egg1

  (First published in Finesse, Thomas Keller’s superb magazine, earlier this year.) In the 1970s, the egg was bad-for-you food in America. After being a mainstay of the human diet for millennia, doctors here decreed that the cholesterol-laden yolk clogged arteries and resulted in heart attacks. Eat an egg if you must, nutritionists warned, but only in limited quantities. And after 30 years of telling us to avoid eggs and order up those egg white omelettes, the American Heart Association changed its mind—oops!—and declared that eggs, like an unjustly punished child, could once again return to the dining table. As I began to write about the egg, I realized the egg fatwa was no isolated event. Indeed, it came to symbolize for me what was wrong with the way we think about food and how we let others decide what we eat. Read On »

Share
Flatiron-Steak3

    About goddam time. Finally people are starting to make sense. Two pieces in the NYTimes were back to back on the “most emailed” list when I checked yesterday morning. The first, and most important, was Aaron Carroll’s piece on how to eat sensibly: Red Meat Is Not the Enemy. The entire reported essay can be summed up by a large study cited with this rather obvious conclusion: “Everything we eat is associated with both higher and lower rates of cancer.” Ha! Take that, all you nutritional gurus. I need to write that again: Everything we eat is associated with both higher and lower rates of cancer. The author is a professor of pediatrics at Indiana University School of Medicine. He blogs on health research and policy. His advice? Find a diet that works for you. Read On »

Share
Salt and fat does a body ight or wrong? Photo by Donna Turner Ruhlman

  I’m on the road all week so I am reposting this, in light of the new governmental recommendations on what we should and should not eat. The Times article noted in the post, interestingly, is from almost exactly two years ago. —M.R. Originally Posted March 14, 2013 I’d have thought that an article in last Sunday’s New York Times Magazine, Eat Your Heart Out by Gretchen Reynolds, would have made me happy. I’ve long argued that America’s terror of fat and salt is misguided and blown grossly out of proportion. But all the piece did was make me mad. It notes a study that found that men with heart disease who reduced their intake of meat and saturated fats and increased the polyunsaturated fats in their diet were more likely to die of a heart attack than the Read On »

Share
Egg-for-blog

    The government and a committee of docs and PhD’s and other really smart people are reversing two generations of recommendations on how you and your family should eat. It’s OK to eat eggs. They’re not a silent killer. The news arrived last week. This opinion piece on what the new guidelines mean is particularly good (by Nina Teicholz, author of The Big Fat Surprise: Why Butter, Meat and Cheese Belong in a Healthy Diet—how did I miss this?! A girl after my own heart; think she’ll join me in my quest to make July national Butter-Is-a-Vegetable Month?).   Look at these delicious dishes above, all photos of the egg by Donna, featured in my love song to the egg (I especially love the sun-like yolk at top). For two generations we were told that eggs, a miracle of economy, nutrition, utility, Read On »

Share
Wheat-X2-for-blog

  I want to call attention to an op-ed by Mark Bittman in the New York Times last week, headlined “What Is the Purpose of Society?” because it’s particularly incisive. He rightly asks us to reconsider how we think about the production and distribution of our food. He calls on us to ask the right questions: What is the purpose of agriculture? And he asks that we come to a common agreement on what that purpose is. He writes: “… [I]s contemporary American agriculture a system for nourishing people and providing a livelihood for farmers? Or is it one for denuding the nation’s topsoil while poisoning land, water, workers and consumers and enriching corporations? Our collective actions would indicate that our principles favor the latter; that has to change. “…[i]f we had a national agreement that Read On »

Share