In Search of the Perfect Diet

By Bart Brodsky & Janet Geis

Janet Geis and Bart Brodsky have been in search of the perfect diet for several years. While they're definitely eating better than they used to, they say there's always room for improvement. Janet and Bart are the publishers of OPEN EXCHANGE MAGAZINE and they invite you to join them on the search!

What's for dinner? It's been an open question practically since humans walked upright. As whole food advocate Michael Pollan noted, we may be the only species that has to learn what to eat—and what not to eat. Unlike the koala bear, genetically programmed to eat only eucalyptus leaves, we face "the omnivore's dilemma," uncertainty about how much of which foods should be consumed or avoided. We love to eat, and we want to stay fit, so the question is very personal, not just "pie in the sky."

Our search for the perfect diet has taken us in many different directions. The perfect diet is one that would give us the best chance of remaining physically and mentally active and disease free for up to 100 years or more. When we googled "the perfect diet" one of the first links took us to a raw meat diet. Raw meat? We're not sure we have the teeth, let alone the stomach for that! Another promising link was "theperfectdiet.org." Turns out that website was still "under construction." No menus, but at least it provided us with a delicious irony. Hold the fries, please!

It's hard to believe, but just a few years ago Western medicine did not even recognize a link between diet and health. To this day, most medical doctors don't have to take even one course in nutrition. We know an oncologist who, despite having had cancer surgery and a colostomy, insisted on maintaining his daily regimen of bacon and eggs for breakfast. Hadn't he read all the reports condemning saturated animal fats? Apparently it didn't matter, because according to a recent headline blaring in Epoch Times (May 20-26, 2010), "Bacon and Eggs Back in Business."

Yes, according to the headlines bacon is good and vegetables don't count. Media outlets went into a frenzy April 7, 2010 reporting the apparent failure of daily fruit and vegetables to significantly prevent cancers in 400,000 Europeans studied for almost nine years.

"Bad news for food fascists! Five fruit and veg a day doesn't work," screamed British newspaper The Daily Telegraph, followed by an admonition to the "bossy food nutritionists" who've now, it said, been proved wrong.

The study itself, published in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute, found that eating about two servings of fruits and veggies daily reduced cancers overall by just four percent. Was mom wrong about serving peas and broccoli?

Cancer Research UK, which co-funded the enormous study launched in 1991, nevertheless disputed their own results with this proclamation:

• An unhealthy diet can increase the risk of cancer
• Eating lots of fibre could reduce the risk of bowel cancer
• Fibre triggers the production of helpful chemicals, and increases the frequency of bowel movements
• Fruit and vegetables may reduce the risk of many cancers
• Fruit and vegetables are a good source of vitamins, minerals, and fibre.
• Fruit and vegetables have wide health benefits
• Eating lots of red or processed meat can increase the risk of cancer
• Red and processed meat contain chemicals that could cause bowel cancer
• Eating lots of fish could reduce the risk of bowel cancer
• Eating lots of saturated fat could increase the risk of breast cancer
• Eating lots of salt could increase the risk of stomach cancer

The National Cancer Institute UK concludes that an unhealthy diet can increase the risk of cancer as much as 30%. Nevertheless, they say it's difficult to prove this assertion because of the way foods, nutrients, and pollutants interact in combination. (http://info.cancerresearchuk.org)

We have a suggestion for a new study: Feed participants fruits and vegetables exclusively from organic family farms. Then measure the results again. There is plenty of evidence suggesting that vegetables are healthful, and organic vegetables are even more healthful!

One hundred years ago all foods were whole and natural. All farms were family farms, before factory farming. No foods were genetically modified. No foods had stabilizers, chemical brews of preservatives, artificial sweeteners....

FOOD., Inc. is at the vanguard of a modern food revolution. What Al Gore did for climate change in An Inconvenient Truth, Robert Kenner's Oscar-nominated documentary does to dinner in FOOD., Inc. The same company made both movies, and the latter could have been subtitled "An Inconvenient Truth About Your Meat and Veggies." Less than 100 years ago all food was organic and natural, but my, how times have changed! The idyllic ma and pa farms of yore are gone, only visible in advertising campaigns and on butter labels. Agriculture has become big business, and farmers are now factory workers, force-feeding pigs, cows, and chickens a chemical stew of steroids and antibiotics—bad for them and bad for us, too. Writer/narrator Eric Schlosser delicately directs our attention behind the scenes, where animals too sick to stand roll in their own feces and onto our dinner plates. Factory-farm animals spend their whole lives in dark torture chambers, to be sure. But instead of overwhelming us with the horror show (something PETA likes to do), Schlosser takes us to an independent farmer bucking the trend, where a happy pig and a plucky chicken live lives as carefree as you could imagine—before they become your future dinner. Kenner, Schlosser and company make the case that sustainable and organic farming methods could feed the world, if we'd only adopt them.

The Omnivore's Dilemma, written by Michael Pollan, is an eye-opening account of how we produce, market, and agonize about what we eat—and a searing indictment of modern food industry practices. Following the life of a steer in the chemical stew of a cramped American feedlot might turn anyone vegetarian. "How could it come to pass that a fast-food burger produced from corn and fossil fuel actually costs less than a burger produced from grass and sunlight?"

Unfortunately, the organic foods movement, now big business, doesn't fare much better. From "organic beef raised in 'organic feedlots' and organic high-fructose corn syrup," Pollan wonders if the industry hasn't lost its soul. If salvation is to be found, it is where chefs like Alice Waters of Berkeley's Chez Panisse have helped rebuild local food economies, sourcing much of their food from organic growers, and cooking only what is in season. Pollan urges us to be wary of the meal which seems "a bargain but fails to cover its true cost, charging it instead to nature, to the public health and purse, and to the future."

The messages in FOOD., Inc. and The Omnivore's Dilemma are compelling. But let's not forget that a generation ago John Robbins first warned us of the dangers of factory farming in his groundbreaking book, Diet for A New America and a subsequent eye-opening PBS documentary. Robbins is onetime heir to the Baskin-Robbins Ice Cream empire, but he walked away from it all once he recognized the negative health implications of marketing sugary confections. How many of us would turn down a fortune on pure principle? Of particular interest to us was Robbins' take on long-lived omnivores. Robbins, an avowed vegan (eating an exclusively plant-based diet), doesn't shy away from the fact that traditional Okinawans, Hunzans, and other groups noted for their longevity supplement their plant-based diets with small amounts of dairy, meat, and fish. Weighing the evidence he writes, "The debate about how much, if any, animal foods are optimum to include in one's diet will no doubt continue for some time. It is hard to argue, however, against the reality that most people eating the standard Western diet would benefit considerably by moving in a more plant-based direction.... If you eat any kind of meat, purchase products that you know to be truly range-free and organic." (From Health At 100.)

Meat or no meat? Let's put this question on hold for a moment. Meanwhile, let's consider this: If the "Standard American Diet" is meat and potatoes, especially if it's fast food burgers, fries, and sugar, it's an unmitigated disaster. In fact, it truly is SAD. The rise of obesity, diabetes, heart disease, cancer, and even mental illness may well be attributable to SAD.

U.S. researchers have found that organic fruit and vegetables may be better for you than conventionally grown crops. These findings agreed with recent European research, which showed that organic tomatoes, peaches and processed apples all have higher nutritional quality than non-organic.

A ten-year study comparing organic tomatoes with standard produce found almost double the level of flavonoids, a type of antioxidant that has been shown to reduce high blood pressure, lowering the risk of heart disease and stroke. Flavonoids have also been linked with reduced rates of some types of cancer and dementia.

Along with her colleagues at the University of California at Davis, food chemist Dr. Alyson Mitchell measured the amount of two flavonoids, quercetin and kaempferol, in dried tomato samples that had been collected as part of a long-term study on agricultural methods. They found that on average they were 79% and 97% higher respectively in the organic tomatoes than in the conventionally grown fruit.

New Scientist magazine speculated that the different levels of flavonoids in tomatoes are probably due to the absence of fertilizers in organic farming. The lower levels of flavonoids are probably caused by over-fertilization.

Another EU study found more widespread evidence of the benefits of growing organic. Organic milk was found to have up to 80 percent more antioxidants than conventional cow juice, as well as higher amounts of vitamin E. Organic wheat, tomatoes, cabbage, onions, and lettuce had up to 40 percent more antioxidants than their conventional counterparts. And organic potatoes, kiwi fruit, and carrots were found to have higher levels of vitamin C.

Despite growing evidence, skeptics are not easily convinced that organic food is healthier. As one British spokesman said, "Our long-standing advice on organic food is there can be some nutrient differences but it doesn't mean it's necessarily better for you." Say what? (BBC News, 7/5/2007; www.grist.org, 10/30/07.)

Moreover, what about the nitrates and pesticides? A British report published in late 2009 stirred renewed controversy by claiming to prove that organic produce is no better than the commercially grown variety. The report was written by the government's Food Standards Agency, which evaluated 55 scientific studies comparing organic and non-organic produce. Of course, the Soil Association (Britain's organic food organization) fought back, saying, "What about the pesticide residue?"

"We didn't look at that," replied the FSA. "We looked at nutritional elements only. Pesticides are fine, because they are monitored and we don't believe they are dangerous to food."

Not good enough, writes food expert Tom Philpott, pointing to a study released last year by the U.S.-based Organic Center, which comes to a conclusion quite different from the U.K. agency's findings. "Conventionally grown produce has substantially higher levels of nitrates than organic—most likely from widespread use of synthetic nitrogen fertilizer on conventional farms.

"This consensus around a nitrogen gap suggests a non-trivial advantage for organic food: A growing body of literature indicts heightened levels of nitrates in the U.S. diet as a significant health menace. For a while, we've known that nitrates are a powerful carcinogen."

Another damning piece of evidence against factory farming comes from a report from the Journal of Alzheimer Disease linking nitrates in food to "increased deaths from diseases, including Alzheimer's, diabetes mellitus and Parkinson's." (www.grist.org; http://actionspark.com/2009/08/09/organic-food-no-better/)

In Diet For a Hot Planet, Anna Lappé asserts that commercial meat production is an environmental disaster, a major contributor to global warming. But as John Robbins revealed a generation ago, factory meat may be downright deadly for the consumer. And even omnivores tend to get squeamish when they see what goes into their not-so-happy meals. The animals are fed an unnatural diet of grain and recycled animal parts combined chemical brew of fertilizers and pesticides. Antibiotics fed to animals are stored in their fat, and we consume them to overload by eating closer to the top of the food chain. They may be deficient in some nutrients as well.

Industrial meat is safe, asserts the meat industry. Big beef even sued media diva Oprah Winfrey for implying otherwise on her talk show. (Fortunately free speech triumphed and she won, but it was an expensive lawsuit.) Humans aren't affected by all the chemicals, hormones, and pesticides used to beef up commercial meats, right? Wrong. Environmental reporter Tom Laskawy tells a very different story:

"A few years ago, scientists released one of the first studies to examine how diet can affect your exposure to toxic substances. In that case, researchers had a group of Seattle schoolchildren eat an organic diet for five days a week. Almost immediately, pesticide levels in the children's bodies dropped to almost undetectable levels — and returned to 'normal' after they resumed eating a conventional diet."

In another study, a group of Korean scientists found that many toxins disappear when people simply stop eating conventional meat:

"People who adopted a vegetarian diet for just five days show reduced levels of toxic chemicals in their bodies. In particular, levels of hormone disrupting chemicals and antibiotics used in livestock were lower after the five-day vegetarian program. The pilot study suggests that people may be able reduce their exposure to potentially dangerous chemicals through dietary choices, such as limiting consumption of animal products like meats and dairy." (www.grist.org, 5/11/2010)

Perhaps the strongest admonition to avoid chemical exposure comes from the United States government itself. According to a comprehensive 2010 report released by the President's Cancer Panel, industrial toxins are ubiquitous and they're making us ill. Indeed, as many as two thirds of all cancers may be caused by lifestyle choices. However, individuals can minimize cancer risk by eating organic food, drinking filtered water, and avoiding plastic containers. There it is in black and white—official recommendation from mainstream science to go green. (www.grist.org, 5/6/2010, "Does America Cause Cancer.")

Eating lower on the food chain is a simple way to minimize toxic chemical exposure. Since it's easier-—and less expensive—to simply avoid meat than to find high quality, organic varieties, many health faddists prefer to simply go vegetarian or vegan. There are also ethical and environmental issues for going vegetarian—a lot to chew on—which we'll cover in due course. There's a lot on our plate already!

Okay, you already know to eat natural, whole foods. Twinkies and Krispy Kremes may never (or rarely) pass your lips. But here are some other foods better left uneaten:

1) Canned Tomatoes: The resin linings of tin cans leach bisphenol-A, a synthetic estrogen linked to reproductive problems, heart disease, diabetes, and obesity.

2) Corn-Fed Beef: Cattle evolved to eat grass, not grains, and commercial beef has lower beta-carotine, vitamin E, omega-3s, CLA, and other important nutrients.

3) Microwave Popcorn: It's the bag, not the popcorn, that leaches perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), linked to infertility, liver, testicular, and pancreatic cancer.

4) Non-organic Potatoes: Root veggies absorb herbicides, pesticides, and fungicides from the soil.

5) Farmed Salmon: Salmon weren't meant to be crammed into pens any more than cows or poultry. Farmed salmon are higher in carcinogens, PCBs, brominated flame retardants, and pesticides such as dioxin and DDT.

6) Milk With Artificial Hormones: Milk with bovine growth hormone (rBGH or rBST) is banned in most industrialized countries, suspected of contributing to breast, prostate, and colon cancers.

7) Conventional Apples: Farmworkers exposed to pesticides have higher rates of many cancers, so it makes sense to avoid exposure. (Prevention, November 2009.)

The evidence is compelling, if not absolutely certain, that processed foods will shorten your life. Personally, we're loath to criminalize whole classes of foods and additives. However, keeping processed foods away from kids and out of public schools might be a good thing. Indeed, local foods advocate Alice Waters and friends are trying to do just that....

Email your comments and suggestions to openexchange@earthlink.net.

Related Articles:

No Perfect Diet by Joel Lopez, MD
Lifelong Vegetarian - Interview With Dixie Mahy
Using Hypnosis to Recover Healthy Eating by Jessica Levine
5 Causes of Overeating—Finding SOULutions... by Joan Hitlin
The Soul Of Eating... A Path to True Nourishment by Premsiri Lewin
The Roadmap to Your Perfect Diet by Nan Faass
The Herbivore's Enigma... by K. Stiles Bingham

FEEDBACK: CLICK HERE to email comments and feedback. Please note the title of the article or the author's name. Include your own name or type "name withheld" by request. Thoughtful responses will be published in our next edition.