, Do eat that. You will be Nourished by the life giving forces of this food and therefore will thrive.”
Mar 13th, 2008 at 8:43 pm
Hi Sophie and Sophie plus the others
I have been in practice as a naturopath for 10 years now and it has been quite a journey. From my early days of practice based on supplements, supplements and more supplements combined with a high soy, low fat and high grain diet (because that’s what I was taught was THE healthy diet - oh how I cringe now) through to a very traditional dietary approach based largely on the works of Weston Price and others with lots of weird and wonderful fads along the way.
You have the advantage over me in that you are questioning what you’re told right from the word go and are not just accepting the dogma that is dished out as Nutritional science (dogma = doctrine that is proclaimed as true without proof).
The real learning begins when you finish your studies and start to work with real people. You start to see common themes, what works, what doesn’t and you also learn to trust your gut or intuition as much as your brain. On that note, you also need to start listening to the messages that your body is already giving you about what it needs as opposed to what your head wants. I know that I will have a huge breakthrough with a client once they learn the art of pausing before eating and deciding whether they REALLY want the food being offered to them or not.
Nutritional science has given us an epidemic of obesity, diabetes, cardiovascular disease, fertility problems, learning and developmental disorders and allergies. Nutritional science allows sugar and chemical laden breakfast cereals to be promoted as healthy for children because of a little bit of niacin and riboflavin added in. Nutritional science allows white bread to have a low GI rating because of a little bit of extra fibre. We keep coming back to basics though - eggs were condemmend as killers due to their cholesterol content now they’re healthy once again, all fats were to be avoided like that plague now we’re told that there are good and bad fats (we’ve some way to go before they get the good, the bad and the very, very bad sorted correctly though) and butter was replaced by margerine until the recent trans fats revelation.
Health care will always be controversial and confusing, I don’t think that will ever change because health and healing is part science, part experience, part belief or opinion and part intuitive art form. Don’t try and make sense of it all now or you really will go nuts, plus you’ve yet to discover just how hard it is to convince people to change their diets in any direction (that will really send you nutty), dishing out supplements is easy, convincing people to get into their kitchens and cook is a constant challenge!
Keep an open mind and keep questioning. Good luck with your studies.
Mar 17th, 2008 at 8:58 am
What a great letter, Sarah. After all is said and done, everyone is a individual, don’t you think, and there is no point is just saying, “Don’t eat that - it’s no good for you!” to all patients. Some cannot heed the advice; there are needs that go so deep no one, not the eater himself, knows why there is that attraction. It’s not just food, is it.
In any case, I do not think we can go back to our traditions 100%. We are not those people anymore. We are us, with changed DNA. Intuitive art form - absolutely. You are so wise.
Mar 19th, 2008 at 5:25 pm
What a pleasure to be in the company, albeit virtually, of such insightful and encouraging women (and men), who inspire others by living abundantly in the many ways one can. By living in abundance, I mean exactly what Joanne, Sarah, Sophie, Lacey, and Anna May have all tapped into-the art of celebrating what the earth has given us and the exciting journey of figuring what works for each of us, individually. Living in abundance means not feeling physically deprived or emotionally malnourished, but satiated on many levels of our being.
As Anna May pointed out, we are different not only from each other but from how we used to be. My evolving concept of health includes eating a pure diet like our ancestors but also tailoring it based on the environment we live in and what suits us specifically. Allergens, environmental toxicity and pollutants, the importance of eating in season and foods that are grown locally all play key factors in that equation. Figuring out what works for us can still be simple, but being cognizant of what may affect us now -both personally and as a culture-that were not factors before-is crucial. For example, the toxins in the air, ocean and land have polluted our food so much so that we have to be more aware of how much fish we eat, where it comes from, how it’s caught, etc., all making the simple choice of regular fish consumption more complicated than it should be. DNA changes may take thousands of years to take place, which support our movement towards eating the way we used to- pre-pesticides, pre-genetically modified foods, etc. However, whether we have genetically changed or not, our environment has.
As Sarah made clear, even with people who want help, I imagine the hardest thing is making them see that there is no formula that works, but instead helping them to become their own doctors with the tools you give them. I thought for a while that the simple suggestion of saying, “Eat what feels right” would be a sure way to help people learn to recognize how their body is reacting to what they are eating. Our bodies are so magnificent that we will be sent the signals of, as Sarah mentioned, when to stop eating, what we are allergic to, what our bodies need at that time for nourishment, etc. But I think that as a culture, we are taught not to be connected to our bodies, not to listen to what we want, and to live by the “should dos” above all else. This disconnection makes listening to how food makes us feel, and as Joanne says, re-spiritualizing food, all the more difficult.
Joanne’s concept about re-spiritualizing our relationship with food could not be more delicious. I want to jump in it-mind, body and soul- and let it soak right in. Being a massive topic, here are my thoughts. One of the problems is that we have become so disconnected with food, either eating to live or living to eat, not usually a compromise of the two. It’s either survival mode or an act of satisfying sensual needs. I’m not talking about wholesome food tasting delicious, because we all know how to do that and I think more and more people are discovering that truth. But re-spiritualizing connects Joanne’s thoughts to Sarah’s, because once people become connected with their bodies and their food, a story begins to unfold behind each meal, each plate, each ritual. Before each bite, there becomes intention, so that disconnection is impossible.