DIET AND COMMON SENSE

Otago Daily Times, Issue 23363, 1 December 1937, Page 18

DIET AND COMMON SENSE

ro THE EDITOR

SirA few days ago there appeared a paragraph under the above heading, reporting Dr Gwynne. the Auckland radiologist, as having said, inter alia: “An adequate diet required properlybalanced percentages of protein, fat, and carbohydrates. A wide variety of foodstuffs was capable of meeting these requirements, and dietetic fads, however dogmatically asserted, had no general application.” When all this is granted, the fact remains that the vast proportion of the population does not have properlybalanced percentages of the various elements necessary for maintenance of health. In how many families are the three daily meals (and extras) composed almost wholly of starch? How many families have days without either fruit or vegetable, or without both, and even where these are included in the meals that are partaken of, very often in insufficient quantity Statistics show that in New Zealand the figures of consumption of such foods as meat, sugar, etc., are far too high, while those for fruit, vegetables, milk eggs, etc., are too low. Why, therefore, do the majority of doctors ignore these facts when treating their patients? Then, it is an admitted fact, stressed by health authorities —the Plunkct Society included —that more nourishment is obtained from the pure, unrefined, and unadulterated foods, such as whole meal, unpolished rice, brown sugar, etc., and certainly they have far more flavour. Yet the few who base their diet on these nutritious foodstuffs and stress their value arc designated “ faddists.” “ cranks.” etc. Would Dr Gwynne. or any other doctor, point out where I am wrong in these assertions? I genuinely desire to know.—l am, etc.. One of the Faddists. November 29.