3 HISTORICAL SOURCES OF
Nutritional "Science"
Ever wonder why you believe what you believe? Like, why do I care so much about the Buffalo Bills? The reality is that I just absorbed it being from upstate New York.
Have they done ANYTHING for me except disappoint me since watching Scott Norwood's field goal attempt go wide right on January 27, 1991? Have I ever had a family member or even a friend as part of the organization? Do they at least reach out on my birthday with a greeting? NOTHING...Ever. But yet, I root for them every year, get frustrated watching them lose and have this emotional connection to them when they don't even know I exist.
For many, the same mindset happens with nutrition. Where did they form their nutritional views? They absorbed them much like I absorbed my love for the Bills. I want to go through the three big entities that have shaped the anti-meat food policy, that have then trickled down into individual beliefs about what is good and bad in terms of food consumption.
RELIGIOSITY
If you have eaten a graham cracker, you have been unknowingly influenced. Sylvester Graham was a Presbyterian minister in the early 1800s. The "best food," according to Graham, was bread made from unsifted whole wheat flour, appropriately dubbed Graham Bread, and vegetables and plenty of cool, clear rain water. "Meat created too much heat in the body," causing circulatory disturbances that weakened it. That's why meat-eaters ended the day bone-tired, and why, Graham argued time and again, butchers had short lives.
Graham inspired the work of Dr. John Harvey Kellogg (yes, the cereal brand), who further leaned into the "meat is bad" agenda and tied it more to a morality issue. In the 18th and 19th centuries, Judeo-Christian Victorian morality, along with the Great Awakening and other religious revivals in America, created a perfect storm for people to really get obsessed with it. He thought that meat and certain flavorful or seasoned foods increased sexual desire, and that plainer food, especially cereals and nuts, could curb it. Yes, cereal was invented to weaken your libido.
Claims that grains and plants are the key to health weren't from any studies but just their individual opinions on morality and food. Fast-forward to the present day, and we have an easy way to eat them, in a convenient package that you pull out of a pouch or pour into a bowl. How often do you hear a commercial for low testosterone treatment?
IT'S YOUR DUTY
Back during World War I and World War II, the US had the challenge of feeding the soldiers enough to win the war. There was a slogan, "Food is ammunition - don't waste it."
The following foods and ingredients were rationed by the Food Administration during WWI with appropriate substitutes.
Wheat: substitute corn, oats, rye, and barley products.
Meat: eat fish and other seafood, poultry, rabbits, and beans instead of beef, mutton, and pork.
Fats: cook with olive, cottonseed, or corn oil instead of butter.
Sugar: replaced with syrups (corn and maple) and honey.
The replacements had nothing to do with better nutrition. It had everything to do with getting soldiers enough food. Soldiers were expected to eat approximately 4,600 calories a day to keep up with their activity level and the physical demands of trench warfare.
The cultural shift in eating by the people back in the states began as they were eating fewer animal products like beef and butter to reserve them for the troops, but it quickly became a habit of eating less red meat. It started as good intentions, but it morphed into "this is healthy."
But how can only 10 years of eating differently shape policy moving forward? Just look at the regulations, peer pressure, and fear from 2020-2021 that will shape the behaviors of all future generations. It doesn't take a lot of time to shape policy, just a lot of repeating the same messages over and over again.
Fun Fact: Instant coffee became the staple drink for G.I.'s to such an extent that the nickname of G.I. Joe lent itself to the drink for decades after ("cup of Joe").
THE MONEY OF $CIENCE
If you can't guilt people into eating differently with arguments of ethics, morality, and duty, then just pay off scientists to create fraudulent data from prestigious institutions.
In the 1960s, the sugar industry paid scientists at Harvard to conclude that it was fat that was creating heart disease and NOT sugar.
Documents show that a trade group called the Sugar Research Foundation, known today as the Sugar Association, paid three Harvard scientists the equivalent of about $50,000 in today’s dollars to publish a 1967 review of research on sugar, fat and heart disease. The studies used in the review were handpicked by the sugar group, which was published in the prestigious New England Journal of Medicine, minimized the link between sugar and heart health and cast aspersions on the role of saturated fat.
SUCCESS STORIES...
GOT QUESTIONS?
Book a complimentary discovery call to see if we're a good fit to work together.
GET. MORE. ENERGY
At Dr. Kurt's Place, we have helped many with a variety of conditions but what we're best at, what we enjoy the most, and what we've had the best track record with is helping you get more energy to serve, lead, and dominate.
We're not diagnosing or treating your disease, we are working to upgrade your overall health and well being.
Dr. Kurt Perkins DC CCWP CFMP
4239 N. Nevada Ave. Suite 104
Colorado Springs, CO 80907
719-602-4545
hello@drkurtperkins.com
CONTACT US
hello@drkurtperkins.com
(719) 602.4545
4239 N. Nevada Ave. #104
Colorado Springs, CO 80907
Stay connected
© Copyrights by More Health Less Healthcare Inc. All Rights Reserved.