Eat food. Not too much. Mostly plants. (2007) - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13487886 - Jan 2017 (179 comments)
The essential nutrients that your body needs are carbohydrates, protein, lipids, vitamins, minerals, fiber, and water. The first three are macronutrients, providing most of your body's energy in the form of calories.
Traditional diets incorporate all of these nutrients naturally, as human beings formed traditional diets by sourcing needed nutrients from the surrounding environment. Before industrialization, humanity subsisted on these diets, and if you look far back enough you will find these foodways in your ancestral culture.
Industrialization provides us the luxury of choice in our diets, but it also leaves many displaced and confused as to choosing a diet. You will find that traditional dishes naturally incorporate all of our necessary nutrients. A good rule of thumb when building healthy meals is this:
Carb + protein + vitamins/minerals
Such as:
Rice + beans + tomato + onions
Potatoes + steak + green beans + milk
And so on.
The carbohydrates and proteins will provide the bulk of your calories and the feeling of "fullness" while the sources of vitamins and minerals will complete your diet.
A good metaphor is to think of the human body like a car that needs gasoline and oil primarily as well as some additional fluids to run optimally. A balanced diet will help you feel better physically and psychologically.
Whether you choose to source protein from plants or animals is entirely up to your discretion in this industrialized age, while it was previously a result of an agricultural or pastoral means of subsistence.
The article has an extensive discussion as to why this way of phrasing the problem is not only meaningless but actively harmful.
That's not to say your diet is necessarily bad; frankly by adhering to his "eat food, not too much" you're 2/3 of the way to what Pollan recommends. You're only missing "mostly plants", but you're doing better from his rubric than a diet consisting of mostly processed food products.
Sometimes when I go shopping, I catch myself checking fat and sugar first, then looking for added omega-3. The more I read, the more complicated eating seems to become. I keep staring at nutrition labels, and end up feeling more confused about what I should actually eat.
When fried in vegetable oil, I tend to eat 4-5. When fried in lard, 2 is starting to feel a bit much.
The animal fat option seems to be what my body prefers. There's clearly some kind of endogenous GLP-1 inhibition action going on. It sticks with me a lot longer too. I feel myself getting sucked into my work for hours on end instead of bouncing in and out of the kitchen every 30 minutes looking for a snack.
I think "mostly plants" can be interpreted as malicious advice given the realities of human biology.
tobinfekkes•1d ago
"Eat food. Not too much. Mostly plants."
Succinct, doesn't alienate anyone, or make a lot of rules, or shame you for doing the wrong thing. Don't complicate food.
I own a fresh organic produce delivery outfit in the Seattle region, and we basically run our operations off what he explains in more words. The more steps involved between the soil and your mouth, the less "food" it is. It might not kill you, but it also won't help you.
criddell•1d ago
tobinfekkes•1d ago
You should not drink Coke because it has WAY too much sugar and WAY too little of anything beneficial. If you tried to consume the amount of sugar in Coke by eating apples, you would be too full long before you get to Coke-level sugar intake. That's because of all the other stuff in an apple; it's not concentrated sugar.
Your body is a wonderful thing. Respect it and listen to it, it will keep you healthy. That's literally its job, and it only knows how to repair and heal you. It will keep the things it needs, and discard the rest. You can't "over-consume" if you eat real foods. Your body won't let you; you'll get full and stop. You can only over-eat engineered foods, which over-saturate sugar|fat|carbs|salt|etc, which then necessitates a "diet".
criddell•1d ago
The word "diet" is not always about restriction. Surely you've heard people use the term "standard American diet" which doesn't have anything to do with restriction.
I assume you are talking about a raw diet (not necessarily calorie restricted diet) because of your comment about minimizing steps between soil and mouth.
thwarted•1d ago
There's an episode of Mad Men where they are coming up with pitches for weight loss products and losing weight is referred to as "reducing", a term from before the word "diet" was used as you've described.
zahlman•1d ago
Have you tested this?
drjasonharrison•1d ago
Taking plants from the soil, or fruits from the tree/vine, and trimming, washing, cutting, and cooking are typically considered steps that are unavoidable for some plants.
The difference between a baked potato, potato chips, and Pringles is what we're talking about. The oil used for potato chips (and Pringles) originated from plants, but it has undergone several steps from plant to container of oil.
vladvasiliu•1d ago
I don't know about Pringles / Lays &c, but I've never seen two potatoes of the same size and shape in a bag, so there must be some way they manage to get all their chips to look the same.
badc0ffee•1d ago
Lays and nearly every other brand are just thinner versions of potato chips you could make yourself at home (cut thin, fry in oil, dress in salt). Nothing "blown to smithereens" there.
AStonesThrow•5h ago
https://www.pringles.com/en-us/products/pringles-the-origina...
Lay's Classic contain only potatoes, currently with a grab-bag of oils:
https://www.pepsicoproductfacts.com/Home/Product?formula=LBS...
The most "basic" mass-produced snack food award goes to: Fritos!
https://www.pepsicoproductfacts.com/Home/product?formula=LBS...
(US formulations only. Your gas station may vary.)
milesward•1d ago
tobinfekkes•1d ago
https://boxofgood.com
schmidtleonard•1d ago
I'm not even against the idea that processed food is often bad and should always be treated with skepticism, but naturalism as a foundational principle is just way too exploitable. I called "companies are going to start marketing sugar as a natural alternative to low-calorie sweeteners" a decade before I saw it in grocery stores and I would like to pre-register my prediction that tobacco products will soon come back as "natural alternatives to vapes" in the not too distant future.
testing22321•1d ago
No, it’s incredibly simple and makes sense. Coke are Doritos are not food, they are a science experiment designed for the express purpose of getting you hooked. They have virtually no health benefits and a ton of negatives. Nobody should ever put them into their body, or certainly as little as possible.
Our “food” has changed more in 50 years than the preceding 500. Take away all the science experiments and eat what your great grandma did “mostly greens, not too much” and a massive number of health epidemics go away.
dr_dshiv•1d ago
s_m_t•1d ago
dr_dshiv•1d ago
Agreed!
neuralRiot•1d ago
This is a myth, healthy whole foods are way cheaper than any ready-made “meal” and that is not even taking in account the future savings in healthcare!
dr_dshiv•1d ago
worik•11h ago
I eat well.
I spend a lot of time cooking
neuralRiot•6h ago
dowager_dan99•1d ago
You can't throw out shit like this and then tack on "ymmv" as a disclaimer.
dr_dshiv•1d ago
No, it would interfere with his Vibecoding
> Are Dutch people statistically taller than Germans?
Yes. 183 vs 179cm
> Do they eat more junk food?
Arguably. Few would argue that the food quality is better in the Netherlands than Germany.
> Does your milk have more hormones?
Well, there are hormones in milk, and the Dutch drink a lot of it. 25% more than Germans.
> Are Dutch taller today than previous generations?
Yes. But a centimeter shorter than those born in the 1980s, when it was still legal to pump cows up with hormones.
>You can't throw out shit like this and then tack on "ymmv" as a disclaimer.
I can’t exactly advocate for his diet — nor disclaim it. It’s confusing for me!
Govt statistics linked here, O3: https://chatgpt.com/share/6838c51d-c4a4-8007-97e7-431006f495...
paulpauper•1d ago
neuralRiot•1d ago
Submitting children to the standard american diet (or mostly western diet as sadly it is not relegated just to the USA anymore) should be considered child abuse, by feeding them high calorie, high cholesterol, high protein, high sugar meals you’re condemning them to a certain disease-ridden future.
dr_dshiv•1d ago
badc0ffee•1d ago
> Take away all the science experiments and eat what your great grandma did “mostly greens, not too much”
I don't know about your great grandma, but mine was mostly eating bread and potatoes, not mostly greens. Certainly generations before her were as well.
s_m_t•1d ago
drekipus•1d ago
Might it be the beans that are what you're able to live off?
What are Doritos adding to the equation here?
badc0ffee•1d ago
Living off beans alone sounds hellish.
Spivak•1d ago
dmonitor•1d ago
jajko•1d ago
One side they lived till higher 80s, another both till 95. Active till very late, basically maybe 1-2 years before death.
The thing is, they all lived frugally (and under hardships of communist rule, thats why garden). No junkfood as we know today. Tons of slow physical work on that garden. No vices like frequent alcohol consimption or cigarettes.
One of their sons (aka my uncle) smoked half a pack a day. Dead at 54 from heart attack, had a cancer before but got cca cured. Another daughter got over time overweight, little physical activity, and as I learned only recently became over time an alcoholic. Dead from an heart attack at 62.
Some folks I know have much worse lifestyles (ie smoke more than uncle, plus are more overweight, plus are alcoholics) yet keep living much longer.
Not sure what I want to say with all this, maybe that eating veggies is not enough. Its whats the rest of the plate and how much of it, how active you are, how stressed, how much exposure to bad chemicals. And genes, one thing completely out of control, but as mentioned above they alone wont save you.
stronglikedan•1d ago
Actually, they aren't. They're what's left of corn tortillas after the industrial frying process stripped anything that could be considered nutrients (hyperbole, of course), with a little salt added for flavor. Now you just have a calorie dense but non-nutritious glorified salt lick.
It's hardly food, and if you don't think so, try living on nothing but Doritos for a week and see how that works out for you. Potatoes may not be much more than starch and fiber, but I could live off those for any length of time because they are food.
badc0ffee•1d ago
Try living off fried corn tortillas with salt for a week for the same effect.
How, specifically, are they different?
stronglikedan•1d ago
badc0ffee•1d ago
It's a relatively simple product, as packaged snacks go.
dowager_dan99•1d ago
Swizec•1d ago
My great grandma is from eastern-ish europe and grew up on a farm. Her diet mainly consisted of potatoes, bread, corn, milk, sausage, lard, butter, fermented cabbage or turnip, various preserved fruits (jams and compotes), and copious amounts of extra salty preserved meats. Fresh food was a luxury reserved for the summer (fruits, veggies) or slaughter weeks (fresh meat). No refrigeration, remember?
If I ate like her I'd die of a heart attack before I turned 40. And I'd be pretty obese, too. Many of those farmers got pretty chunky in their 30's despite working on the farm all day.
Oh and I almost forgot: liters of wine per day per person. Liters!
owenversteeg•5h ago
No you wouldn’t. Obesity rates back then were near zero. For the general population, not just for farm laborers. Heart disease killed far fewer people per capita per year. If you remove the infectious diseases that we have practically cured, mortality per capita per year in 1900 and 2020 is pretty similar.
Mind you, those infectious diseases were 90% eliminated by sanitation and understanding and 10% modern medicine; tuberculosis deaths were down by 90% from the 1860s to 1947, which is when streptomycin, the first antibiotic effective against TB, was used.
For some time I ate similar diets to the one you describe - a poor farmer’s diet high in potatoes and bread, with some vegetables, meats and dairy - and I know people who eat that diet today. None of them are fat. It’s because potatoes and bread aren’t very calorie-dense. It is difficult to eat a caloric surplus every day when the majority of the food in front of you is greyish brown, vaguely mushy and of a sufficiently insufficient density that you must take your time to eat it. Modern processed foods, even the fairly simple ones, take the labor out of eating and make the regular things around us infinitely snackable. Modern foods have just the right amount of sweetness and salt and crunch with the right color and appealing packaging and advertising and so on. A standard potato in a standard kitchen will never have that. There’s a reason why obesity rates precisely track consumption of processed foods.
hollerith•5h ago
aggie•1d ago
neuralRiot•1d ago
badc0ffee•1d ago
neuralRiot•11h ago
saghm•1d ago
neuralRiot•11h ago
As a side observation and not particularly referring to your reply, I see that people tend to put food or nutrition if you want, almost in the same scope of politics and religion, many people I know who I consider very open-minded will get very on the defensive whenever I tell them that the best thing to do is to reduce the intake of proteins of animal origin and increase plant consumption. That goes to show that years of propaganda have worked very well.
worik•11h ago
testing22321•1d ago
Only buy things with one ingredient. There, now you’re not eating the science experiment.
rcxdude•15h ago
testing22321•13h ago
spondylosaurus•1d ago
sellmesoap•1d ago
spondylosaurus•1d ago
I have yet to see any credible evidence that tofu is bad for your endocrine system.
sellmesoap•1d ago
I've heard personal accounts of vegan friends turning to meat and dairy to keep up with their fitness demands (studying yoga in Astanga, and Olympic lifting.) I've been vegie for parts of my life, but it sure is a loaded topic!
danw1979•18h ago
But yeah, I agree with your point that “naturalism” isn’t often optimal.
I’ve read the book he wrote after this article and it’s really quite good. The principal that if your great grandparents wouldn’t recognise it as “food”, then avoid, is a pretty good rule of thumb.
Spivak•18h ago
But refined sugar, you'll be drowning in real documented health problems.
hndamien•12h ago
worik•11h ago
The key is "in moderation"
Many people seem to get their entire liquid intake out of aluminum cans.
That is too much sugar.
aidenn0•16h ago
oldpersonintx2•1d ago
GLP-1 has freed Americans from the burden of thinking about what they eat. The drug dictates their appetite now, and any old junk will fill the shrunken void.
chermi•1d ago
spondylosaurus•1d ago
paulpauper•1d ago
paulpauper•1d ago
croisillon•1d ago
criddell•1d ago
croisillon•1d ago
mock-possum•1d ago
IAmBroom•18h ago
Omnivores are carnivorous.
dilap•1d ago
Who's going to spread the good word to the Maasai?