Comments on: Think of Food as Food

By: Lia Huber

Lia Huber — Wed, 19 Aug 2009 03:29:14 +0000

Erika . . . Amen, sister. (I hope my byline wasn’t on one of those articles ;-)) Seriously. I was struck by the same thing over the years as I was writing about health. At first, I’d get really excited about each “discovery.” But then it seemed that superfoods and superscares would inevitably cancel each other out. What remained was the essentials of, like you say, a balanced, all-things-in-moderation diet. And . . . there’s science backing that up too. Thanks for your thoughts!

By: Erika Wasielewski

Erika Wasielewski — Wed, 19 Aug 2009 02:45:40 +0000

Recently I found myself leafing through old food magazines, and I was struck by how many various issues over the years touted this, that, or the other thing as the next big thing for health. Eat this and you’ll feel better. Eat that and you’ll boost your immune system. Seriously, if I ate everything that I was told over the last five years to eat because of the health benefits, I have no doubt I’d be seriously overweight.

Most of the time, I just want what I eat to taste good. It’s an added bonus if it’s got great health benefits, but I’m so over the idea of lining up to eat the next big super-antioxidant. Give it to me wrapped in luscious dark chocolate as part of a balanced, all-things-in-moderation diet, and I’ll be a happy girl.

By: Lia Huber

Lia Huber — Tue, 18 Aug 2009 16:24:48 +0000

Randy . . . Great comments. I look forward to seeing your book!

By: Randy Karp

Randy Karp — Tue, 18 Aug 2009 15:12:54 +0000

Check out Informed Living blog on linked in.

By: Randy Karp

Randy Karp — Tue, 18 Aug 2009 15:11:51 +0000

You both are really on the right path. In my soon to be released book, Misinformed About Food, I reveal the truth…just because one food is high in a particular antioxidant and another is lower does not mean the former is a better choice. I would rather have a food with a medley of available nutrients, even if its not as high in one. I reveal a program called The Synergy of Super-Nutrients (SOS), about how certain foods actually empower each other,. In the end, its about the “cocktail”of nutrients you’ve offered up to your body at any given time/ The GI or GL level of food means little, except if eaten alone. Its the GI or GL of the entire meal. Good stuff!

By: Lia Huber

Lia Huber — Tue, 18 Aug 2009 03:36:48 +0000

Dierdre . . . you’re very welcome. Enjoy that sandwich when you are hungry–and when you’ve got a juicy heirloom tomato on hand! Thanks!

By: Deirdre

Deirdre — Tue, 18 Aug 2009 03:29:56 +0000

I’ve just finished dinner and am not at all hungry, but the picture of the the tomato-avocado sandwich just made my mouth water.

Thank you for the reminder that food is to be enjoyed, not broken down into components that have no drool factor.

By: Lia Huber

Lia Huber — Tue, 18 Aug 2009 00:47:06 +0000

Thanks, Eagranie. I remember your post on chocolate getting to exactly to that point very eloquently.

This interview with Dr. Trichopoulou was really a turning point for me in my career/personal life. I’d been on a vertical learning curve about nutrition, and Antonia brought it home that ultimately, it isn’t about the “antioxidants,” it’s about the tomato. I’ve really tried not to lose sight of that stance ever since.

Great to see you here!

By: Eagranie

Eagranie — Tue, 18 Aug 2009 00:26:42 +0000

What a great post, Lia. The idea that you should eat something because of a single nutrient has always struck me as weirdly clinical, especially when you’re talking about food. Food is a textural, tasty, sensual experience that should be enjoyed and not over-analyzed.