[phoenixtxdotcom]

It's always a good idea to take everything you read with a grain of salt, and with information on food, this seems doubly true.

One good example here is food and science. In the US, we like to break down food as a whole down to just nutrients, and go from there. Of course, when nutrients are seperated out and taken without the food itself, the outcome is not always as expected. In the case of beta carotene, which is/was thought to aid in fighting cancer and heart disease, this happened. Beta carotene supplements do not make much of a difference whatsoever. Eat foods high in beta carotene, however, and your risk of cancer and heart disease go down. Other examples in science are eggs (good to bad to good) and salt (ditto).

Then there's pseudo-science. An author in the 1970's created a "fact" that spiraled out of control and now tons of people recite it as pure fact: only animal proteins are "whole" and so vegetarians must eat their incomplete proteins together (such as rice and beans) to create a "whole protein".

While the creator of the protein combining myth has apologized for it and said it's not true, it's still taking people a long time to understand this. Of course, Americans are gung-ho for protein, and rag on that as if it's the only important part of a person's diet. Depending on age, fitness, pregnancy, etc., people only need 2.5% to 10% of calories to come from protein. Most vegetables contain protein. Nut butters, lentils, and legumes contain high amounts of protein. Rice, pasta, tofu, bread - they all contain protein. Protein deficiency is exceedingly rare in the United States. Most people, in fact, get more than they need.

This myth just won't die, though. It's still exceedingly common to hear people espouse it, and even Vegetarian Times gets it wrong:

"Tip: It was once thought that to get a complete protein, you needed to combine beans with grains (rice, pasta, bread) at the same meal. “Now we know you just have to eat them during the same day,” Sass says."

Then, of course, there's personal opinion written as if it's fact. Not to pick on one particular person here, but this one essay I came across rubbed me the wrong way. First, let's note that he considered veganism and vegetarianism to be for hippies, but not eating raw. Judging from his tone, I'm going to guess he's not a huge fan of hippies, which might color his opinions on food.

The author writes that he went to a restaurant where most of the food is vegan. He sets up the idea that the food is healthy, since it's vegan, then smashes that idea into the ground:

Our orders came. Each one was smothered in gross sugary sauce. This is typical for vegetarian and vegan places – they’re almost NEVER healthy. This was actually my favorite thing about eating raw – there was nothing on the diet that wasn’t healthy.

I think someone just has had bad experiences/hates hippies. Granted, I have not been to many veg*n restaurants, but I do have experience cooking such meals, and I call bullshit on this. Of course, it turns out that he considers certain healthy foods to be junk food:

The Baked Potato – It’s not fried, and it’s a vegetable. It MUST be healthy. Nope. Potatoes are pure starch and have almost no nutritional value. Even plain they’re awful for you. Once you start adding bacon bits, sour cream, butter, and all that other junk, they quickly become the worst possible thing you could eat.

Let's take a look at this, shall we? "Pure starch"? "Almost no nutritional value"? Here is a different look at the humble baked potato (ignoring the unhealthy toppings):

a baked potato is an exceptionally healthful low calorie, high fiber food that offers significant protection against cardiovascular disease and cancer.

Our food ranking system qualified potatoes as a very good source of vitamin C, a good source of vitamin B6, copper, potassium, manganese, and dietary fiber.

Potatoes also contain a variety of phytonutrients that have antioxidant activity. Among these important health-promoting compounds are carotenoids, flavonoids, and caffeic acid, as well as unique tuber storage proteins, such as patatin, which exhibit activity against free radicals.

And let's check out Mr. Hates Veg*ns third choice of unhealthy food, rice:

Rice – I seriously don’t understand why people eat rice. It doesn’t even taste good. Maybe that’s why people think it’s healthy. It’s not. It’s a processed grain that is converted into sugar as soon as you eat it. Brown rice is okay for you, but still isn’t very good for you. I don’t eat it at all.

Now, I may be biased because I love me some brown jasmine rice (though not a big fan of any white rice, though my husband likes white jasmine & basmati rice). Not only do I think rice is tasty, I think it's healthy - well, brown is healthy, white not so much (he got that much right):

Our food ranking system qualified brown rice as an excellent source of manganese, and a good source of the minerals selenium and magnesium. The complete milling and polishing that converts brown rice into white rice destroys 67% of the vitamin B3, 80% of the vitamin B1, 90% of the vitamin B6, half of the manganese, half of the phosphorus, 60% of the iron, and all of the dietary fiber and essential fatty acids. By law in the United States, fully milled and polished white rice must be "enriched" with vitamins B1, B3, and iron. But the form of these nutrients when added back into the processed rice is not the same as in the original unprocessed version, and at least 11 lost nutrients are not replaced in any form even with rice "enrichment."