eBook
Available on Compatible NOOK devices, the free NOOK App and in My Digital Library.
Related collections and offers
Overview
Our relationship with food extends far beyond survival. It incorporates aspects of physiology, emotions, thought patterns, and how we feel about ourselves—all influenced by a culture that turns food into a source of compulsion and guilt. Despite our best efforts, many of us remain hooked to unhealthy food habits—habits that keep us overweight and unhappy.
In Unhooked, Laura Dawn sheds light on the food struggle from six essential perspectives: environmental, physiological, behavioral, mental, emotional, and spiritual. And she provides concrete steps you can take to free yourself from your personal food traps—whether it’s chronic overeating, incessant cravings, food addiction, yo-yo dieting, disordered eating, or the inability to eat certain foods in moderation.
These steps empower us to shift our perspective on food, fueling our transformation to vibrant health and reminding us that we are all worthy of living the healthy lives of our dreams.
Product Details
| ISBN-13: | 9781630472061 |
|---|---|
| Publisher: | Morgan James Publishing |
| Publication date: | 09/10/2019 |
| Sold by: | Barnes & Noble |
| Format: | eBook |
| Pages: | 250 |
| File size: | 1 MB |
About the Author
Read an Excerpt
CHAPTER 1
How Our Environment Hooks Us
Now, more than ever, information is being shared about how our global food environment is contributing to our compulsion to keep eating, and processed, food-like substances are taking center stage. What wrong turn did we take to find ourselves in a place where we now have to educate ourselves about the difference between edible "fabricated" food and wholesome real food; where the price of these processed foods has become incredibly cheap, yet our healthcare costs as a nation have skyrocketed; where more people are obese, yet paradoxically are "dieting" more than ever before? Part of the challenge is that our food environment has changed so drastically in such a short period of time that we now have to navigate through an increasingly confusing food situation. How did all this happen? In order to move in the right direction, we need to understand where we are now and how we got here.
Tightly Held Beliefs
Beliefs are opinions that we accept as being true for us — and we all have our share, especially when it comes to food. Our beliefs about food tend to carry a heavy emotional charge. I don't think anything can rouse people into heated debate like nutrition can — except for maybe religion or politics. Countless times I've witnessed people go into panic or rage mode when defending their personal beliefs about food, such as defending the rights of animals and advocating veganism, or arguing that it's impossible to be healthy without eating meat.
Everyone wants validation; we want to be right and don't want to hear or be told that the beliefs that guide our behavior are not always grounded in truth. Some of our beliefs are deeply entrenched, especially those that define us as individuals, including the way we eat. When we put ourselves in a definitive "dietary box," adding concrete labels to our dietary patterns (whether you define yourself as a "meat eater" or "vegan"), these beliefs can be static and inflexible, and lead to rigid ways of thinking. When we label and rigidly define our food philosophy and belief systems (BS), we leave less room for new information to filter through, moving us away from our inherent wisdom and becoming more wrapped up in the ensuing debate about who's right and who's wrong.
So much of the way we eat is due to deeply engrained beliefs that historically have been created by the agricultural industries and food companies, perpetuated by lobbyists and backed by government. Many of these food-related beliefs have been with us since before the 1950s, and it is difficult to remember a time when we all lived closely connected to the abundant earth and ate whole foods.
When a Tomato Is No Longer a Tomato
Today, when it comes to food, everything has changed. We're forced to navigate an increasingly complex food environment with extreme caution. We can no longer say the word "tomato" and agree about what this means, even if they appear (somewhat) similar on the outside. A tomato genetically modified to be perfectly round with thick skin and a waxy coat when picked green weeks prior to ripening and gassed with ripening chemicals when it arrives at its destination is worlds apart from the organic purple heirloom tomato that I picked ripe off the vine this morning. These tomatoes are not the same — right down to their molecular makeup. Although we call them both tomatoes, we now have to learn to decipher between the two. In some regards, I consider the first to be somewhat "fake"— a man-made food product and a result of our current food industry. This is the food environment that most of us now live in. The second example is what I loosely call "real" food — a result of collaborating with the natural ways of nature. I say "loosely call 'real' food" because of course there's no exact cut-and-dry definition of "real" versus "fake" food, but rather general descriptors we can apply. See the section Whole Food Versus Processed Food later in this chapter for a more thorough description.
Genetically modified foods are one example, yet we also need to recognize what has become our socially acceptable definition of food. Author and food journalist Michael Pollan pointed this out when he popularized the phrase "food-like substance." He suggests that just because you can put it in your mouth and it may taste good doesn't make it real food. This way of perceiving these processed and packaged "foods" has become an accepted belief system in our culture, much to our detriment. What led us down the brightly colored aisles upon aisles of packaged foods that have an infinite shelf life and clever marketing schemes, where Convenience with a capital "C" dominates the marketplace — at all costs?
Scientific Reductionism
In the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, major scientific discoveries had long-lasting and far-reaching consequences, fundamentally changing the way we look at the world. While many were beneficial, unfortunately some had negative implications for our current food environment.
René Descartes popularized the method of analytic thinking, or breaking up complex phenomena into pieces to understand the behaviors of the whole from the properties of its parts. It was during this time that the mechanistic view took hold — essentially relating the miracles of life to the clockworks of a machine, and thus "mechanistic thinking" was born. This worldview still predominates our perceptions despite incredible discoveries in quantum physics — discoveries that show how our thoughts influence matter — the interconnection of our mind and body — and that we are indeed made up of more than the sum of our parts.
Rooted within this paradigm of the mechanistic model, chemist Antoine-Laurent Lavoisier (1743–1794) defined the calorie, a measure of the energy in food, thus equating food to fuel to feed the "machine." Then, in the nineteenth century, an English doctor and chemist named William Prout isolated and identified carbohydrates, proteins, and fats, what are now known as macronutrients. One by one, new vitamins and minerals were identified in food, and step-by-step we lost greater sight of the whole — the greater meaning in whole food — in favor of a reductionist mentality limiting our view of food to mere numbers and nutrients.
As a result, we now tend to look at food with a "microscopic view," only able to see one isolated part of the whole at a time, when in fact it would be more appropriate to look at food through a kaleidoscope, in which all the beautiful colors and integrated components mesh into each other and are inexorably linked together.
Driven by the media, the food industry, and government agencies, the dialogue then became all about which nutrients were "good" and which were "bad," and before we knew it we were looking to experts for nutritional advice to help steer our eating habits in the "right" direction — only to seduce us further and further away from the miracle of real food.
In his book The Web of Life, Fritj of Capra talks about "systems thinking," describing things in terms of connectedness, relationships, and context, as opposed to "mechanist thinking." He states: "According to the systems view, the essential properties of an organism, or living system, are properties of the whole, which none of the parts have. They arise from the interactions and relationships among the parts. These properties are destroyed when the system is dissected ... into isolated elements." Essentially, we can't isolate individual nutrients from the miracle of the interconnected perfection of the whole food from which the nutrient came and still call it the same thing with the same benefits.
A perfect example of trying to isolate a single nutrient from the whole food from which it emanated is the famous Cancer Prevention Study of 1995. After discovering the health benefits of beta-carotene in carrots, two studies were conducted to try to prove the health benefits of this nutrient for cancer patients. The participants were given these micronutrients in isolation, not within the whole foods in which they are normally found. To the researchers' surprise, they found that isolated beta-carotene supplementation is associated with significantly higher incidence of lung cancer and mortality, and the trial had to be abandoned.
Despite all the information we are inundated with about nutrition, most of it contradictory, science actually doesn't have the definitive answers to our diet woes that we are searching for. As Michal Pollan states in Food Rules, " ... in fact science knows a lot less about nutrition than you would expect — that in fact nutrition science is, to put it charitably, a very young science." It's still not completely definitive what goes on inside our bodies when we eat chocolate or munch on a piece of celery. They can see trends and correlations, but relatively speaking, they're only scratching the tip of the iceberg.
It's impossible for us to fully grasp the manner in which one tiny nutrient like beta-carotene works in relation to the synergistic magic of the whole carrot. There are an untold number of properties working together in carrots that lend this root vegetable its health-promoting and life-giving force, properties we may never be able to fully comprehend — as doing so would be to know the mystery and secrets of life itself. This reductionist approach, now solely driven by profit, ultimately led to the wave of processed food-like substances masquerading as real food.
I'm certainly not saying that all the incredible discoveries of individual nutrients aren't beneficial. All discoveries are important. However, when we look at isolated nutrients (through the microscope) and not the greater whole (kaleidoscope), we lose the connection to the deeper meaning and miracle of real food. This predominant worldview is one that separates us from nature, quite literally, as seen by the large geographic distance that separates most people from their food source. We're out of touch with ourselves and with nature, and this disconnect amplifies competition within a trillion-dollar food industry, vying for our food dollars.
Whole Food Versus Processed Food
Whole food is food that comes directly from the earth, (from nature) without any — or very minimal — processing or man-made interference.
Whole foods are what I tend to refer to as "real" foods. When I picked berries right off the bush this morning, I was reminded of how fresh, whole, and delicious real food is. Despite food science continuously trying to outsmart nature, there is no amount of science that can do a better job of replicating these berries that are already "designed" to perfection.
Whole foods start to lose their full "wholeness" when we process and even cook them. When we cook foods we start to change the chemical composition of the food, further losing and destroying vitamins, minerals, enzymes, and phytonutrients — just to name a few. Depending on the method of cooking, the length of time, and the temperatures the food is subjected to, foods can be drastically altered from their original state. When we cook food, we also lose a large portion of its inherent water content.
It is my personal opinion that on a cellular level, our infinitely intelligent bodies recognize real, whole foods as optimal — as what we are anatomically and physiologically designed to consume. And to a certain extent, when nutrients are lost from our food in the refinement (and even cooking) process, whether it's vitamins, water, or any other nutrient, our body has to work harder to compensate in some way to make up for the loss, either by depleting its nutritional reserves or by simply doing the best it can with the "incomplete" nutritional resource available, compromising its function. Water is a perfect example of this. When we cook food, we remove much of its water content — that's why cooked foods can be dehydrating. I immediately notice how dehydrated I become after eating a cooked meal. It's ironic that we then add layers upon layers to the dysfunction by recommending the population supports their chronic dehydration not by correcting the underlying imbalance — eating whole foods — but by drinking no less than eight cups of water a day!
The heavy processing of refined, fragmented foods, and all the nutrients lost in those foods due to these industrial processes, is only part of the equation that makes up what I refer to as "fake" foods. The second part of the equation is what is then added back after so many vital nutrients are stripped away. Added to the mix are thousands upon thousands of other "ingredients" that are not found in nature but are chemically fabricated in a production plant to help the food achieve its most desirable taste, texture, smell, shelf life, and other marketable qualities. The real problem is that these packaged fake foods are what most people have come to accept as "normal," when they are anything but normal. They make berry flavoring without real berries and vanilla flavoring without real vanilla bean. Do we really know the long-term consequences of eating these imitation foods? And can this honestly be better than the real thing? Maybe only better monetarily — and only for the very few people reaping the profits.
In his book Salt Sugar Fat, Michael Moss describes the KoolAid brand managers' efforts to market one of their "imitation" food products:
The Kool Bursts were engineered to evoke the image of fresh fruit in as many ways as possible: They were made in a variety of imitation fruit flavors, including cherry, grape, orange, and tropical punch, and they were given the most enticing imitation aromas that lab technicians could devise so that when the bottles were opened, they emitted powerful fruity smells. Even the bottles promulgated the mythology of health. ...
Despite the "healthy" advertising marketed directly to children, this brightly colored drink is surprisingly sweeter than Coke, and at one point was stirring up close to 600 million gallons a year. This disconnect from nature is what defines our current food environment and redefines the very basis of our relationship with food — to real, living food that comes from the earth. Instead we're living in a society with many children who don't even know what a cucumber plant looks like or how tomatoes grow, or that chips and French fries are made from potatoes.
This really hit home for me one day when my friend's little brother was drinking a freshly opened, sweet Thai coconut (an incredible, hydrating gift from nature) and exclaimed: "Man, I wish they would make something that tastes this good!" I looked at him with a bewildered look on my face as I grasped the magnitude of what he actually just said and replied: "They already did; you're holding it in your hand." I knew he meant he wished that the food industry could make a drink with coconut flavoring that could come in a colorful can and that he could easily buy whenever he wanted it, which, not surprisingly, they recently have. This thought process not only reflects how disconnected we can become from our food source, but also how we, as a culture, drive consumer demand for the very same products that further perpetuate our separation from nature.
Of course, there is a largely grey, undefined area that lies in the middle of the polar ends of "real" whole foods versus "fake" processed foods. Raising these questions as to what we define as real food is a good place to start and encourages us to question what we're eating. Ultimately it's up to you to use your intuition and common sense to determine what you define as real or fake food and to ask yourself if the way you're eating is connecting you to — or separating you from — the natural ways of nature. I came to realize that what we've collectively agreed on as "normal" is a far cry from normal. The fact that millions of people eat these foods and continue to live with excess weight and disease is not proof of the safety of these processed foods, but rather a testament to the miracle of the human body and the abuse that it can endure.
The Birth of Fragmented Foods
The "food-as-nutrient" concept became popular during the industrial food revolution with the birth of refined foods. Whole foods were starting to be dissected, separated, and processed, and the food industry used new nutritional terminology to rationalize these "food-like products" and make scientific sense to the public about the new food environment they (food companies, government, and agricultural big business) had fabricated and now tried to control. Fake foods flooded the markets and only reinforced the food-as-nutrient mentality. Whatever key nutrient was currently deemed "good" by mainstream media was "in": "Fortified with Vitamin C," "High in Fiber," "Source of Omega-3s." And whatever nutrient was out of favor was deemed "bad," which companies also used to sell their fake-food products: "Low in Saturated Fats" and "Gluten Free!"
(Continues…)
Excerpted from "Unhooked"
by .
Copyright © 2015 Laura Dawn.
Excerpted by permission of Morgan James Publishing.
All rights reserved. No part of this excerpt may be reproduced or reprinted without permission in writing from the publisher.
Excerpts are provided by Dial-A-Book Inc. solely for the personal use of visitors to this web site.
Table of Contents
Acknowledgments,
Introduction: How We Get Hooked on the Food Struggle,
Part One: The Environmental Hook,
Chapter 1 How Our Environment Hooks Us,
Chapter 2 Unhooked: The Healing Process of Reconnection,
Part Two: The Physiological Hook,
Chapter 3 How Our Physiology Hooks Us,
Chapter 4 Unhooked: Transitioning to a Whole Foods Lifestyle,
Part Three: The Behavioral Hook,
Chapter 5 How Our Behavioral Patterns Hook Us,
Chapter 6 Unhooked: Committing to Change,
Part Four: The Mental Hook,
Chapter 7 How Our Mental State Hooks Us,
Chapter 8 Unhooked: Learning to Eat Mindfully,
Part Five: The Emotional Hook,
Chapter 9 How Our Emotions Hook Us,
Chapter 10 Unhooked: Working with Emotions and Boosting the Feel-Good Chemicals in Your Brain Naturally,
Part Six: The Spiritual Hook,
Chapter 11 How Our Spiritual Isolation Hooks Us,
Chapter 12 Unhooked: Deepening Your Spiritual Connection,
Appendix A Yale Food Addiction Scale,
Appendix B Understanding Fruit Sugars: Glycemic Index Versus Glycemic Load,
Appendix C Basic Sitting Practice: Mindfulness-Awareness Meditation,
About the Author,
Endnotes,