What Is The Theme Of Unhappy Meals By Michael Pollan

Eat food. Not too much. Mostly plants” (Pollan). With these words, American author and food journalist, Michael Pollan, begins detailing his approach to making healthy food choices in the article “Unhappy meals” published in the New York Times. Pollan criticizes food science and the nutritionist approach to foods, scrutinizing the reductionist approach that nutritionists have to diet. He offers his approach, which instead emphasizes the importance of “whole” or “real” foods. In short, Pollan urges his readers to ignore the microscopic perspective that modern food science offers regarding diet, claiming that it is more beneficial to look at the bigger picture. It is clear that the information surrounding food is convoluted and unapproachable

There are several reasons for this, firstly, the American diet is synonymous with processed and fast foods. These foods are often high in salt, fat, or sugar. All of these components make food tastier and more enjoyable. Pollan also discusses fast food in several places in his article, he states, “It might be argued that... we should simply accept that fast food is our food culture” (Pollan). However, Pollan’s perspective differs slightly from the traditional scientific criticism, the fact that fast food is inherently high in certain molecules, making them unhealthy. Pollan claims that the problem with fast food is how refined it is, he claims that fast food is, “to a considerable extent predigested, in effect, and therefore more readily absorbed by the body”

He states, “depending on the reigning nutritional orthodoxy, the avocado might be either a high-fat food to be avoided (Old Think) or a food high in monounsaturated fat to be embraced (New Think)” (Pollan). This is a confusing perspective to hold because scientific arguments, by design, are meant to change. “Change in knowledge is inevitable because new observations may challenge prevailing theories. No matter how well one theory explains a set of observations, it is possible that another theory may fit just as well or better” (Primack). Scientific theories are inconclusive by design; they are tentative because it leaves the door open to criticism, further research, and revision. While avocadoes may have been considered unhealthy in the past because of high fat content, further research has demonstrated the differences between saturated and unsaturated fats, and thus the position has been revised. To claim that this makes science unreliable is a ludicrous position to