The point of fitness

I hate blogs that apologize. No apologies. I do what I want.

I have been slowly getting out of shape over the last few months. My diet isn't as great as it should be (although I have been sticking to 100% vegetarian... about 60% vegan which is not too bad), and I haven't been running much at all. There have been a few hill workouts with the track girls, but being a head coach has been pretty demanding and there were only a few days that I could actually sneak out with the athletes. But anyway... I dragged myself out of bed this morning and went for a run as the sun came up. My lungs hurt a little more than they should have and my legs feel a little bit like jelly even though they really shouldn't... but I made it through the run. I may be out of shape physically, but I haven't lost any of the mental strength I built up earlier this year. With the shape that I'm in, I never would have been able to convince myself to run for that long a year ago... but this morning it was just another run.

Anyway... aside from the results of my run, right now I'm thinking about the point of fitness... the point of working out. I guess I get caught up on the fact that working out seems to create an unnatural state of being. If I worked out every morning I would be lean, muscular, and in great cardiovascular shape... but how do I need that in my daily life? It's not as if being stronger is going to make me more productive to society, or does it? Lets assume, because there are so many benefits of being active, that we were built to lead active lives. Why is it that that activity is so separate from our productivity and liveliness? It's a hobby rather than a necessity.

I know there are a lot of ways to argue with what I've just said. Runners would especially have a lot to say about it. Once you're a runner, you don't have a choice, it is a necessity. Being active definitely increases the amount you contribute to society because it gives you a clearer head. I know these reasons, I just feel there are some contradictions in the way we are built to live and the way we actually live. I wonder how to rectify these.

Aimlessness

I originally started this blog with the idea that I would post about food and issues surrounding it. I'm not sure that's going to work for me so I'm opening it up. From now on the title "Real Sustenance" will be interpreted even more loosely as I explore different issues that strike my fancy. This is partially because, as I have mentioned before, I am quite unsure of the career path I would like to pursue. I want to find out what my interests truly are and to do that I want to explore them all.

I hope you all enjoy the exploration with me.

Ahead of the Times

It seems as though I was one step ahead of the New York Times yesterday when I posted about the image of Vegetarianism and Veganism throughout the country. Today's article, The Carrot Some Vegans Deplore, is about just that.

The article starts by discussing a vegan strip club in Portland, Oregon. The owner, a male vegan (or vegetarian... forgive me for not getting the facts perfect), decided to combine these two interests. He claimed that combining a very masculine place like a strip club with vegan food was a great way to introduce men to this healthy, conscientious lifestyle. Whether spreading veganism was actually his objective is unclear, but apparently the association between animal rights and women's rights is not a new one. The article referenced many other examples of women's bodies being exploited to highlight animal rights, or on the other side, women leading a vegetarian lifestyle in order to highlight their personal struggle. The article did mention and have quotes from the authors of Skinny Bitch, and discussed the ways in which this and other popular vegan items contributed to the gender discussion around this lifestyle.

Overall, I'm not sure the article gave many answers to the questions that I brought up in my post. It did, however, say a lot of the same things. Exposure, even if it comes in the form of extreme ranting or attached to sexually attractive women, is a good thing. If you buy into that, you could argue that the vegan lifestyle gets a disproportionally high level of exposure for the very small percentage of Americans who actually call themselves vegan. On the other hand, many of these issues of fairness and appropriate treatment (whether for men, women, people of color, or animals) should be closely linked in our minds, shouldn't they? Should PETA really sell their message by attaching it to a picture of an attractive, half naked woman?

At least now the NY Times has weighed in on the subject.

Skinny Bitch

I've had Skinny Bitch on my Amazon wish list for a little while now. I knew that this was a "diet" book that ultimately argued the value of the vegan lifestyle. I knew that the authors wrote the book in a very harsh, "stop eating shit, fat-ass" type of tone... but I was looking for some solid philosophical reasons to give up all animal products. I didn't buy the book but I did spend a very enjoyable afternoon at Border's as I was playing hooky this week. I picked a sunny seat by the window, got some tea and read a big chunk of Skinny Bitch. I have to say, I'm glad I didn't spend the $13 to actually own a copy of this book.

I have read a number of blog entries that address the way vegetarianism and veganism are perceived among the omnivores of the world. These slightly extreme subsets of the population can be stereotyped as radical, throw red paint on fur coats, scoff at diners who partake in meat, type of people. Obviously, this is not the case and can lead to the general population to having a negative impression of a healthy, conscientious lifestyle. I felt like the book, Skinny Bitch, through exaggerations, a very harsh tone, and detailed descriptions of animal cruelty, contributed to the negative image of vegetarianism and veganism instead of aiding the cause. Does it really serve a purpose to tell people they're stupid for eating cheese? Wouldn't it be more beneficial to discuss the issues?

I'm sure a number of people are reading this and thinking, "You just don't get it," so lets look at the other side. This is a book about veganism that is hugely popular. Awesome. That's definitely something. Additionally, how many picked up this witty, comedic book and read it because of the entertaining tone... even though they might have been scared by the content had it been presented in a different manner? I'm sure there are A LOT of readers who fall into this category, meaning the tone of the book reached more people than my boring philosophical discussion ever would. I suppose we could refer to this as the Michael Moore presentation advantage, yes? Obviously this book has some positive things to offer the food/health community... I'm just not totally convinced that the net effect is a positive one.

The entertainment factor

I've never wanted to be a salesman. I don't really have the patience or the motivation to try and convince people that they need something or that they want to do something. I prefer to adopt a general, "Do what you want..." type of attitude. I was, however, very interested in education. I love reading, writing, thinking, and discussing; sharing that with others seemed like a great idea. I didn't realize how much of a salesman I would have to be in order to be a good teacher. In order to "be a good teacher" and reach the majority of my students, I must continually convince them that they want to do this. I must "sell" education to them. I hate this.

While writing my senior thesis on the economics of education from contending perspectives, I got into a lot of educational philosophy (I love how close economics and philosophy can get at times!). One very influential book that my adviser pointed me toward was Why Read by Mark Edmundson. In this book Edmundson talks about his experiences as a college professor. Specifically, he discusses the way students evaluate classes. Many students today expect education to be engaging and entertaining... and they expect teachers or professors to orchestrate the course in a way that accomplishes this. I run into it in my classroom everyday and I certainly remember those expectations in college as well. Teachers and professors are supposed to make education entertaining... because, seriously, what's the point if it's not enjoyable? (Sarcasm... hope you can pick up on it!) The New York Times has an article today that brushes on a lot of these same thoughts. The Professor as Open Book .

One of my favorite quotes comes from John Dewey (I know... not original at all for an educator to be quoting Dewey... give me a break), "Education has no end beyond itself; it is its own end." I truly believe that true education is engaging, inspiring, and it's hard work that offers an intrinsic reward. It's not entertaining and enjoyable because the professor is funny or the teacher brings in manipulatives every day... it's amazing because it changes the person that you are and that's fulfilling. Here's the issue though...Why can some people feel it and others need engaging instructors to sell it to them? And... if I hate the entertainment factor while teaching on the high school level... will I hate it while working on the college level? Finally, is this a result of our culture... entertainment all the time... or is it just a natural division within the population, some people are nerds and others aren't?

To me writing, reading, thinking, and discussing are REAL SUSTENANCE. Now I need to figure out what to do with that.

Acceptance of food restrictions

A woman with celiac's disease goes into a restaurant to eat and explains that she needs a gluten free meal. She orders a salad without crutons and explains how sensitive she is to food that is cross contaminated with gluten... but the overworked, slightly annoyed waiter with tired feet just goes back to the kitchen and picks up a pre-made salad, tossing the crutons into the trash on the way back to the table. The woman eats this "gluton free" salad and breaks out in a rash later that night.

A man who has chosen to follow a strictly vegan diet because of his political and moral beliefs is invited to celebrate his grandfather's birthday at a local steak house. The man calls ahead, explains his dietary preferences, and asks the restaurant if they can accommodate him. The restaurant understands and wanting to increase business agrees to do what they can. The night of the celebration the vegan man arrives, introduces himself to the waitress and is greeted with annoyance and irritation. The chef had to go out of her way and the waitress is bothered by "picky" customers. The man is served cold food and treated poorly because he was "difficult."

In both of these situations the diner has a difficult time eating in a restaurant, and the restaurant staff is annoyed by the specific requests and added hassle of meeting the diner's needs. The difference is that the first situation involves an innate dietary restriction while the second one is a chosen lifestyle. The question is... is there a difference? Should people who choose to restrict their diet based on different belief systems have a harder time doing that than people who are required to eat differently than the majority of the population?

Personal anecdotes:

I ate at my favorite brewery recently and I wanted to share the chili cheese fries with my brother who was visiting from out of town (for all you non-New Mexicans - chili cheese fries out here have a green chili pepper sauce on them, not the red bean and beef sauce that other parts of the country call chili). I know that most places make their chili sauce with a little bit of pork so I asked if the brewery had any vegetarian chili sauces. They didn't, but the waitress was super friendly, talked to the kitchen, and came back with a few suggestions that worked out very nicely. The vegetarian "chili" fries were quite tasty. Even though my dietary restrictions are voluntary, in this case I felt they were respected.

On the other hand... I was recently invited to an Easter dinner with a close friend and his family. I made sure that my friend let his family know that I was a vegetarian in advance and I offered to bring something to contribute to the meal. The situation seemed ok, but I received an email about the menu where my friend felt the need to inform me that the meat was really going to be very high quality, free range, natural meat. When I replied saying that I was indeed going to be eating vegetarian, he seemed surprised. I don't tell this story to pick on my friend or insinuate that he was being insensitive - I know he had valid reasons for giving me this information and questioning what I would do - but this situation does make it clear that there is a difference between how chosen diets are perceived versus compulsory ones. My friend never would have asked his uncle, who has a gluten allergy, if he was absolutely sure he didn't want any of the delicious bread.

The question becomes, should there be a difference in how dietary restrictions are accepted and respected? Does it make a difference if it is chosen versus innate? Am I more responsible for the inconvenience my vegetarianism causes because I chose it... or should my choice be respected as a black and white, no-meat type of issue?

I'm sure that we can think of some parallels to draw in this situation. We'll come back to these questions.

Unconscious Cooking

On the I Can Make you Thin program that I watched yesterday... one of the points that Paul McKenna tried to reference repeatedly was that people should eat consciously. This meant that they should pay close attention to how the food actually tasted (this makes sense as many fast food meals are strategically designed to trick our senses into thinking they taste better than they actually do) and to eat very slowly and deliberately. By "eating consciously" you are less likely to overeat and more likely to hear the signals from your body telling you that you've had enough. I totally buy into this. I also enjoy meals a whole lot more when I put my knife and fork down and take the time to enjoy the setting and the company... anyway...

Today I was going about my business. I ate a dinner of leftovers... it was ok. I had a rough day and I was still feeling hungry so I decided to make a yummy desert. I pulled out a bowl, started with plain low-fat yogurt and the remaining canned pumpkin from my fridge. I added some honey and a handful of dark chocolate chips. To finish it off I grabbed a small spice container that I thought had been left on the counter from making my oatmeal this morning - I thought it was pumpkin pie spice. Yummy cinamon, allspice, and cloves... perfect. I was wrong. It was the garlic powder that I left on the counter after making popcorn last night. Damn it! I had a beautiful bowl of pumpkin yogurt with honey and chocolate chips and I sprinkled garlic powder all over it. In an attempt to salvage the desert I found the pumpkin pie spice, added some and mixed it all up hoping that the garlic wouldn't be that noticeable. That didn't work. Bummer.

Desert yogurt number one got dumped in the trash while I toasted some bananas, honey, and a few more chocolate chips for desert yogurt number two. I left the garlic powder out of this version.

So much for unconscious eating... beware of unconscious cooking!

I can make you thin!

I don't know why, but I'm obsessed with weight loss. I think unpacking this obsession is going to take more than one post, so lets think of this as the first chapter in a continuing discussion. Personally... I guess I've always been attracted to a challenge. As a kid I wanted to get addicted to cigarettes just so I could be strong and show everyone that I could quit (I swear I truly remember having these thoughts on a regular basis). I still see a lot of evidence of this attraction to challenges in my life right now. For example, unlike many women I find myself slightly more attracted to men whom I have to chase. I'm turned off when men are too easily "won." But anyway, I'm aware of this romanticized idea I have of challenging situations... which can easily be applied to weight loss. My first instinct is that successful weight loss is a result of perseverance, willpower, and strength of character... and I'm well aware that the flip side of this statement involves blaming unsuccessful weight loss on weakness and a few other undesirable characteristics. I need to examine this, however, because there are a variety of factors that influence this view.

Personally... I have always been thin but in the last year I have lost about 20 pounds and am keeping it off quite easily (I actually lost a few more pounds accidentally since becoming a vegetarian... oops). But, I am proud of my body and my health; I feel like it is something I have worked for and accomplished. I don't want anyone to look down on that accomplishment as nothing special just because I had "thin / active" genes to start with. This is an initial, almost defensive reaction. On the other hand, I have no idea what it's like to really struggle with my weight. (My 20 pound weight loss brought me from 137 to 117... both of which are well within the healthy range for my 5'6 frame). My parents and my brother are all thin, healthy, and quite active. I can look around me and confidently say that the chances of me ever being overweight are slim to none. The moral of my personal story is that I don't want choices, will-power, and strength of character to be written off as contributing to health or obesity... but I also have no clue how much of my personal experience can be related to what others experience.

The inspiration for this reflection came from a television program that I taped the other night (because... as I said... I'm obsessed with weight loss) called I can make you thin. This show featured a British man named Paul McKenna who continually boasted that he had the golden rules for simple, permanent weight loss. I did like the rules that McKenna suggested because they seemed to be encouraging people to eat more consciously and enjoy their eating experience more. I believe that both of these are very important in order to have a healthy relationship with food. The thing that kept getting to me was how he reiterated how easy his program would be. He also told the audience over and over again that it was not their fault they were overweight. Is this the most productive way to think of the obesity epidemic? There's a quick fix out there and individuals really don't play any role in the epidemic... everyone is just a victim? I don't know.

Where's the line between crazy Mississipi legislation that makes it ok to discriminate against people to encourage them to loose weight (ultimately trying to emphasize personal responsibility for weight loss) and telling people who are overweight that they are not at fault and have just been innocent victims for years? Neither seem to be productive approaches to me, but where's the happy medium?

The convenience factor

Well... I took a few minutes and wrote the last post about shopping for the girls' track team. I did eventually find a grocery store that accepted the credit card I had and I got so excited to run around the store and fill my cart with lots of good things. I was able to pick up a ton of fruit as well as wheat bread, peanut butter, jelly, and granola bars. I really felt accomplished and felt as thought I was doing something positive for the students in a variety of different ways. First, they would be able to compete better because their stomachs wouldn't be filled with greasy burgers. Second, in a community that is so hard hit by the obesity / diabetes epidemic, I feel as though even the smallest opportunities to model and teach healthy habits are helpful. Plus, of course, healthy food is something I'm passionate about and sharing that feels great.

The kids seemed generally appreciative of the food choices. Especially the fruit. The girls loved the grapes, the apples and the oranges disappeared pretty quickly, and there were a few mumblings about a lack of bananas... good to know... I'll add them to the list. The sandwiches, however, were not a hit. Everyone liked the idea of peanut butter and jelly (some liked the idea of one without the other, you know how it goes...) but because they actually had to assemble their own sandwiches... NOBODY ATE ANYTHING! I was pretty shocked. There were kids who were really hungry by the end of the day and I guarantee that if there had been a cooler full of pre-made PB&J everyone would have gone to town on it. Instead they didn't eat any of it... too much work to make their own sandwich.

I guess I shouldn't have been that surprised, I did just finish reading Mindless Eating by Brian Wansink. Clearly, the choices that people make are not always rational, but how do you combat those choices? For example, one could argue that to truly feed yourself a healthy diet, you need to cook. Cooking involves time, work, energy, and... doing the dishes (EEK!). But people are lazy and the many will make their choices based on convenience rather than logic. Does that mean that the new single serving, microwaveable veggies are the best way to convince people to eat healthier? Would a fast food restaraunt that serves "rabbit food" in a quick, convenient way profit and improve America's health?

I don't know. Next time I'm going to recruit some of the free manual labor that I have at my disposal (aka my students) to make up sandwiches in advance.

The world I live in

I am currently the head girls track coach of the high school at which I teach. This is the first year I've been "in charge" and so far it's been a blast... a stressful blast... but a blast nonetheless. I am trying to change a number of things about the team so that all the girls have a better experience and really enjoy the season. In the past, during meets, the girls have been given double cheeseburgers, fries, and sodas... for lunch... in the middle of a meet. This is a huge problem and I don't want to teach these girls that it's ok for athletes to eat like that! In an effort to make better nutritional use of the team's allotted food money, I took a survey this week of acceptable, healthy snacks, and drove the 60 miles into town last night to pick up food for Saturday's meet.

I was shopping for 40 athletes and had a good budget so I definitely enjoyed myself. I pushed the cart around the store for an hour filling it with apples, oranges, bananas, peanut butter, jelly, whole wheat bread, string cheese, and a couple cases of gatorade. I wheeled my haul up to the front of the store with pride... my team was going to be very well fueled this week... but then ran into a big problem. The store did not accept the team's credit card; our school district hasn't been paying its bills so we won't be able to get food this week.

One would think I might have gotten upset at this, but my colleague (who had come along for the shopping extravaganza) and I couldn't do anything but laugh... We weren't surprised, this is just a normal occurrence when one works in a severely underfunded, slightly corrupt school district. We both bought ourselves a bottle of red wine (using our personal credit cards which were happily accepted) and chuckled in amazement as the poor store clerk began re-shelving my track team's would-be lunch.

I've been told that the Navajo grocery store will still accept the cards. That chain tends to have a much smaller selection of produce and healthy items but I will venture over there today in hopes of finding a way to feed my team something other than double cheeseburgers, fries, and soda.

I can't help but think that this is one of the big reasons why obesity is so rampant in low-income communities... it's not easy to eat healthfully when you're running into these problems on a regular basis.

Smorgasboard of Links

This has been a great week for interesting little articles about nutrition and food culture in the US. This post is dedicated to pointing a few of the highlights out. If you're sitting at work and you're board, I highly recommend these articles. (I suppose I would recommend them even if you're not bored and you're not at work... but who really reads blogs when they have something better to do?? ha!)

Tear Up the White House Lawn!
This comes from TakePart.org... a neat site that has articles on a ton of different topics. In this article they suggest that the next president should tear up the White House lawn and plant a garden in order to set a better example for Americans. Gardening, after all, not only encourages people to eat their fruits and veggies but it also forces people to get outside and get active. I would love a president with a green thumb, but could it ever happen? Would the large veggie corporations in California and Florida send hit men to 1600 Pennsylvania Ave and replace a strawberry patch with a neatly packaged container of organic spinach? I don't know...

Explosive Truth about Twinkies
This article, also originally posted on TakePart.org but the link is from the repost on EatingLiberally.org, talks about the book by Steve Ettlinger called Twinkie, Deconstructed. It also has a great You Tube clip of a 1960 Twinkie commercial in which a mom talks about how important it is to serve the children Twinkies. "They're only young once!" she says... I thought this was really interesting especially after reading the chapter in Wansink's book about comfort food and where we develop certain predilections towards snacks, desserts, or entrees.

Free Lunch
This article is from the New York Times this week and is can be tied into my last post on conspicuous consumption and how it affects food choices. In the article they talk about how many students who receive free lunch do not eat it because they don't want to be seen eating it. Free Lunch is not cool. This makes perfect sense. Certain food is seen as a status symbol so despite the fact that these students may be hungry, they will pass. Very interesting.

Quest for Local produce

There was a great article on the times last Saturday that I just got around to reading. It's written by a Midwestern vegetable farmer who shares some of the troubles he has had with government restrictions on what he can grow and where. He claims that the demand for local produce is on the rise but the government and the farm bill are heavily influenced by the large vegetable companies in California and Florida; therefore, laws are stacked against local vegetable farmers. This is why it's so hard to become a member of certain CSAs. Demand is much higher than farmers are allowed to supply.

Anyway... check out the article. My Forbidden Fruits (and Vegetables)

Wine Snobs and Conspicuous Consumption

Currently I am reading two books. The first one I started is Appetite for Profit by Michele Simon. While I tend to agree with much of what Simon discusses in the book, I am having a hard time getting through it because the organization is too S for my tastes (according to multiple Myers-Briggs tests I am a very strong N... not a surprise to anyone who has had a real conversation with me) and I feel that she is repeating the same argument over and over again. Corporations cannot be trusted to do anything in the interest of public health because they are more concerned with profit. I get that. But anyway... because of great recommendations I plan to continue through Simon's book... but while I do that I decided to start Brian Wansink's Mindless Eating.

First, a little background, Wansink is currently a professor of consumer behavior at Cornell University. This specialization has him dabbling in the fields of Economics, Behavioral Psychology, Business, and a variety of other fascinating subjects. (He also just happens to be a professor in the Applied Econ program that keeps floating around in the back of my head as a possibility here soon...) But, Wansink conducts experiments at his Food and Brand Lab where he tries to figure out how different environmental factors influence what and how much we eat. Mindless Eating is a great book for anyone who is trying to lose weight, because it points out a number of unhealthy habits we have. Eat on smaller plates. Eat slowly. Create a positive atmosphere. Replace short fat drinking glasses with tall skinny ones. All of these can be used to effectively trim calories from your daily consumption. More than just a diet book, however, it is very interesting and slightly depressing to realize vulnerable our food choices are to environmental factors. I also love the fact that this book applies quantitative, scientific analysis to our food choices.

I just finished reading a chapter entitled "Name Game." Wansink talks about how our enjoyment of food is shaped significantly before we taste it by the name of the menu item or the label on the bottle of wine. He provides a number of references to support this claim. He ends up talking about wines, citing the fact that very few people can actually distinguish good wine from great wine, and most choose a bottle by first choosing a price range. "Well, this is a nice party and she's a good friend so I should spend about $15 on the bottle of wine I bring..." As often as I am currently surrounded by people who talk as if they could distinguish a California Merlot from a Chilean Cabernet... I'm not so sure they could. I'm not ignorant when it comes to wine, but I know my palette cannot make that distinction. Wansink brings this point up and argues that the enjoyment is influenced by expectations, but another big red wine flag went up for me as I was reading this part.

How closely can Veblen's theory of conspicuous consumption be applied to our eating decisions? (For a quick, game theory enhanced overview of this theory check out my college project Conspicuous Consumption, I would also highly recommend reading up on the "Special Applications" at the bottom of the page!) Isn't choosing the wine to bring to a party based on price an example of someone who is trying to consume in order to fit into a certain social group? Wansink also discusses how eating in groups tends to encourage both heavy eaters and light eaters to forgo their extreme habits and mirror the habits of the group (discussed in "Mindless Eating Scripts" page 96). Another example in which people are literally consuming in a way that helps them attain a certain status or acceptance. This is exactly what Veblen was referring to except food consumption actually goes into your body as opposed to consumption of clothes, vehicles, or houses which just goes around it.

I have little doubt that these conspicuous consumption ideas can be applied to wine snobs, organic eaters, vegetarians, locavores, or a variety of other high end labels that people define themselves with. We may not readily admit it, but there is a level of pride and belonging when one chooses to shop at Trader Joe's every week or decides to order the garden burger instead of the prime rib sandwich. But I'm not sure one could apply this idea as easily to the populations who struggle with obesity. Does a young man of color choose to gorge on Whoppers and fries and become obese because he wants to identify with a certain social group? I don't know. I suppose I just need to do more research to see how Veblen addresses those at the other end of the conspicuous consumption spectrum.

Opting Out

I have been slowly telling my friends and my family about my decision to become a vegetarian. Reactions have not been out of the ordinary, but one conversation did leave me with something to think about. A friend of mine reacted by talking about how radical being a vegetarian seems in the context of American society. He views vegetarians as individuals who are very separate from the mainstream. The concept of vegetarianism has never been a foreign one to me and I have been surrounded by a handful of vegetarian friends for as long as I can remember. I am well aware of the fact that a typical American meal contains at least one large chunk of animal protein, but I would never have classified vegetarianism as "extreme" or "radical."

My vegetarian days are still very limited, but I am already starting to see how making this dietary decision places me on the very edge of mainstream culture. My students (most of whom are Navajo and butcher their own sheep) do not understand what a diet without meat consists of. Fast food restaurants (with the exception of Burger King) do not have vegetarian options. Other restaurants may have a few vegetarian options, but in the state of New Mexico everything is covered with chili and the chili is generally made with pork. As a meat eater, these are things that I may not have noticed before. Eating vegetarian is a conscious decision that takes some work and forethought to do successfully because the world is not always set up to accommodate this choice.

While avoiding meat is a very clear example of "opting out" of American food culture, there are many others as well. Thinking about Michael Pollan's prescriptions for eating healthier, all of them would entail "opting out" of food culture to an extent. Avoid processed foods with five or more ingredients - I don't know a single student who would turn down a bag of hot Cheeto's for that reason. Learn to cook - For many, cooking is a special occasion, it's not a daily occurrence. Convenience trumps the process of preparing food for most people. If one chooses to follow either of these two rules, they will be required to opt out of mainstream culture. This is radical. This is extreme. It doesn't take a vegetarian diet to cross over to the rebellious side of American food culture.

The question this leads me to is this: what does it take for people to opt out of a harmful food culture? Do they learn it at home? Do they learn it from coworkers and peers? Do they stumble across an article or a book that will change their mind? Or, will opting out always be simply a radical and extreme action... meaning in order to improve the general American's diet we'll have to change the food culture? If so, how in the world do we do that?

Utility

As I may have mentioned in a previous post, one of the possibilities I'm considering is pursuing higher education in the field of Economics. It was my major in undergrad and I absolutely loved it. I have become obsessed with food and nutrition since then so I am also considering pursuing that, but I realized recently that I can combine those two interests. I could study food marketing and production in an applied or agricultural economics program. It could work out very well... only I know next to nothing about the field.

Anyway... the point of this entry. Economics is a very curious social science that does its best to quantify choices... which can be very difficult to quantify. One of the tools economists use is this very general term known as utility... or the pleasure and individual takes from certain consumption decisions. It seems as though this might be a great way to account for preferences and everything else, but the problem is, who really knows why they enjoy all of the things they do? I've been applying this idea a lot and trying to figure out why I do the things that I do (in regards to food that is) and what motivates me to make healthy decisions while many other people make very different decisions.

Example: Tonight I had an eggplant "curry-like" dish with tofu for dinner. (Contains the following - eggplant, onion, cauliflower, lentils, tomatoes, garlic, and indian spices). To be honest, it was kind of tasteless... definitely not bad but definitely not spectacular. Regardless of the finished product, I was so excited to have made it. I told all of my coworkers that I made eggplant curry and I looked forward to reheating the leftovers and tasting the mediocre meal again today. Despite the taste, I took great pleasure from that curry which means that my utility from eating is not derived purely from taste.

Now, this is going to be far from a definitive list, but here's where I think my food utility comes from:

Nutrition - There were lots of different veggies in my curry... meaning I ate a more varied diet this week than I would have without that dish. Plus, there wasn't anything "bad for me" in my curry. That made me feel like I was doing something great.

Exploration and culinary growth - I learned a new way to cook eggplant (roast it in the oven for a while and then scoop the insides into a dish of your choosing)... this makes me feel as though I'm actually becoming a better cook.

Productivity - If I've had a tough day at school, nothing will improve my mood more than making something with my hands. I like being productive; I feel good about myself when I can do that. Cooking is a great outlet for that type of stuff.

Taste - of course I want something that tastes great in addition to all of the above.

I suppose that this is something I need to do some more research on, but the economic concept of utility very complex. The pleasure I take from food is very complex... I can't imagine trying to analyze the pleasure everyone else takes from food. Are there any patterns? Are these innate preferences of have I been shaped by my surroundings? Basically, why do I eat the way I do and why do others eat the way they do?

Research suggestions appreciated.

Blogging... Eeek!

This week I stumbled into the world of internet blogging. I mean... I've written on blogs before and I'm familiar with the concept, but I had no idea how huge the community of bloggers actually was! First, I found one of two blogs that were very interesting, then I followed links from their "blogroll" then all of a sudden I was falling down the rabbit hole. There were food blogs by diabetics, cancer survivors, dieters, amazing chefs, working moms, and anything else one could dream up. I'm sure that some of these blogs are uber popular and some are just "wanna-be's" in the blogworld. They all referenced each other and all of them had tons of comments on each post. This was a community with personal interactions and a lot of dialog going on. First, I realized that there are a lot of intelligent, great writers out there who are passionate about the same things I am. Second, I got very intimidated... what am I doing?

I couldn't help but question myself. Why am I spending time writing in a blog? Why do I think this is a worthwhile project when it is clearly not a unique one. What am I going to contribute that all of these other people aren't already saying? Just like the rest of my life... I guess I really have no clue. I'm wandering right now because, hey, these are my odyssey years. Despite ultimately not knowing what I hope to get out of this blog, I do believe that it is a productive step. I have a lot of thoughts and ideas. I like thinking, reading, and making connections. Since graduating from college, I don't have many places where I've been asked to do those things in a structured manner. I hope this blog can be an outlet for that type of structured reflection on ideas that catch my interest.

Ideally, I will write in this blog a few times a week, maybe even have some people read it and comment on it once in a while (the spot of first comment is still up for grabs! you better act quickly if you want to be a part of this history!) . After a few months of this (maybe longer... who knows), I would read back on my entries and be able to see patterns... something would become clear and point me towards my next step. Maybe I'll stumble across a research possibility or dissertation topic in a blog entry. I guess that is a huge expectation to have for a blog, but I don't think it's totally unrealistic. Writing and reflecting is very valuable; therefore, I envision this as being a way in which I might figure out what I'm doing with myself. It could happen.

This is how I think of this blog. I haven't sent the address to my family members and aside from the passing reference to my dietary patterns, contented singleness, or love of running on the mesas, I have no intentions of dwelling on my personal life. This is a place for me to explore ideas about food, economics, sociology, philosophy, and any other passing thoughts that might come my way. I think becoming part of the blogging community would be fun, but it's not my main goal. (Comments are still welcome, though!)

Made to order nutrition bars

You Bars - This is a site that allows people to custom order nutrition bars. They have a pretty wide selection of ingredients and supplements that can be added. The small, family owned business is located in California, produces the bars there and then sends them to the customers across the country. The bars are individually wrapped, can be named by the person who places the order, and come with a nutrition label on them.

Great things about this idea: I am quite familiar with the nutrition and meal replacement bars that are on the market right now. I really like the convenience of such products, but I'm usually turned off by the extensive list of ingredients. It's difficult to find a bar that offers the calories, protein, and whatever else I am looking for without tons of additives that I would like to avoid. You Bars seem like a great alternative. I can order these bars so that the carbohydrates are coming from honey and oatmeal instead of cornsyrup and sugar... and make sure they still have some protein in them. This is a great thing. Throwing a nutrition bar that is made from real food into my bag on the way out the door seems like a much better idea than reaching for a vitamin enriched candy bar.

Questions about this idea: Even if they are made with whole foods and organic ingredients, these are still meal replacement bars... supplements. These are designed to be eaten quickly and to specifically optimize what we are putting into our bodies. They are also made in California and shipped across the country... definitely not local for the majority of us. This product promotes and caters to the same patterns of convenience eating and nutritionism that so many other products on the market sell to, it just does this with higher quality ingredients.

Ultimately... I love having snacks readily available and if I could afford to pay the $40 for a box of 12 bars, I would order some "Becky Bars" right now. I don't think that expense is going to be very high on my priority list right now, BUT... I sure would love to get my hands on the recipes that this family uses! (And congratulate them on a great business idea)

Experimentation

Marion Nestle highlighted this family's experiment on her blog yesterday and I'm really interested in reading about how it is going. A family of five, parents and three boys under the age of seven, have cleaned out their cabinets and decided to follow Michael Pollan's advice about eating for 30 days. This includes very few processed foods and a whole lot of cooking. The family will be chronicling their experience on this blog: Fresh Mouth.

Ultimately, I think any attempt to eat healthier and "opt out" of American eating habits is a good thing. I can also relate to this woman's feelings towards cooking and working so hard to eat well because I tend to follow the same diet plan that she and her family are currently following... and I do dishes constantly! And I'm only cooking for one! She brings up a great point in today's post about being detached from food because of our schedules. It takes a lot more time to eat whole foods than to heat something in a microwave. I have never had a family or kids to take care of so I know I can't really understand those demands... but I would like to think that it's more about priorities. As a runner, a lot of people will tell me that they would never have the time to run... I don't really believe that. I guess the same can be true of food, if it's a priority, you will get it done, if it's not... too bad.

Anyway... Good luck! I look forward to checking back in and hearing the stories coming from this family's kitchen!

Vegetarianism

This is my official announcement. As of Saturday, February 16th, 2008, I am officially a vegetarian. My last bite of meat was half of a Carl's Jr. burger on Friday night. I put all of the meat in my house in a bag and in the back corner of my freezer... I will probably be gifting it to my neighbor quite soon. I have two reasons for making this decision, and while I don't think it will be a permanent change, I am 100% committed to it.

First, I don't want to put bad food in my body. The animals used to produce this meat are not raised in a natural or a humane way, creating a situation where they are not only fed a disgusting diet, but they are medicated to prevent them from getting sick on that diet. I think this situation is wrong, but more so, I don't want to put the meat that results from these CAFOs into my body. If I lived in a place where I had more access to a local cattle farm or something similar I might be making a different decision, but vegetarianism works for now.

Second, I'm fascinated by food culture in the United States. I am currently choosing to opt out of US food culture in many ways (ex. eating a generally healthy diet with only a few Carl's Jr. exceptions). But, I am curious as to how difficult it will be to opt out more dramatically. How difficult is it to eat out if you're a vegetarian, how difficult is it to participate in other social eating situations as a vegetarian? What will my students say?

This is going to be a great experiment. I'm hoping to do this for at least six months... and then I'll reevaluate. I will keep everyone updated!

Deal breakers

I have been thinking a lot about vegetarianism lately. I am appalled by the way meat is produced in this country. My disgust does not come from that "touchy feely" place that I have despised for so long as a reason for not eating meat, but it comes from a respect for what I put into my body and a belief that the current state of the meat industry is no where close to how things are supposed to work. I ultimately believe that it is ok for humans to kill animals in order to feed ourselves. Maybe it's ignorant, but I don't see a problem with that. I do, however, think it's wrong for humans to modify the natural order of life in order to make meat cheaper or more profitable. I also find the meat industry environmentally careless and don't have a desire to feed my body with a substance that has been so adulterated.

After some reading, I figured out my beliefs (explained above) but couldn't figure out why I hadn't thrown my hat into the vegetarian ring yet. I really enjoy tofu, beans, veggies, soy products, and other vegetarian fair so giving up my occasional burger or grilled chicken would not kill me. I found a passage that really helped me answer this question in The Omnivore's Dilemma. Pollan talks about the experience of eating communally and being a vegetarian. He explains how a chosen dietary restriction can separate an individual from other diners and create awkward situations filled with different guilts and obligations. This explanation makes a lot of sense to me. I want to be able to enjoy communal meals with others; I can eat and cook however I want in my own home, but while dining with others I want to participate in that community fully.

There is an article the The New York Times today that also dwells on the power food can have in social relationships. They discuss romantic relationship, the successes and failures, between people who have different diets. I Love You, but You Love Meat. They allude many times to the connection people feel when sharing a meal together. The problem, however, is that there are many people who don't consciously value food in the same way... or they value foods like Big Mac's and Sonic burritos... and that gets in the way of romantic relationships. The article makes a great point. I could date a vegetarian, a vegan, someone who was kosher, or someone who had a dietary restriction, but I could not date someone who didn't derive enjoyment from the process of cooking and eating, or who didn't respect what they were putting into their body.

Vegetarian or not... I like sharing the enjoyment of food with others. I guess I will have to add this idea to my list of dating deal breakers in the future.

Another Option

I really love reading the blog Eating Liberally. Last week they had a spectacular recipe for orange vegan cupcakes. It was my first exploration into vegan baking and I was definitely impressed with the results. Other than that, this blog just offers some interesting, well written pieces. Here's a quote from today's entry:

David Gracer, a connoisseur of bug-based cuisine, told Najame, “Insects can feed the world. Cows and pigs are the S.U.V.’s; bugs are the bicycles.” Way to get us eco-weenies to board the bug-eating bandwagon; who doesn’t love bicycles?

I like bicycles. The entry is about eating bugs, the unjust prejudice that Americans have against it, and the ways in which this new diet can solve the world's problems. I haven't been eating a whole lot of meat recently because of everything I've learned about the current state of the meat industry so I did give some serious thought to the bug idea. My serious thought involved imagining myself wandering around the mesas in back of my adobe, trying to find 2 cups of grasshoppers in order to make quesadillas. Interesting... I'm just not sure if I could bring myself to put one of those grasshoppers in my mouth. It would take a while to get used to the texture I imagine...

Are bugs even clean? If I were to pick up a beetle or a worm of some sort and snack on it, would I get some sort of disease? And if they are generally clean on the inside, how do you clean the outside? And do you eat them whole? These are all things that should be answered if anyone wants us to seriously consider eating bugs.

Check out the article. Eating Bugs?

Venture into Academic Literature

After a year and a half in the "real world", I have returned to the journal pages that occupied so much of my time not too long ago. I have been reading books written on the subjects of food and nutrition, but have realized that these are not enough. After coming across "Behavioral Economics, Food Assistance, and Obesity" by David Just (a professor at Cornell), I figured this was a good place to start.

As the title suggests, Just starts by acknowledging the prevalence of obesity among low-income sections of the population and, therefore, the high percentage of obese men and women who rely on food assistance programs. He discusses the difficulties in addressing this situation using standard economic solutions (a fat tax or restrictions on what can or can't be purchased) and advocates that policy makers need to consider the contributions that behavioral economics can make to address such problems. After presenting a variety of examples from behavioral economic and food psychology studies, Just argues that food choices are not always rational and need to be treated as such. Just goes on to discuss a few changes that can be made in the school lunch program, food stamp program, or the WIC program that will encourage participants to spend the assistance money in a way to increase overall health and decrease caloric consumption - thereby addressing the high rates of obesity.

This article provided a very different perspective than a lot of the literature I have been reading about food recently. While Michael Pollan alludes to the variety of contributions food makes to our lives (nutritional, communal, spiritual, ect.), Just views food as something that simply sustains us. As a way to help the school lunch program effectively address childhood obesity he suggests that students eat in very small groups and eat quickly because these conditions encourage eaters to consume fewer calories. Ok, this is definitely logical, but what about that great sense of satisfaction and community that comes from sharing meals with others. Do we have to give that up in order to eat less? Another policy recommendation Just has for improving the efficacy of the food stamp program is to encourage producers to make more individual sized portions and make ready-to-eat meals in smaller portions eligible food items. This, too, encourages people to eat fewer calories, yes, but does not promote a communal enjoyment of food. (The excess packaging is of course an environmental issue as well...)

The prescriptions made by David Just in this article make a lot of sense. They address the issues of overeating in a way that takes an individual's proclivity for being irrational into account. Because of this I believe that his policies have the potential to be effective if implemented correctly. I do, however, find this outlook on food slightly depressing. I love food. I love shopping and cooking and eating and sharing these things with others. I wish others could view food in this manner. The thing is, it's easy for me to say this because I don't have a problem with overeating whereas many people in the US do. This just leads me to wonder, is there a way to fit the enjoyment of the process of eating into an economic analysis of food, food assistance, and obesity? If we could encourage a greater pleasure and connection to what we eat, would that provide people with an incentive to eat better and become healthier?

Just, David R. “Behavioral Economics, Food Assistance, and Obesity.” Agricultural and Resource Economics Review. Vol. 35, No. 2 (October 2006): 1–10.

Techno-phobe?

Recently, I had a great conversation about food with my good friend Aaron. Both of us have experimented with different diets that advocate for supplements, specifically high protein supplements. Personally, the diet worked well for me; I lost some weight and felt pretty great about what I was doing for myself. Aaron was also a fan of the diet. Since then I have read books by Marion Nestle and Michael Pollan, both of whom advocate for whole foods and are critical of food science. Even though I enjoyed the nutrition program that I experimented with, I now find myself much more critical of anything that tells me I need to supplement my diet with "edible food-like substances." I agree with the idea that whole foods can provide me with everything I need, and I also find it to be a very romantic perspective to have.

As I was expressing this view to my friend, a very intelligent, scientifically minded man, and he accused me of being critical of innovations just because they are new and different. Food science had already brought about helpful things such as preservatives and different supplements for people with debilitating allergies. Why judge a protein bar that conveniently provides important vitamins and minerals just because it comes from a lab instead of off a tree? Well... good point. Where is the line between arguing that we should still be running around naked, eating berries and wild animals because that's how we used to do it and arguing that certain things just don't need to be improved upon? I'm not sure I have an answer to that totally, but I have a few more arguments after reading the first part of In Defense of Food: An Eater's Manifesto.

As Michael Pollan points out in his discussion of the FDA's decision in 1973 to allow modified foods to be marketed without the "imitation" label that was previously required, Nutritional science and food science is assumed to have a thorough understanding of how foods nourish our bodies. This, however, is not always the case.

1) Margarine. Margarine was introduced in the last century as a way to avoid saturated fats. Food scientists used hydrogenated vegetable oils to make a substance that was similar to butter. Americans ate this for decades before we all realized that the trans-fats created by hydrogenating vegetable oils were twice as bad for us as the naturally occurring saturated fats in butter were. Ooops... We clearly hadn't figured it out at this point.

2) Snackwells and the Fat Phobia. More recently, in another attempt to avoid fats, Americans became obsessed with low fat alternatives. The vast majority of foods engineered to be lower in fats are much higher in refined carbohydrates; for example, Snackwell products. The reduction in food fats accompanied with the increases in refined sugars has increased the obesity problem in the United States instead of decreasing it. Ooops again!

3) Baby Formula. I haven't read much about this specifically, but Pollan refers to it multiple times. Apparently the trial and error food scientists have gone through in creating infant formulas that adequately replicate breast milk is a great example of how much we still don't know about the intricate nature of food and health.

These might partially justify my "techno-phobia" and I will keep you updated as to whether my friend finds these reasons valid. Ultimately, the best reason I have to eat real food and avoid "food-like substances" is that human science is flawed and will continue to be so for a long time. Nature, on the other hand, produces some pretty delicious dishes if I do say so myself... and I'm pretty sure they won't make my pee smell like chemicals. That's a good thing in my book.

The Omnivore's Dilemma

Know where your food comes from. Trust culture.

I began reading this book because it is on the list of must reads for aspiring food geeks. Throughout the first half of the book, sections that go into fascinating detail about the origins of many common foods in the American system, Michael Pollan neglects to inform the reader that he has a concrete solution to this Dilemma to which the title refers. During the second half, he lets us in on the secret. Food is nutritional and sustaining, but even more so food is spiritual and cultural. It is in our understanding of, connection to, and appreciation of the food chain that we can truly experience the full pleasure of eating. And, it is through our identification with culture, and the community interaction that should follow the act of eating, that we can learn to eat in ways that sustain us and our environment.

While not a main focus of this book, Michael Pollan has spoken critically of "nutritionism." This is how he identifies the current trend of focusing on food and health by analyzing individual nutrients instead of viewing foods and diet in a more holistic manner. After realizing how much he believes food provides humans with a physical and spiritual connection to the rest of the world, this criticism seems very justified. Focusing on the effect Omega 3's have on a person's health and wellbeing might be likened to the effect a person's agreement or disagreement to a single Bible verse has on her relationship with God. Ultimately, Omega 3's and a person's reaction to a scripture may be significant, but neither tell a story that could be described as anything other than limited. Spirituality can only be evaluated by examining a variety of different perspectives just as many things need to be considered when thinking about the diet's relationship to health and well-being.

I am glad to have read something that is critical of the importance of individual nutrients. I am also very excited to incorporate the idea's Pollan has about culture and spirituality into further reading about food and nutrition. Additionally, Pollan's description of the food industry makes me very curious to explore the contradictory motives of capitalism and providing America with a healthy diet.

The Trenches vs. The Ivory Tower

There is clearly an obesity problem in the United States. As a country, we are poisoning ourselves on a daily basis. We have no idea of how to feed ourselves in a way that optimizes our physical potential. Advertising and corporations make seemingly simple food choices unbelievably complicated when examined closely. I believe that this situation needs to be addressed.

While I am still in the early stages of this romantic relationship, I love food. I take great pleasure in preparing meals both for myself and for others. I feel as though I enter some sort of time warp in super markets because hours pass quickly before I tire from reading labels, health claims, and examining unfamiliar products. I read about food, nutrition, and health constantly. This just may be my passion and this just may be the way in which I can contribute to this world. Unfortunately... at the age of 23, passion just leads one to even more questions.

What is the best way to address the eating disorder that America is suffering from? What is the best way for me to share my love and passion of food with others who could benefit from my perspective? Option A: Find a job with WIC or some similar organization that offers advice and counsels the populations who are most in need. Work in the trenches and know that I will influence lives on a daily basis. Option B: Pursue higher education by becoming a Nutritionist or getting a PhD in Applied Economics or something very similar. Talk, think, teach and write about these issues for the rest of my life and hope that my words don't fall on deaf ears.

Both options have benefits, both have drawbacks. What do you think, the trenches of the ivory tower?