Analytical Analysis of the Chapter Bad Science

582 Words2 Pages

In the chapter “Bad Science” of his book In Defense of Food, Michael Pollan explains and analyzes why nutrition science is constantly mistaken about dietary fat and health. He writes that due to the way science is structured to isolate variables and study the individual components, nutrient study is unable to realize the intricate interactions within food. Pollan underscores this by investigating the inaccuracies that plague food-frequency questionnaires due to their focus on single nutrients, such as fat or proteins. Overall, I believe Pollan clearly defines why nutrient science is regularly incorrect about diet and health. However, he misses key citations for interviews with prominent nutritionists, thus resulting in lack of credibility. “I don’t believe anything I read in nutritional epidemiology anymore. I’m so skeptical at this point” (78). The quote comes from Pollan's interview with the famed epidemiologist Gladys Block, and is used several ways: First, as an authority to the reader; second, as a method to conclude and summarize his chapter concerning nutritional methodolog...

Open Document