1. Present one idea in the introduction (pp. 1-15) that was surprising or intriguing to you and explain why. (1-2 sentences) * What surprised me in the introduction is that people used to know how to eat well, but nowadays dietary lessons have been confused, complicated, and destroyed by food industry marketers. As a result, we are being advised to consume the fake food which is called “nutrients”.
2. From the section pp. 27-32 explain the term nutritionism and its key feature scientific reductionism. (3-5 sentences, and these concepts will also be covered in lectures.) * The term nutritionism is the main ideology about food. Pollan says, “In the case of nutritionism, the widely shared but unexamined assumption is that the key to understanding food is indeed the nutrient.” (page 28) * Scientific reductionism is definitely a powerful tool, but it can mislead us too, especially when applied to something as complex as, on the one side, a food, and on the other, a human eater. It encourages us to take a mechanistic view of that transaction: put in this nutrient; get out that physiological result. However people differ in important ways.
3. From the section pp. 40-50 explain what the lipid hypothesis claimed, what evidence over time called it into question, and what disastrous health consequences it led to. (5-7 sentences)) * The Lipid Hypothesis specifically concerns chronic disease. The evidence was that the dangers of the trans-fat were no longer ignored so people switched from butter to margarine. It is claiming that low fat and fat free are much better for people to get healthier. The disastrous health consequences it led was the rising coronary heart disease. As a result, blood flow to the heart can slow down or stop.
4. From the section pp. 85-89 explain what researcher Kerin O’Dea learned in her experiment changing the diet of aboriginals of Western Australia. (2-3 sentences) * After the 7th week,...