After a lecture a man asked me why I do not recommend
a paleo-type diet although I said during the lecture that it's usually a very
healthy diet - and his opinion was that I was promoting a less healthy diet
when allowing many things he didn't. Why do I "allow" eating food for
which the health effects are minimal or even unhealthy- say a potato? Well I
used paleodiet just as an example as it is by no means automatically healthier
than any other diet type. And the main question is that how healthy diet should
we pursue. If I consider my usual advice it would be easy to say that one could
eat more healthy diet. Eating advice could always be healthier, and even healthier
- and still healthier. But it's not a good idea to chase the optimally healthy
diet.
Naturally
I want people to heat healthily and I'm sure my advice leads to a healthy diet
- but it doesn't mean everything has to be healthy. Why don't I optimize? Very
shortly put I could say I aim for well-being and health is only one block of
many in that set. And if some other block (taste, social flexibility,
stress-free eating etc.) needs more space to attain better well-being health
can easily lend some of that space. This is certainly a common sense argument
that many already know. But there are other reasons..
How healthy is healthy enough?
Another
reason is that saying what is a healthy enough diet and what is not is very
much a thin line that can be drawn anywhere. It's simply an opinion, not a
fact. And the line has to be drawn somewhere because it is utopistic to as
healthy as possible because neither science nor any person has an idea of the
optimal diet - and if they claim they do they don't know enough. How so?
For
example is my discussion with the older man followed some variety of paleo diet
and called it an optimal diet. It was easy to counter that it might be slightly
healthier than what i outlined in my lecture but is surely is not optimal: did
he gnaw bones? Eat insects? Etc... and thus getting rare nutrients - such as
glucosamine - that our usual diet doesn't contain. Of course he didn't and of
course the diet wasn't optimal. And even if he did there would have been
countless other issues that knowingly or likely improve health: Did he eat most
food raw? Surely there wasn't added salt anywhere?.. There is no end to these
questions and in fact his diet was not optimal. And I'm pretty sure no one
other on this planet eats an optimally healthy diet because none of know our
genetic makeup and thus not the optimal diet for it. The man had just drawn the
line in a slightly different place than i had. More on the health side, less on
the flexibility and taste side in his case (he did say having some problems in
these). It was neither right nor wrong, it was just his choice.
Then
there's also the fact that there is a name for trying to as healthy as possible
- orthorexia. While working with eating
disorders it is quite obvious that there is a limit to how healthy you can try
to eat before thought patterns and practices associated with disordered eating
start growing.
Then
there are all the other lifestyle factors. Theoretically, if we aimed at
optimal dietary recommendations we should - in all fairness - aim at optimal
recommendations in other aspects of life too. What would be the point of
spending energy on eating as healthy as possible while sleeping too little and
being too inactive - I don't see one. That's when things get really
complicated. Aiming for "optimal" physical activity (..naturally not
really known either..) would surely mean a lot more activity than the present
recommendations of 30-60 mins a day. Here in Finland, 2/3 of population doesn’t
make even the 30 mins a day and i still remember the cries of disbelief when
the upper limit of 60 mins was established some years ago: unrealistic!! we have a life u
know!!.. But a total amount
of around 1,5 h activity a day would likely be needed. And that's just the amount and as to the quality
it would need to be adjusted to cover all the aspects of motor function,
flexibility, aerobic fitness etc. while still taking care to avoid injuries. And
that's just exercise - add to that recommendation of optimal sleep, stress
management, dental care, ergonomy... Noooo, I really don't want people to
strive for optimal!! They do have a life u know!!!
The
point is that whatever we recommend it is never optimal and it is always just a
question of where we draw the line of "healthy enough". Even during
the times of evidence-based medicine, all recommendations and guidance is very
much a product of opinion and especially opinion about what is realistic and
feasible. So it is with eating too. You can make it healthy and easy.. or
healthier and bit more difficult..or very healthy and very difficult (and
possibly also unhealthy in the end). For example the present recommendation of
eating veggies, fruit and berries is around 400-500 g day in Finland and likely
around that number wherever you are. Of course 400-500 g a day is not the
optimal intake and more is better - but Finns happen to eat around 350 g a day
so it’s a realistic goal. Surely the optimal intake is somewhere with 4-digit
gram figures but few dare to set those goals. Which is fine by me - I usually
recommend just going over 500 g a day.
Line has to be drawn somewhere even though no thresholds exist
So
the idea is clear. Lines have to be drawn and some balance between healthy
eating and feasibility has to be found. Recommendations draw this line
somewhere and individual people may draw it elsewhere. Whenever you see any
general recommendations it is worthwhile to consider whether you share the same
ideals as those giving recommendations. If you don't want to make any bigger
fuzz about eating there are likely recommendations you shouldn't mind about.
And if you want to eat really healthily the recommendations are just the
starting point.
Then
there's also the question of how much are you willing to do just based on speculation
- when something MIGHT be healthy but then again it might not. When we just
don't know - organic food for example? I'm quite sure most people do not want
guidance based on speculation and I would leave these things to more devoted
healthy eaters and not recommend it to all. But then again there are many who
are willing to go far to the zone of unknown - that's fine, just don't expect
others to follow.
Synopsis
People
vary on how much they are willing to put emphasis on the health aspect of
eating and that's fine. I just wish people would stop trying to eat as healthy
as possible because the concept in itself is an unreachable, utopic dream - and
while chasing the dream the payout diminishes the further you go. With a poor
diet you get huge benefits with small changes, with a very good diet to start
with it is debatable what gains there might be to improve it further.