More Supplement Confusion: Nutritionism isn't helping
The topic of supplements is a highly battled one - and last week's news from the Women's Health Initiative Study, reported on today by the NY Times, here - doesn't help much. But - in reading the play by play on the history of supplements and the clinical studies, one thought kept pounding in my head - summarized by Dr. Gann, here:
Scientists suspect that the benefits of a healthful diet come from eating the whole fruit or vegetable, not just the individual vitamins found in it. “There may not be a single component of broccoli or green leafy vegetables that is responsible for the health benefits,” Dr. Gann said. “Why are we taking a reductionist approach and plucking out one or two chemicals given in isolation?”
Why ARE we taking a reductionist approach and plucking out one or two chemicals in isolation? To use Michael Pollan's term, 'nutritionism' is only complicating things, and ignores the systemic nature of our bodies, our lives, and the food we eat. To think we are anywhere close to understanding the delicate dance between our bodies and the nourishment provided by the earth's fruits - or that we can come close through the reductive scientific method, is infuriating to me. Yes - we can learn a lot - but why not just eat a bountiful, varied, whole foods diet based on seasonal eating?
That said, I will admit that I DO take vitamins - just a multi and cod liver oil. And that is merely an insurance plan - I believe that our food system doesn't make it easy to eat the balanced diet we need to get the goods, so why not back it up with vitamins. But just as I believe in quality of food, I believe in quality of product, and I am very careful to get well-sourced, whole-food based vitamins, as well as Internationally Certified Fish Oil. But supplements are my plan B for health - not may main game. Eating (and enjoying) quality food is.