Tuesday, April 12, 2011

Health Myth #1: You Are What You Eat

This particular myth is emblematic of the captialist-driven desire to find simple causes for complex conditions.

The human body is constantly converting one type of substance into another, and the foods that you eat by no means escape this process.

Yet, for a long time it was a medical truism that excess fat on the body was caused by a diet with a high composition of fat. If you have too much fat inside of you, you must have put that fat there, directly, via fat consumption. Nevermind that carbohydrates can easily be converted into fat...

A more reasonable, and thus still widely accepted, logic is premised on a simple calculus of "calories in, calories out." Thus, you gain weight when you eat more calories than you burn, and lose weight when you eat less. Anyone who has had some fluctuation in their weight, diet, and exercise regimen can tell you that, unfortunately, it does not work like that. It is a lot easier to put weight on than it is to get it off, and these changes never follow the expectations derived from calorie counting. This suggests the ability of the body to actively respond to changing conditions and adapt its internal processes to conserve energy reserves.

Another still widespread example of "you are what you eat" logic is the recommendation that high cholesterol be treated by reducing cholesterol in the diet. However, a vast majority of cholesterol is produced by the body itself, and will thus remain unaffected by diet.

What this simple logic ultimately amounts to is an attempt to attribute undesirable conditions to "bad" inputs - and, thus, personal responsibility. Let us not forget, as well, that with food as the fulcrum of many public health endeavors, it is possible for regulatory organizations to use this concern as leverage to subsidize and promote particular agricultural industries. For example, the low-fat craze and the food pyramid built thereupon were a major boon for corn, soy, and grain industries, which have been heavily subsidized both in the U.S. and abroad. This demonstrates, once again, the way in which the trope of personal responsibility and governmental power work in tandem.

2 comments:

  1. I agree with you in spirit, but no matter how complex the processes of digestion or uses of food are by the body, on still is what one eats or becomes what one because of what one eats, drinks, breathes, interacts with, and so on....

    This is - to me - fully compatible with dialectical materialism and an appreciation of the complexities involved in any attempt at understanding why things happen the way they do when they do.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Although I guess that Marx was more about: you are what you produce. Same difference: one is what one eats which enables one to produce what one produces.

    The only true question then is: free will or determination. Marx's famous answer involving free will under determined circumstances is smart, but perhaps not the end of the story. Personally, I have faith in chance (contingency, the aleatory), which doesn't mean I am not a dialectical materialist or something like that more or less....

    ReplyDelete