IMPORTANCE OF DIET.

Evening Star, Issue 22353, 1 June 1936, Page 8

IMPORTANCE OF DIET.

There is an old, old saying—everybody has heard it—that ono man’s meat is another man’s poison. Like many old sayings, it contains more than a grain of truth. That is why the practical application of the study of dietetics to individual requirements should command more usage than it does. As a matter of fact, a good deal of evidence can now be found in older countries than ours that the day of the professional dietitian is quickly approaching. In Europe and America graduates of home science schools are being welcomed as competent allies of the medical and nursing staff's in the perpetual fight against disease and physical infirmity. New Zealand, however, is slow to face the dieting problem from the most direct and therefore the most efficacious angle. That is evident from the remarks made by Professor A. G. Strong the other day in the course of an interview. Local graduates in home science who have pursued dietetic courses with creditable enthusiasm arc not being given the opportunities that should he theirs for turning their knowledge to good account among their own people, and so have been forced to leave the Dominion. Wo are not prepared to give our whole-hearted support to the allegations of Dr Ulric Williams, of Wanganui, that the diet in our boarding schools and hospitals is appalling. Nevertheless, it is conceivable that certain gastronomic habits and penchants formed during the school period, while having no deleterious effects during the subjects’ more youthful years, may take their toll if persisted in later in life. The incidence of stomach trouble in the Dominion is known to bo high, and a common sense review of the position appears to indicate that by turning an attentive ear to the voice of the dietitian much suffering could he averted. it is easy and perhaps fashionable to decry the “ food crank ” and the “ faddist,” hut authentic students of food reform can summon a quick answer by reminding their critics that their methods are based largely on a return to the dictates of Mother Nature, which means the curtailment of refined and overcooked foodstuffs. It is a moot point as to who is the real faddist, the person who is not averse to assimilating plenty of roughage or the person who attaches

more importance to Hie culinary treatment of food than to the nutritive properties of the food itself. However, although New Zealand is lagging behind the older countries in the efforts that are being made to combat illhealth by the utilisation of modern dietetic principles, she does not stand alone in ignorance. Nutrition in relation to public health and economic conditions is a matter that is engaging the attention of the League of Nations. The League has embarked on a farreaching inquiry into the social and hygienic aspect of the problem. According to a report recently issued, the exports no longer make investigations as to the minimum food ration without which a man’s physique deteriorates, but they endeavour to determine what is the best ration for health, for work, and for good results without fatigue. This does not necessarily mean that the housewife in the average home must confront the huge problem of serving something different to each of her charges. It will be found that there are sufficient basic nutritive substances available to meet the physiological needs of every person in fair health. It is, of course, in cases of malnutrition and sickness that discrimination should be shown.