What else can you eat? An expert clarifies!
ChroniquesDuVasteMonde: It has long been said that we should only drink coffee in moderation and eat as little fat as possible. This is no longer true. Why do studies on food conflict so often?
Prof. Dr. Christoph Klotter :? In nutrition science is often methodically not really clean worked. Different variables are correlated with different research methods. Or connections are made that are not causal. An example: The Japanese live long because they eat a lot of fish. The connection between fish consumption and life expectancy can not be interpreted causally, there are other factors that play a role. Many studies are scientifically untenable.
Why is that?
80 percent of social science data is collected via questionnaires. And questionnaires are conceivably inappropriate because they reflect a social desirability. The moment I'm supposed to write down what I eat, I change my eating habits. And in laboratory experiments, there is always the question: Can I transfer this to reality? Often not. An example: We want to investigate if advertising influences eating behavior. One group looks advertising and has cookies on the table, the other does not look advertising and also has cookies on the table. This is an artificial situation that says nothing about everyday life. The subjects are in an experiment and think: Ah, there food advertising is shown, they want to know now if I eat the biscuits. The people are not stupid!
And who has any of this in the end, if the results are rarely true anyway?
Scientists are under great pressure to publish so their reputation increases. That produces a lot of garbage. Then there are cliques, you know the reviewer and does not hurt. Some studies are also funded by the industry for a specific purpose. In the end, it is the consumer who remains confused.
That manipulate the food manufacturers, is the great fear of many people ...?
The food industry has become much more defensive in Europe. But it does not hurt us to realize that there is a lot of salt and sugar in finished products.
Do you mean defensive? for example, that supermarket chains like Lidl and Rewe are now reducing the sugar content in their own brands?
Yes, retailers are reacting to the increasing number of quality-conscious consumers. Among other things, this group is paying more attention to the sugar content. And of course the trade wants to offer products that sell themselves.
Back to the studies: When I can not believe most? how do I know what to eat?
If you summarize what nutrition science actually knows today, you come up with three simple rules: eat unprocessed food. As varied as possible. And a lot of vegetables. More can not be said with certainty, because people metabolize food differently.
And that was it?
My concrete recommendation is: Everyone has to find his own way and try out what is good for him. Not dogmatic, with strict prohibitions, but a kind of self-exploration. But you have to pay more attention to your food and take your time.
I do not feel that there is any need to catch up: organic freaks, vegans - the right nutrition takes on unimaginable proportions!
Yes, today, individual eating habits have actually become a platform for identity formation for some people. This is also because the political utopias of the 20th century have died and ended catastrophically. So we do not wait any longer for socialism - today the food should redeem us. On the other hand, there are also more and more people who can not read a list of ingredients, take no time to cook or do not control it anymore. They have to empower themselves again and recapture the food. Knowing what is in the food and how to prepare it not only makes you eat healthier, it also tastes much better. And you regain self-confidence and self-esteem, because you become your own expert.
How do you start this reconquest?
This requires planning and reflection: What could I acquire in terms of cooking skills? What do I cook on which day? When do I go where to go shopping? How do I read ingredient lists? We also need a ritualization of food. So maybe I'll cook with the family and make a ritual out of it, instead of quickly making something happen to me. I celebrate the meal, instead of eating it in front of the TV, so that I am also mentally fed up. Always on the side and to go to eat does not satisfy me, then I need more and have a bad conscience. I only gain access to food if I prepare it myself.
Now many say: no time ...
Exactly this argument actually means that it is not important enough to me. I say indirectly: I am someone who lives for work. But eating is the antidote to work. Meals interrupt work and initiate pauses and relaxation. Today we eat by the way, and that is a fatal development, because who does not take breaks, works worse. I often hear that: In the evening I can not cook. I answer then: But you have time for television! We have to take the food again more important. It is also important to ask yourself: How does food give me identity? Which lifestyle do I have - and does the food fit?
The French have worse values, but live longer? because they enjoy.
Following the motto: If I eat vegan, am I a better person because no animals die for me?
For example. The problem with these diets, however, is that they are closely correlated with eating disorders and quickly turn into constraining systems. And that's not surprising, because we live in a society that has food embedded in a system of science. In the 19th century, there was a government mandate: Food science should look at how the population needs to be fed to be fit and efficient. From this, the system of the German Society for Nutrition (DGE) with the recommendations for macro- and micronutrients developed later.
Why are we doing there ??
We feel that we are good members of society if we live up to their expectations. In a capitalist labor market in which one has to act as a brand, mastery of the body becomes more and more important. Moderation as a virtue, slimming as a symbol of efficiency. The conscious eater stages himself, he is in control.
Still, so many people are more obese than ever before in history ...?
Our genetic programming says: Eat as much as you can, if available. In our affluent society this has led to many people becoming fat. What the DGE recommends today - a balanced mixed diet - is a counter-strategy. Because the overweight epidemic costs the health system a lot of money.
The strategy does not work out very well!
Right. The French, for example, have worse physiological values, but live longer than the Germans - because they enjoy, have social support and are more satisfied. A little more serenity and enjoyment would do us Germans good too.
So no prohibitions?
From time to time you can eat as many chips and chocolates as you like. Exceeding prohibitions is part of life. Except for the three rules - unprocessed, varied, vegetables - everything is individual. It's not about the fact that trans fatty acids or sugar are basically harmful, but you have to try out how they affect your own body. I get sick when I eat cake, so I let it go. For some people sugar is not wholesome, others do not like raw food so well. Anyone who is insulin resistant, of course, should already see how he can change his diet. The physiological values should not be left out.
Wholesomeness is the most important criterion when eating ??
Exactly. It is a life task to find out which food is good for me and which is not. Sometimes that changes over time. Of course, with trans fatty acids, it is clear that they are not particularly cheap. When I eat unprocessed foods, however, I automatically do not absorb trans fatty acids. The three rules are also great because they are so easy.
The nutritional psychologist Prof. Dr. Christoph Klotter, 61, teaches at the University of Applied Sciences Fulda, but lives with his family in Berlin. There he runs the "Café Diderot" with his wife, where he regularly brings food science, crafts and enjoyment to the table at events.
