• E-mail
• Print
• Comment
• Font Size
• Digg
• del.icio.us
• Discuss article

Don't Fret - They're Just Guidelines

Posted on: Thursday, 27 January 2005, 06:00 CST

COUNTING SERVINGS, calories, fat grams or (fill in the blank) is a chore. I don't enjoy being told what to eat and how much - or little - of it to eat, which is why I bristle at the thought of governmental dietary guidelines. Besides, how does the government know the particular circumstances that inform and determine the composition of my meals or how they are consumed?

I understand that the guidelines are indeed just that: a suggested framework. I take that to mean that if you achieve the recommended servings, great. If you don't, getting most of the servings is better than none at all. The guidelines are meant to encourage the public toward more healthful food choices, which is not inherently wrong. Some people, perhaps those who think the major food groups are sugar, grease and "cheez," need all the help they can get.

But, the guidelines, especially when the word "dietary" is attached to them and they are handed down with a healthy dose of doom (eat this way or suffer physical ailments and die), don't necessarily work. If anything, it triggers those of us with an inkling of a rebellious streak, to flout the rules. Tell me to eat low-fat yogurt and, instead, I probably will seek the kind with the cream on top.

What troubles me about the guidelines is that they neglect cultural context and pleasure.

Americans aren't programmed to have a healthy relationship with food. It is alternately described as fuel, an evil, a reward, an indulgence, a measured serving. If a kid is bad, he is sent to his room without dinner. If you eat a piece of cake at lunch, you've committed a sin. If you crave chocolate, you're a chocoholic. If you want to be healthy, eat nine servings of fruits and vegetables a day, and, while you're at it, make sure you choose from the full spectrum of produce type and color.

This is a highly dysfunctional manner in which to consider food and its consumption.

I don't like to follow recipes, because it takes too long to measure everything and to have to refer to the directions repeatedly. It's much more efficient and fun to cook according to the techniques that I long ago internalized. Risotto is much less of a pain to make when you know what you're doing.

Eating more healthfully would be easier if people were given a better context for food, if they simply knew what they were doing.

I wonder if obesity would be a problem if we didn't place so much value in convenience products and processed food. How about more commercials on how to create a juicy salad instead of on pizzas with toppings on and in the crust? What about encouraging people to eat less but better, more naturally flavorful foods?

We no longer recognize when specific produce are in season and are therefore at their peak taste and minimum cost. Our palates have tunnel vision, registering only manufactured flavors or ones that jolt our taste buds with cloying sweetness or burning saltiness. We don't know how to appreciate subtleties or nuances, or even the other key flavors that our tongues can detect: bitter and sour.

If we knew any better, there wouldn't be "tomatoes" in winter. If we were culturally programmed to take pleasure in food, its daily preparation and consumption, the guidelines might be very different.

We have to care about food before we can talk about controlling portions.

P-I food writer Hsiao-Ching Chou can be reached at 206-448-8117 or hsiaochingchou@seattlepi.com.

Source: Seattle Post - Intelligencer

More News in this Category