For this weeks peer response, I read Pat’s blog about In Defense of Food and believe he did a really good job. Pat understood the points that Polan was trying to make, but he also stated how its not realistic for everybody, and that its also a little bit absurd to completely disregard the advice from a nutritionist. Pat clearly states the points that he agrees with and those that he doesn’t. Although not avid of Polan’s work, he shows that Polan made a good point in that eating an orange would be more beneficial than merely taking a pill for vitamin C.
We are both in the same boat in that when one is looking for “a tasty treat”, they cannot simply follow Polan’s guidelines. I also agree with his statement that his book would be helpful for those who are trying to obtain a healthy lifestyle, just not for everybody.
Pat’s article was successful in defending Polan’s article. The main purpose of the article is to show that by taking supplements for Vitamin C and E, you will not necessarily reduce the risks of cardiovascular disease. This is in concordance with Polan’s articles because Polan is a firm believer in getting your nutrients from “real” foods, and not artificial substances.
All in all, I believe that Pat did an excellent job in responding to Michael Polan’s article, In Defense of Food, and I look forward to continue following his blog.
No comments:
Post a Comment