What do you think?
Rate this book
Гневният майстор-готвач
"Създали сме общество, в което последователите на чистото хранене, здравните фанатици, дебелофобите и всички, които пробутват рестриктивни диети, имат имидж на добродетелни и свестни хора. Време е да разкрием истинския им облик – повърхностни, предубедени, безотговорни и грешащи."
Антъни Уорнър е професионален майстор-готвач, посветил живота си на насладата от храната и на борбата срещу драстичните хранителни режими. Живее в Нотингамшир и списва блога angry-chef.com, който го вдъхновява за книгата му "Гневният майстор-готвач". Води редовни рубрики в "Ню Сайънтист" и "Пул", а за блога му са писали "Гардиън", "Мейл он Съндей" и "Телеграф".
В стремежа си да покаже същността на храната като празник, Уорнър обявява война на псевдонаучните идеи за ограничения. Смело изобличава лъжците и шарлатаните и излага на показ безумията им. Привърженик на здравословното и балансирано хранене, той си поставя за цел да разкрие опасностите от модните диети и да разпространява послания за любов към кулинарията. "Гневният майстор-готвач" ни насърчава да прегърнем богатото разнообразие, което предлага светът на гастрономията. И най-важното – да приготвяме храна, която кара сърцето да запее.
Антъни Уорнър е професионален майстор-готвач, посветил живота си на насладата от храната и на борбата срещу драстичните хранителни режими. Живее в Нотингамшир и списва блога angry-chef.com, който го вдъхновява за книгата му "Гневният майстор-готвач". Води редовни рубрики в "Ню Сайънтист" и "Пул", а за блога му са писали "Гардиън", "Мейл он Съндей" и "Телеграф".
В стремежа си да покаже същността на храната като празник, Уорнър обявява война на псевдонаучните идеи за ограничения. Смело изобличава лъжците и шарлатаните и излага на показ безумията им. Привърженик на здравословното и балансирано хранене, той си поставя за цел да разкрие опасностите от модните диети и да разпространява послания за любов към кулинарията. "Гневният майстор-готвач" ни насърчава да прегърнем богатото разнообразие, което предлага светът на гастрономията. И най-важното – да приготвяме храна, която кара сърцето да запее.
368 pages, Paperback
First published October 10, 2017
172 people are currently reading
2620 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 188 reviews
July 5, 2018
The Angry Chef Guide to Spotting Bullshit in the World of Food
1.They will have a food philosophy.
2.They will try to sell you detox.
3.They will tell you that your illness is your own fault.
4.They will fit the health blogger template.*
5.They will talk about superfoods.
6.They will use anecdotes as evidence.
7.They will quote ancient wisdoms at you.
8.They will tell you things were better ‘back then’.
9.They will tell you all these things with great certainty.
"I was living my impossibly glamorous life as an INSERT GLAMOROUS OCCUPATION HERE at a hundred miles an hour, eating all sorts of junk and not caring what I put in my body. My health was really suffering. It was only when I started to take control of the food I was eating that my health improved. I started my INSERT NAME OF MADE-UP DIET PLAN HERE and it revolutionized my life. All my friends just begged me to share my recipes with them and that’s how my blog was born."
The author debunks detox, alkaline ash, coconut oil, evil sugar, magical coconut oil, paleo, antioxidants, GAPS diet, prepared foods, cancer fighting diets (just a thought, but if someone who makes coffee to drink is called a barista, what is someone who makes coffee to shove up your bum called?) and most of all clean eating and his enemy no. 1,Gwyneth Paltrow & her wellness blog, Goop.
If any of these diets or foods resonates with you in any way other than a good way to lose weight whilst feeling morally superior (a bit like people who follow dietary restrictions as part of their religion), then you are going to hate this book. If you are a pragmatist and like things to be science-based then this book will serve as confirmation bias, we all like a bit of that, it never hurts to know that one was right for all these good reasons. What Ben Goldacre did for alternative medicine in Bad Science, Anthony Warner is doing for alternative nutrition. And like Goldacre he is naming names and not getting sued. That should tell you plenty.
But we all deep down know what a good, healthy plan is, it's one where you can eat anything in moderation and where you exercise regularly (and get enough sleep). And that's how he concludes this very good book. It's a bonus that he writes well, the only downside is that with me at least he was preaching to the converted and I got bored every now and again. Still a 5 star read though.
This is the quote I like best, "The health and wellness lobby is taking over, relegating the opinions of nutritional scientists, dietitians and public health officials to the sidelines. Their books dominate the best-seller lists, their websites receive millions of hits and their Instagram accounts deliver endless pictures of kale smoothies and quinoa bowls to armies of adoring followers." (And pictures of just how thin and beautiful they are since being on the diet).
1.They will have a food philosophy.
2.They will try to sell you detox.
3.They will tell you that your illness is your own fault.
4.They will fit the health blogger template.*
5.They will talk about superfoods.
6.They will use anecdotes as evidence.
7.They will quote ancient wisdoms at you.
8.They will tell you things were better ‘back then’.
9.They will tell you all these things with great certainty.
"I was living my impossibly glamorous life as an INSERT GLAMOROUS OCCUPATION HERE at a hundred miles an hour, eating all sorts of junk and not caring what I put in my body. My health was really suffering. It was only when I started to take control of the food I was eating that my health improved. I started my INSERT NAME OF MADE-UP DIET PLAN HERE and it revolutionized my life. All my friends just begged me to share my recipes with them and that’s how my blog was born."
The author debunks detox, alkaline ash, coconut oil, evil sugar, magical coconut oil, paleo, antioxidants, GAPS diet, prepared foods, cancer fighting diets (just a thought, but if someone who makes coffee to drink is called a barista, what is someone who makes coffee to shove up your bum called?) and most of all clean eating and his enemy no. 1,Gwyneth Paltrow & her wellness blog, Goop.
If any of these diets or foods resonates with you in any way other than a good way to lose weight whilst feeling morally superior (a bit like people who follow dietary restrictions as part of their religion), then you are going to hate this book. If you are a pragmatist and like things to be science-based then this book will serve as confirmation bias, we all like a bit of that, it never hurts to know that one was right for all these good reasons. What Ben Goldacre did for alternative medicine in Bad Science, Anthony Warner is doing for alternative nutrition. And like Goldacre he is naming names and not getting sued. That should tell you plenty.
But we all deep down know what a good, healthy plan is, it's one where you can eat anything in moderation and where you exercise regularly (and get enough sleep). And that's how he concludes this very good book. It's a bonus that he writes well, the only downside is that with me at least he was preaching to the converted and I got bored every now and again. Still a 5 star read though.
This is the quote I like best, "The health and wellness lobby is taking over, relegating the opinions of nutritional scientists, dietitians and public health officials to the sidelines. Their books dominate the best-seller lists, their websites receive millions of hits and their Instagram accounts deliver endless pictures of kale smoothies and quinoa bowls to armies of adoring followers." (And pictures of just how thin and beautiful they are since being on the diet).
Read
September 13, 2017A thoroughly enjoyable, sweary and important read about the poisonous lies we're fed about food. Warner has some scientific background and a passion for food, and also common sense, and he takes on the Gwyneth Paltrow/paleo/clean eating brigades with gusto, attacking the baselessness and pseudoscience of it all, but also the thinly veiled misogyny and fatphobia that lies behind all this.
The first half of the book is basically a high octane rant, which is massive fun. The second half delves into the ways that food pseudoscience leaks into medical treatment--horrific starvation diets and enemas forced on autistic children as a "cure", cancer sufferers persuaded to ignore medical treatment in favour of fruit juice, the inescapable links between the shame-fuelled 'clean eating' fad and anorexia/orthorexia. This bit ought to make you extremely angry.
A really good, thorough read that digs into the lies we tell ourselves (the concepts of "confirmation bias", "regression to the mean" and "correlation is not causation" ought to be on every school syllabus).
Warner thinks we should take pleasure in food, eat a varied diet with occasional treats, and not give other people a hard time about their bodies. It's incredible, and incredibly depressing, that those principles require a lengthy polemic to defend them.
The first half of the book is basically a high octane rant, which is massive fun. The second half delves into the ways that food pseudoscience leaks into medical treatment--horrific starvation diets and enemas forced on autistic children as a "cure", cancer sufferers persuaded to ignore medical treatment in favour of fruit juice, the inescapable links between the shame-fuelled 'clean eating' fad and anorexia/orthorexia. This bit ought to make you extremely angry.
A really good, thorough read that digs into the lies we tell ourselves (the concepts of "confirmation bias", "regression to the mean" and "correlation is not causation" ought to be on every school syllabus).
Warner thinks we should take pleasure in food, eat a varied diet with occasional treats, and not give other people a hard time about their bodies. It's incredible, and incredibly depressing, that those principles require a lengthy polemic to defend them.
July 3, 2022
Антъни Уорън обича храната, но още повече обича науката. И е истински гневен, когато самозвани хранителни експерти и инфлуенсъри пробутват теории за хранене, които не почиват на никакви научни данни. За примери се дават палео диетата, безглутеновата и алкалната диета, “чистото” хранене със скъпи био продукти и суперхрани – все диети, които носят имплицитно послание за висок социален статус и чувство за морално превъзходство на последователите им над нещастниците, които се хранят традиционно, ограничени в избора от финансовите си възможности. Доказателството за “ефективността” на въпросните диети не е нищо повече от личната история на хранителното гуру – така наречения “anecdotal evidence”, който има нулева научна стойност.
В най-добрия случай ефектът от подобни рестриктивни режими е временна загуба на тегло, а в много лошия – приписваните им лечебни свойства могат да доведат до отказ от жизненоважно лечение по каноните на традиционната медицина. Такива диети демонизират цяла група храни или хранителни вещества за сметка на други (най-често скъпи), които гуруто представя като чудодейни и лековити. Друг подмолен аргумент зад модерните хранителни експерименти е връщането към някакво идеализирано (и затова никога несъществувало) минало, в което нашите баби са яли чиста и естествена храна, докато днес се тровим в токсини. Истината е, че днес живеем във възможно най-добрите времена, включително и откъм качеството и сигурността на храната. Регулациите и задълженията върху хранителната индустрия са по-строги отвсякога и изненада – тези високи стандарти за качество и безопасност идват от “лошите” големи производители.
И макар че съществува пряка връзка между здравето и храната, която приемаме, да се приписват лечебни свойства на определени храни е забранено със закон в редица държави, просто защото храната е нещо толкова комплексно като химичен състав, че за науката е изключително трудно да установи пряка връзка между дадена храна и претенциите й за лечебен ефект.
Интересното е, че Уорън взима на мушка конкретна личност - Гуинет Полтроу с нейния сайт за уелнес, на който могат да бъдат открити безумни псевдонаучни и откровено опасни твърдения, сред които е признанието, че актрисата използва кокосово масло като лубрикант.
Но защо съмнителните хранителни режими привличат огромен брой отдадени следовници? Отговорът според Уорън е прост и очевиден. Псевдонаучният наратив обикновено е атрактивно поднесен и апелира към емоциите, а научният е скучен и трудно разбираем за лаика. Гурутата са убедени “на сто процента”, че техният режим работи и агресивно го рекламират, а науката винаги се съмнява и в това е най-голямата й сила – съмненията водят до още проучвания и изводи, а оттам и до по-голям прогрес.
И така, как и с какво да се храним, без вини и съмнения? Решението според Уорън? Яжте умерено и от всичко по малко, движете се повече и така ще имате здравословни отношения с храната, която освен енергийно гориво за нашия организъм, е и невероятно удоволствие.
В най-добрия случай ефектът от подобни рестриктивни режими е временна загуба на тегло, а в много лошия – приписваните им лечебни свойства могат да доведат до отказ от жизненоважно лечение по каноните на традиционната медицина. Такива диети демонизират цяла група храни или хранителни вещества за сметка на други (най-често скъпи), които гуруто представя като чудодейни и лековити. Друг подмолен аргумент зад модерните хранителни експерименти е връщането към някакво идеализирано (и затова никога несъществувало) минало, в което нашите баби са яли чиста и естествена храна, докато днес се тровим в токсини. Истината е, че днес живеем във възможно най-добрите времена, включително и откъм качеството и сигурността на храната. Регулациите и задълженията върху хранителната индустрия са по-строги отвсякога и изненада – тези високи стандарти за качество и безопасност идват от “лошите” големи производители.
И макар че съществува пряка връзка между здравето и храната, която приемаме, да се приписват лечебни свойства на определени храни е забранено със закон в редица държави, просто защото храната е нещо толкова комплексно като химичен състав, че за науката е изключително трудно да установи пряка връзка между дадена храна и претенциите й за лечебен ефект.
Интересното е, че Уорън взима на мушка конкретна личност - Гуинет Полтроу с нейния сайт за уелнес, на който могат да бъдат открити безумни псевдонаучни и откровено опасни твърдения, сред които е признанието, че актрисата използва кокосово масло като лубрикант.
Но защо съмнителните хранителни режими привличат огромен брой отдадени следовници? Отговорът според Уорън е прост и очевиден. Псевдонаучният наратив обикновено е атрактивно поднесен и апелира към емоциите, а научният е скучен и трудно разбираем за лаика. Гурутата са убедени “на сто процента”, че техният режим работи и агресивно го рекламират, а науката винаги се съмнява и в това е най-голямата й сила – съмненията водят до още проучвания и изводи, а оттам и до по-голям прогрес.
И така, как и с какво да се храним, без вини и съмнения? Решението според Уорън? Яжте умерено и от всичко по малко, движете се повече и така ще имате здравословни отношения с храната, която освен енергийно гориво за нашия организъм, е и невероятно удоволствие.
July 23, 2017
Sorry to say this, but I did not like this book at all, I couldn't even get past chapter 6. It's a shame because lots of healthcare professionals and nutritionists were talking it up and promoting it. And I really, really wanted to like this book; the author just made it very difficult for me.
There are (some) useful information and good points in there, of course. However, I couldn't find most of them as they are greatly overshadowed by the unappealing style of writing and very strong opinions of the writer that also seem to scare people (the exact idea he is trying to tell people about the fake nutrition experts out there). So while reading the first chapter, I couldn't get out of my head the idea that this person is also not a healthcare professional but a chef and a blogger, so essentially he is doing exactly what he criticizes other 'health' bloggers and writers for doing. Granted, he does debunk several popular nutritional myths, but his points are largely opinion-based and not backed up by enough evidence at all, "I am not desperately keen to go into every detail of the science here, but in my opinion..."
This seems to me another blogger who went into the book industry for the money, as there aren't enough appealing ideas in there to make this book worth a read.
This is a book written by a chef, so I don't expect a great deal of scientific analysis in there. Then again, why should I even read this book if it's written by a chef and not a scientist or a health-care professional? Twenty-plus years as a chef does not make you a nutrition expert.
And finally I have to say something about this because I did read chapter 19 just to really understand what he was saying. "Every time we criticize convenience choices, we are showing our desire to drag women's bodies and minds away from the workplace and back into the kitchen." WHAT?!
Okay, who said anything about women doing all the cooking? TV dinners, ready-made foods and meals sold in many different stores or restaurants are laden with salt, fats, sugars and a myriad of other ingredients to make them very palatable and shelf-stable until they reach the consumer. 'I am not desperately keen on to go into every detail of the science here', but we certainly shouldn't be relying on these types of convenience foods in our everyday life. We don't mean to be attacking the can of sardines or the iron-fortified cereal types of processed foods. But then, who said anything about women being the ones that have to go to the kitchen to cook? You're a male chef yourself. When we (by 'we' I mean actual nutritionists) advise not to rely on convenience foods and prefer you cook your own foods at home, we mean EVERYONE, not just women. Why ever would you think we mean only women?
There are (some) useful information and good points in there, of course. However, I couldn't find most of them as they are greatly overshadowed by the unappealing style of writing and very strong opinions of the writer that also seem to scare people (the exact idea he is trying to tell people about the fake nutrition experts out there). So while reading the first chapter, I couldn't get out of my head the idea that this person is also not a healthcare professional but a chef and a blogger, so essentially he is doing exactly what he criticizes other 'health' bloggers and writers for doing. Granted, he does debunk several popular nutritional myths, but his points are largely opinion-based and not backed up by enough evidence at all, "I am not desperately keen to go into every detail of the science here, but in my opinion..."
This seems to me another blogger who went into the book industry for the money, as there aren't enough appealing ideas in there to make this book worth a read.
This is a book written by a chef, so I don't expect a great deal of scientific analysis in there. Then again, why should I even read this book if it's written by a chef and not a scientist or a health-care professional? Twenty-plus years as a chef does not make you a nutrition expert.
And finally I have to say something about this because I did read chapter 19 just to really understand what he was saying. "Every time we criticize convenience choices, we are showing our desire to drag women's bodies and minds away from the workplace and back into the kitchen." WHAT?!
Okay, who said anything about women doing all the cooking? TV dinners, ready-made foods and meals sold in many different stores or restaurants are laden with salt, fats, sugars and a myriad of other ingredients to make them very palatable and shelf-stable until they reach the consumer. 'I am not desperately keen on to go into every detail of the science here', but we certainly shouldn't be relying on these types of convenience foods in our everyday life. We don't mean to be attacking the can of sardines or the iron-fortified cereal types of processed foods. But then, who said anything about women being the ones that have to go to the kitchen to cook? You're a male chef yourself. When we (by 'we' I mean actual nutritionists) advise not to rely on convenience foods and prefer you cook your own foods at home, we mean EVERYONE, not just women. Why ever would you think we mean only women?
December 28, 2018
I appreciate the debunking of some silly and some openly dangerous myths because who doesn't find magical thinking dressed as science and then preached as gospel annoying? But I especially appreciate the absolutely novel, in my experience, approach to talking about food and health mainly from the point of view of mental health. Food is good, it's more than just fuel, it's a powerful cultural tool we use to derive pleasure, make bonds, understand each other, experience different cultures, explore our differences to find the commonalities between us, and make lasting memories of happy times and loved ones. It's truly cruel how it's been turned into a malicious monster by diet gurus and health bloggers, to be carefully handled, restricted, excluded, maligned as an enemy - and this ultimately harms us all, breaks our relationship with food, deteriorating our quality of life in a palpable way. This angle is the crucial and very significant point and asset of the book that earned it the 4 stars.
Apart from that, there's a fair bit of exalted science worshipping, which I've long been wary and weary of, some decidedly narrow-minded prejudice against non-Western cultures, and, most annoying of all, some disingenuous underplaying of proven hazards to health such as pollution, including in food (fish, for example), and meat consumption, so he could make his point more unequivocally. This kind of undermines the sort of trust this kind of book requires to be taken seriously.
Apart from that, there's a fair bit of exalted science worshipping, which I've long been wary and weary of, some decidedly narrow-minded prejudice against non-Western cultures, and, most annoying of all, some disingenuous underplaying of proven hazards to health such as pollution, including in food (fish, for example), and meat consumption, so he could make his point more unequivocally. This kind of undermines the sort of trust this kind of book requires to be taken seriously.
July 28, 2017
Bravo. Now I trust nothing. 3.8.
January 18, 2018
I'll be honest - for the first few chapters I wasn't really into this book. That's because those chapters, barring one or two useful insights, were mostly like blog posts about fad diet and idiot lifestyle gurus, and how they're wrong: a fact that most readers of books like this will already know. So it felt sort of like we're patting each other on the back about how clever we are to not fall for such idiot tricks.
I only started getting into this book in chapter 12 (A History of Quackery), and it is here that the book should have started, really: with a background of where quackery comes from, because that does more than anything to explain why it is so prevalent today. I know tonnes of people who mistrust government guidelines and doctors, not because they're stupid, but because they're old and because they remember guidelines and recommendations, which turned out to be poisonous. That chapter is followed up by how science works, and why scientific understanding is an evolving thing, which often offers little comfort, as opposed to quack beliefs which are often very strict and clear about rules and about what's good or bad to eat. This, then, would have served as a great second chapter for the book: an outline of his methodological framework, if you will. And it would have supported his actual argument, which, due to the way the book is organised, is kind of lost behind the spiel of "I'm an angry, ranty guy, who hates dumb idiots." That's the spiel that's supposed to sell you this book, but it is, in essence, false advertising. This book isn't funny and it isn't fun, and the author, I think, never intended it to be.
So, following his outline of where quackery came from, and how the scientific method works (and why there are so many things which we just don't know yet), he could have proceeded to dismantle the likes of Gwyneth Paltrow, which at this point would not have looked cruel or mean, but an introduction to his main argument, which follows in the last part of the book: that seemingly innocent quack beliefs, easy to fall for because they offer an illusion of certainty and control over your body and health, have wide-ranging, serious consequences for people and can literally kill.
Anyway, I might be too academic in my review of this book, but it would have, I think, strengthened his argument. In truth, the first few chapters, when he rants about alkaline ash and gluten free etc, undermine him later on, because they make you think: dude, you're a chef. It's like a painter writing a book about the health consequences of plastic surgery. But in fact he's very good at signalling to you where scientific consensus or fact ends and his opinion begins. He sources his claims, so you can check them for yourself anyway, which is always a good idea. So it's clear that he is serious about his message, and wants you to take it seriously too. Which is why I think his publisher did him a disservice by putting on the cover reviews that stress how "funny" this book is, and putting knives on the cover, signalling this will be a brutal take down by an angry, angry man. The best parts of this book aren't angry at all, but heartfelt, compassionate, worried but understanding. And there's little to laugh at when he explains how vulnerable people are being victimised by our refusal to accept science (despite its weaknesses and faults) as the only safe arbiter of what is healthy and what isn't.
Anyway, despite my criticism, it is an interesting and worthwhile read for everyone. If you're prone to fall for the glossy image of perfect lives lived by the "clean eating" crowd, this book is for you. If you're ill and confused about the myriad of advice given you by well-meaning people, crowding out your doctor's advice, this book is for you. And if you, like me, avoid any and all news about food, weight-loss and health in newspapers and magazines, because you know the opposite will be claimed a week later somewhere else, this book is also for you.
I only started getting into this book in chapter 12 (A History of Quackery), and it is here that the book should have started, really: with a background of where quackery comes from, because that does more than anything to explain why it is so prevalent today. I know tonnes of people who mistrust government guidelines and doctors, not because they're stupid, but because they're old and because they remember guidelines and recommendations, which turned out to be poisonous. That chapter is followed up by how science works, and why scientific understanding is an evolving thing, which often offers little comfort, as opposed to quack beliefs which are often very strict and clear about rules and about what's good or bad to eat. This, then, would have served as a great second chapter for the book: an outline of his methodological framework, if you will. And it would have supported his actual argument, which, due to the way the book is organised, is kind of lost behind the spiel of "I'm an angry, ranty guy, who hates dumb idiots." That's the spiel that's supposed to sell you this book, but it is, in essence, false advertising. This book isn't funny and it isn't fun, and the author, I think, never intended it to be.
So, following his outline of where quackery came from, and how the scientific method works (and why there are so many things which we just don't know yet), he could have proceeded to dismantle the likes of Gwyneth Paltrow, which at this point would not have looked cruel or mean, but an introduction to his main argument, which follows in the last part of the book: that seemingly innocent quack beliefs, easy to fall for because they offer an illusion of certainty and control over your body and health, have wide-ranging, serious consequences for people and can literally kill.
Anyway, I might be too academic in my review of this book, but it would have, I think, strengthened his argument. In truth, the first few chapters, when he rants about alkaline ash and gluten free etc, undermine him later on, because they make you think: dude, you're a chef. It's like a painter writing a book about the health consequences of plastic surgery. But in fact he's very good at signalling to you where scientific consensus or fact ends and his opinion begins. He sources his claims, so you can check them for yourself anyway, which is always a good idea. So it's clear that he is serious about his message, and wants you to take it seriously too. Which is why I think his publisher did him a disservice by putting on the cover reviews that stress how "funny" this book is, and putting knives on the cover, signalling this will be a brutal take down by an angry, angry man. The best parts of this book aren't angry at all, but heartfelt, compassionate, worried but understanding. And there's little to laugh at when he explains how vulnerable people are being victimised by our refusal to accept science (despite its weaknesses and faults) as the only safe arbiter of what is healthy and what isn't.
Anyway, despite my criticism, it is an interesting and worthwhile read for everyone. If you're prone to fall for the glossy image of perfect lives lived by the "clean eating" crowd, this book is for you. If you're ill and confused about the myriad of advice given you by well-meaning people, crowding out your doctor's advice, this book is for you. And if you, like me, avoid any and all news about food, weight-loss and health in newspapers and magazines, because you know the opposite will be claimed a week later somewhere else, this book is also for you.
September 27, 2017
Нарешті хтось взяв і написав про те, що я давно підозрювала! "Здоровий" підхід до їжі має бути насправді здоровим, у значенні "здорового глузду"! Автор (насправді можна сказати колектив авторів, бо автор у написанні консультувався з багатьма науковцями) зібрав міфи, які розповсюджують фудблогери, які насправді нічого не тямлять в питаннях медицини і здоров'я, і на основі наукових досліджень доводить, що нема єдино правильного підходу до "здорового харчування", їсти можна все (якщо у вас нема серйозних траблів чи алергій)! Чим різноманітніше - тим краще, а головне, від їжі треба відчувати насолоду, а не провину! Згодом напишу більше у себе в блозі. Смачного!
July 26, 2017
Very much in the vein of Ben Goldacre, The Angry Chef sets out to debunk clean eating myths and bad food science. It's a very interesting topic but unfortunately it comes across as jumbled and badly written. Too anecdotal and not enough research to back up some pretty wild statements (like how women were freed from the shackles of the kitchen by convenience foods and railing against homemade food), maybe it will be popular with teenagers in the throes of clean eating blogs and health food propaganda (What The Health, anyone?). I think I've read better books about this subject. Also I'm not a fan of his personal bashing of celebrities, it's mean spirited an doesn't contribute anything to the point of the book.
February 7, 2018
What a wonderfully well put together piece of genius this is.
As a food teacher, I’ve long believed the wisdom held within but never had the nerve to stand up against the trash in the media. Read this, it will seriously open your eyes, and do so in a hugely entertaining manner.
It has profanity too!
I’ll leave you with this little piece of wisdom...
“Put down that superfood smoothie, ditch your wellness books, close that clean-eating web page and delete it from your history. Unfollow the wellness gurus who encourage you to abandon the tenets of scientific reason. It might seem harmless today, but sometime in the future when your options are not so bright, it may cost you more than you can afford.”
Oh. And eat more fish.
As a food teacher, I’ve long believed the wisdom held within but never had the nerve to stand up against the trash in the media. Read this, it will seriously open your eyes, and do so in a hugely entertaining manner.
It has profanity too!
I’ll leave you with this little piece of wisdom...
“Put down that superfood smoothie, ditch your wellness books, close that clean-eating web page and delete it from your history. Unfollow the wellness gurus who encourage you to abandon the tenets of scientific reason. It might seem harmless today, but sometime in the future when your options are not so bright, it may cost you more than you can afford.”
Oh. And eat more fish.
June 17, 2021
Something in me wants to print this out and it out to everyone who thinks Gluten is bad for them, that potatoes are somehow not good for you and so on. I love debunking nutritional nonsense and as a long time sufferer of eating disorders nothing pisses me off more than someone demonising certain foods. I love this book and I recommend to everyone! a must read.
June 6, 2019
“When modern medicine has little to offer, one of the few things people can control is their food. As their illness progresses and they start to feel worse, they will look for any intervention that might help. Many will find advice from alternative practitioners or the internet, often telling them to exclude certain things from their diet.”
Warner, and his learned cohorts, like Goldacre’s “Bad Science” and Ernst & Singh’s “Trick Or Treatment” try to take a sobering and practical look at some of the worrying nonsense being pedalled out there in the celebrity diet community. He makes some great points about how food and dietary choices are so often used to assert class and superiority. Just listen to some people talk about coffee and wine. He brings a bold and pragmatic approach that is an ideal tonic for the wall of waffle we get from pseudoscience.
He shows how people so often confuse hypothesis with theory and the problems that can lead to. Detox, Anti-oxidants, the alkaline ash diet, the paleo diet, clean eating and GAPS all come in for some well-earned criticism. Gwyneth Paltrow, (who comes across like a maniac with a keyboard) also falls between the crosshairs. He doesn't hold back on his opinions to diet or food, his thoughts on coconut oil as a super food were very amusing, “A small, obscure culinary fat with very limited use” that “makes everything taste like sun cream”.
Warner reveals the generic template that so many of these diet gurus churn out, which did make me laugh aloud in recognition. He even makes up his own diet to see if it will be adopted by gullible readers. He goes onto explain many more concepts like regression to the mean and placebos, like Goldacre did in “Bad Science”. There is a jokey light hearted approach with no lack of a naughty word or two in there, but he also tackles some very serious subjects too, not least some heart breaking cases of terminal cancer, that really hit home the seriousness of his point.
There was one argument that I was largely unconvinced by and that was the chapter on sugar. He appears to have lumped all sugars in together, as if sugars derived from fruit were in the same league as refined, white sugar, which I found a bit misleading. We obviously need sugar, but the problem is with refined and hidden sugars, which I think he could have expanded on. He is correct in saying that the obesity epidemic is more than just about sugar, but as he himself even agrees there is enough strong evidence to show the damage caused by refined sugar, “Although the United States did see a per capita increase, and sugar consumption there shows a strong correlation to obesity levels.”
He suggests that big sugar is not as influential as it is being made out to be, “We will have to be so powerful we can persuade the nutritional establishment to spend millions of dollars producing fake science to justify these new dietary guidelines. We will then have to bribe every level of government to enforce these guidelines on an unsuspecting public.” He goes onto say, “Which part of the food industry do you think has the most power, money and influence-sugar manufacturers, or the combined weight of the meat, dairy and culinary oil businesses.”
But you don’t need millions of dollars. In 2016 it was revealed that Harvard professors had taken money to manipulate their findings to favour the sugar industry. As the New York Times said,
“The documents show that a trade group called the Sugar Research Foundation, known today as the Sugar Association, paid three Harvard scientists the equivalent of about $50,000 in today’s dollars to publish a 1967 review of research on sugar, fat and heart disease. The studies used in the review were handpicked by the sugar group, and the article which was published in the prestigious New England Journal of Medicine, minimized the link between sugar and heart health and cast aspersions on the role of saturated fat.”
As well as that it is worth noting that one sugar company alone, Nestle, enjoyed a revenue in 2012 that was larger than the GDP of all but seventy of the world’s nations, so there is little question of the power and influence of these brands. They don’t need to be stronger or even as powerful as these industries. They are not necessarily competing against each other, and they don’t have to, both are more interested in minimising regulation, and maximising profit than fighting each other.
I thought he was incredibly naïve in his thinking that governments wouldn’t allow something into the market that wasn’t good for us. He greatly underestimates the phenomenal power and influence that the lobbyists of these multi-billion conglomerates employ. Taking the US as an example, look at their record on regulating guns, caffeine, big pharma, big oil, to mention only a few areas. If they can’t change gun laws when massacre after massacre occurs what makes you think that they would be any different towards sugar?...
More importantly remember that big tobacco claimed for decades to have health benefits in moderation, using images of babies, Santa and it was endorsed by athletes, and doctors in the US who publicly advocated the health benefits of smoking. They were doing this for years and this was still happening in the second half of the 20th century. These are not the rantings of conspiracy theorists, or paranoid extremists. These are highly educated people with power and influence.
The sugar defence really didn’t make sense until the final third of the book, when I came across this quote, “In the interests of transparency, I have to admit vested interests at this point” I thought that page 271 was maybe a little late to reveal them, but better late than never. “I have spent over ten years working as a development chef in the food manufacturing industry, creating recipes for value added convenience products for a number of well-known food brands.” For whatever reason his interests of transparency stop at naming any of the brands by name, so I will go out on a limb and guess that maybe ‘value added convenience products’ is some corporate Orwellian euphemism for ready meals, stuff that you cook in the microwave. If so, why not just say that?...I am sure you will be aware that these products traditionally rely on a lot of added sugar, salt and other filler, so this may explain why he is so reluctant to speak out against sugar and ready meals.
I agree with him about the important role that convenience foods play in countless people’s lives. Surely only idiots would wish to outlaw them. But again it’s a question of framing. The problem isn’t convenience foods, the problem is the dubious claims of 'health benefits' and of course the hidden sugar, salt and other crap buried away in them. The sheer abundance of it in everyday items and how hard it is to avoid them, especially if you are on a limited income. What is needed is more education, stricter regulation on what you are allowed to put in them, and more transparency and responsibility from the companies who persist to design deliberately misleading labels.
Please understand that is merely a minor gripe, and that overall this was an otherwise excellently researched, at times amusing and enjoyable two fingers up to the celebrity laden, charlatan crowded mad world of fad diets, non-science and snake oil. Warner and his team have done a great job of bringing these dangers, fallacies, myths and lies into the mainstream and exposing them for what they are. Their concerted efforts will help to stop so many trusting, vulnerable and desperate people from being hurt, fleeced or worse in the future, and for that Warner and his cohorts should be applauded.
Warner, and his learned cohorts, like Goldacre’s “Bad Science” and Ernst & Singh’s “Trick Or Treatment” try to take a sobering and practical look at some of the worrying nonsense being pedalled out there in the celebrity diet community. He makes some great points about how food and dietary choices are so often used to assert class and superiority. Just listen to some people talk about coffee and wine. He brings a bold and pragmatic approach that is an ideal tonic for the wall of waffle we get from pseudoscience.
He shows how people so often confuse hypothesis with theory and the problems that can lead to. Detox, Anti-oxidants, the alkaline ash diet, the paleo diet, clean eating and GAPS all come in for some well-earned criticism. Gwyneth Paltrow, (who comes across like a maniac with a keyboard) also falls between the crosshairs. He doesn't hold back on his opinions to diet or food, his thoughts on coconut oil as a super food were very amusing, “A small, obscure culinary fat with very limited use” that “makes everything taste like sun cream”.
Warner reveals the generic template that so many of these diet gurus churn out, which did make me laugh aloud in recognition. He even makes up his own diet to see if it will be adopted by gullible readers. He goes onto explain many more concepts like regression to the mean and placebos, like Goldacre did in “Bad Science”. There is a jokey light hearted approach with no lack of a naughty word or two in there, but he also tackles some very serious subjects too, not least some heart breaking cases of terminal cancer, that really hit home the seriousness of his point.
There was one argument that I was largely unconvinced by and that was the chapter on sugar. He appears to have lumped all sugars in together, as if sugars derived from fruit were in the same league as refined, white sugar, which I found a bit misleading. We obviously need sugar, but the problem is with refined and hidden sugars, which I think he could have expanded on. He is correct in saying that the obesity epidemic is more than just about sugar, but as he himself even agrees there is enough strong evidence to show the damage caused by refined sugar, “Although the United States did see a per capita increase, and sugar consumption there shows a strong correlation to obesity levels.”
He suggests that big sugar is not as influential as it is being made out to be, “We will have to be so powerful we can persuade the nutritional establishment to spend millions of dollars producing fake science to justify these new dietary guidelines. We will then have to bribe every level of government to enforce these guidelines on an unsuspecting public.” He goes onto say, “Which part of the food industry do you think has the most power, money and influence-sugar manufacturers, or the combined weight of the meat, dairy and culinary oil businesses.”
But you don’t need millions of dollars. In 2016 it was revealed that Harvard professors had taken money to manipulate their findings to favour the sugar industry. As the New York Times said,
“The documents show that a trade group called the Sugar Research Foundation, known today as the Sugar Association, paid three Harvard scientists the equivalent of about $50,000 in today’s dollars to publish a 1967 review of research on sugar, fat and heart disease. The studies used in the review were handpicked by the sugar group, and the article which was published in the prestigious New England Journal of Medicine, minimized the link between sugar and heart health and cast aspersions on the role of saturated fat.”
As well as that it is worth noting that one sugar company alone, Nestle, enjoyed a revenue in 2012 that was larger than the GDP of all but seventy of the world’s nations, so there is little question of the power and influence of these brands. They don’t need to be stronger or even as powerful as these industries. They are not necessarily competing against each other, and they don’t have to, both are more interested in minimising regulation, and maximising profit than fighting each other.
I thought he was incredibly naïve in his thinking that governments wouldn’t allow something into the market that wasn’t good for us. He greatly underestimates the phenomenal power and influence that the lobbyists of these multi-billion conglomerates employ. Taking the US as an example, look at their record on regulating guns, caffeine, big pharma, big oil, to mention only a few areas. If they can’t change gun laws when massacre after massacre occurs what makes you think that they would be any different towards sugar?...
More importantly remember that big tobacco claimed for decades to have health benefits in moderation, using images of babies, Santa and it was endorsed by athletes, and doctors in the US who publicly advocated the health benefits of smoking. They were doing this for years and this was still happening in the second half of the 20th century. These are not the rantings of conspiracy theorists, or paranoid extremists. These are highly educated people with power and influence.
The sugar defence really didn’t make sense until the final third of the book, when I came across this quote, “In the interests of transparency, I have to admit vested interests at this point” I thought that page 271 was maybe a little late to reveal them, but better late than never. “I have spent over ten years working as a development chef in the food manufacturing industry, creating recipes for value added convenience products for a number of well-known food brands.” For whatever reason his interests of transparency stop at naming any of the brands by name, so I will go out on a limb and guess that maybe ‘value added convenience products’ is some corporate Orwellian euphemism for ready meals, stuff that you cook in the microwave. If so, why not just say that?...I am sure you will be aware that these products traditionally rely on a lot of added sugar, salt and other filler, so this may explain why he is so reluctant to speak out against sugar and ready meals.
I agree with him about the important role that convenience foods play in countless people’s lives. Surely only idiots would wish to outlaw them. But again it’s a question of framing. The problem isn’t convenience foods, the problem is the dubious claims of 'health benefits' and of course the hidden sugar, salt and other crap buried away in them. The sheer abundance of it in everyday items and how hard it is to avoid them, especially if you are on a limited income. What is needed is more education, stricter regulation on what you are allowed to put in them, and more transparency and responsibility from the companies who persist to design deliberately misleading labels.
Please understand that is merely a minor gripe, and that overall this was an otherwise excellently researched, at times amusing and enjoyable two fingers up to the celebrity laden, charlatan crowded mad world of fad diets, non-science and snake oil. Warner and his team have done a great job of bringing these dangers, fallacies, myths and lies into the mainstream and exposing them for what they are. Their concerted efforts will help to stop so many trusting, vulnerable and desperate people from being hurt, fleeced or worse in the future, and for that Warner and his cohorts should be applauded.
September 18, 2017
This book is like a finely cooked dish, with many layers of enjoyment. The main theme is scientific evidence (or lack thereof) for benefits of various food fads. In addition to raw facts, it explores the origins and psychology of persistent culinary nonsense. Elegant cussing and imaginary dialogues are also among the aforementioned layers.
It’s no wonder pseudoscientific eating advice is so common - in a twisted way, bullshit diets often appear to work. The Angry Chef suggests several explanations:
* Instead of following a steady line, our feeling of healthiness randomly fluctuates in time. People are more likely to take action when they’re at worse. The improvement that follows is not due to the miracle diet, but a regression to mean (what goes down must come up).
* Despite claiming to have more energy, shinier skin, etc., the main instrument used to measure diet’s effectiveness is bathroom scales. Not surprisingly, every fad diet can result in weight loss because of their restrictive nature. However, weight loss doesn’t automatically signify healthy.
* Dieting is boring. Using memes like cleanness, detox, alkalinity etc. makes it a game and helps participants stick to their routine. Exotic ingredients and secret recipes function as status signals in the community.
* Lot of symptoms that detox diets claim to soothe are the same as symptoms of depression. Adopting a new diet and having something to focus on might actually pacify a troubled mind.
I also liked the discussion about processed convenience foods. Yes, they might not be as healthy as kale from granny’s backyard. But in a way, they’ve liberated a generation of people (especially women) to pursue other things in life. If food is your passion, go for three home-cooked meals a day. But many would trade a few years in life expectancy for not having to spend the time and cognitive effort on something they have no interest in.
Moreover, “processed” doesn’t automatically mean bad. We all drink processed water - it’s perhaps the greatest life-saving innovation of humanity. Demonising the food industry and demanding scientifically nonsensical products (gluten-free, sugar-free…) goes against the progress that healthy eating movement aims to spark.
As a bittersweet after-note, you may be disappointed to find that the book has no recipes of scientifically proven healthy dishes. We just don’t know enough about the matter yet. The most that science can tell us right now is that the tens of thousands of chemical substances that we ingest every day as food act together in miraculous and poorly understood combination. It is our job to live with this uncertainty and try to make reasonable judgements anyway. A rational healthy eater should “eat everything in moderation and move around more.”
It’s no wonder pseudoscientific eating advice is so common - in a twisted way, bullshit diets often appear to work. The Angry Chef suggests several explanations:
* Instead of following a steady line, our feeling of healthiness randomly fluctuates in time. People are more likely to take action when they’re at worse. The improvement that follows is not due to the miracle diet, but a regression to mean (what goes down must come up).
* Despite claiming to have more energy, shinier skin, etc., the main instrument used to measure diet’s effectiveness is bathroom scales. Not surprisingly, every fad diet can result in weight loss because of their restrictive nature. However, weight loss doesn’t automatically signify healthy.
* Dieting is boring. Using memes like cleanness, detox, alkalinity etc. makes it a game and helps participants stick to their routine. Exotic ingredients and secret recipes function as status signals in the community.
* Lot of symptoms that detox diets claim to soothe are the same as symptoms of depression. Adopting a new diet and having something to focus on might actually pacify a troubled mind.
I also liked the discussion about processed convenience foods. Yes, they might not be as healthy as kale from granny’s backyard. But in a way, they’ve liberated a generation of people (especially women) to pursue other things in life. If food is your passion, go for three home-cooked meals a day. But many would trade a few years in life expectancy for not having to spend the time and cognitive effort on something they have no interest in.
Moreover, “processed” doesn’t automatically mean bad. We all drink processed water - it’s perhaps the greatest life-saving innovation of humanity. Demonising the food industry and demanding scientifically nonsensical products (gluten-free, sugar-free…) goes against the progress that healthy eating movement aims to spark.
As a bittersweet after-note, you may be disappointed to find that the book has no recipes of scientifically proven healthy dishes. We just don’t know enough about the matter yet. The most that science can tell us right now is that the tens of thousands of chemical substances that we ingest every day as food act together in miraculous and poorly understood combination. It is our job to live with this uncertainty and try to make reasonable judgements anyway. A rational healthy eater should “eat everything in moderation and move around more.”
July 23, 2018
The title flags a truth not often recognized in Boulder County, CO, where I live: there is a LOT of bullshit in the world of food. And the many faces of that bullshit, plus their antecedents (ayurveda, etc.), are all spelled out in this book: Paleo, gluten-free-for-non-celiacs, detoxing, "clean" eating. Many of these eating protocols are built on a grain of truth (ha! get it? "grain" of truth!), but have spun way out of control, to the point that the author argues they foster disordered eating, mislead people (sometimes tragically) with regard to food's influence on diseases like cancer, and lead to anorexia and other true diet-related mental and physical illnesses. Warner places such diets in the context of the general contempt that many people, looking for easy answers, have for the complicated, decidedly non-simplistic and hard-to-apply process of science. It's the same anti-science bias you see regarding climate change, and it's just as alarming in the realm of nutrition.
I wasn't familiar with Warner's blog (The Angry Chef), but when I spotted this book on the new bookshelf at my library, I was fresh off the experience of a "detox" that many friends who are not dumb people have done and touted for its great effects on their sleep quality, clarity of thinking and in some cases their weight. I haven't been able to run as much in the last few months because of an injury, and I've gained weight--and that's on top of the general hectic nature of my life, which doesn't allow for good sleep, a lot of downtime to decompress or much time to plan healthy meals. I'm feeling soft in the middle and weak and tired these days. The prospect of a two-week protocol that promised to fix all these issues (and have a positive effect on my skin and hair too!) caught me at vulnerable moment.
It didn't work, of course--it just made me more tired and stressed because I had to plan special meals and drink green smoothies, and my sleep and weight and hair quality stayed exactly the same. And this has been my experience in general with eating protocols. I've (fortunately) never been truly tempted by Paleo or keto or gluten-free diets, which promise equally dramatic results as long as you stay on them....forever; I've never done well with "forever" when it comes to eating restrictions, and I think that's a good thing. But like many people I'm frustrated with the never-ending fight against the first-world problem of creeping weight gain and the mixed messages coming at us from all sides about how to combat it. The media, celebrities (though I try to ignore them) and my friends (who as I said above aren't stupid and in most contexts don't fall for scams but as health-conscious people are susceptible to dubious messages about eating) all have opinions on this and, it often seems, certainty about what will work. At my most downcast, I too can be easy prey for the siren song of clean eating.
The Angry Chef's message is freeing. He hates the moralistic language around food: "clean" vs. "dirty" in particular. His scientific arguments against strict food rules and his clear explanation of WHY nutrition is complicated set you free to enjoy what you want to--even, gasp, some processed food (yay Oreos)--in moderation. I also found his mocking of celebrity health gurus like Gwyneth Paltrow hilarious and spot-on (I've often wondered who died and made her queen of nutrition; it's really easy to eat well when you are a wealthy actress, and it's also easy to have great skin and hair that way). Likewise his calling out of the weird obsessions that go along with some of these programs: enemas? really? for a healthy person?! no, thanks; such a dwelling on poop among these folks!! I also found his honesty refreshing and common-sensical: there are no easy answers. Much of this foolishness is just the Western preoccupation with being thin disguised as a quest to be healthy. Those two things aren't necessarily the same, and it's dishonest and damaging to conflate them.
The only thing I'd quibble with in this book is that while Warner rightly emphasizes the dangers of food pseudoscience for people suffering from scary illnesses like cancer as well as for all of us reasonably healthy people needlessly falling prey to its siren song of "getting the glow" and "our best body," and while it's true that we are all too worried about being thin, obesity also is a real health problem. Warner says we are wrong to blame the food industry and processed food for the obesity epidemic....and he may be right about that. But WHY, then, has it become such an issue? Being lean isn't just cosmetic. In most cases, the leaner a person is, the healthier they are too. Fat-shaming is horrible, and making people think they can escape the middle-aged spread by depriving themselves of the pleasure of food is also counterproductive....but weight gain is an actual health problem that needs to be dealt with. My parents--my direct genetic forebears--were in their youth much leaner on their pre-processed-foods 1950s and 1960s diets than I was at the same age in the 1980s and 1990s, when fast food and processed food hit their peak. It doesn't seem that far-fetched that this is more than just correlation implying a false causation.
But this is just a minor quibble with the important message of this book. As the Angry Chef himself would say, it's complicated. I can live with complication. To lose my extra pounds, I'm going to try to get more sleep, eat more veggies without giving up the occasional indulgence and ramp my running up as my injury allows. It's not easy and there's no real protocol for it, but nothing worthwhile or true is easy. I'm really glad I read this book.
I wasn't familiar with Warner's blog (The Angry Chef), but when I spotted this book on the new bookshelf at my library, I was fresh off the experience of a "detox" that many friends who are not dumb people have done and touted for its great effects on their sleep quality, clarity of thinking and in some cases their weight. I haven't been able to run as much in the last few months because of an injury, and I've gained weight--and that's on top of the general hectic nature of my life, which doesn't allow for good sleep, a lot of downtime to decompress or much time to plan healthy meals. I'm feeling soft in the middle and weak and tired these days. The prospect of a two-week protocol that promised to fix all these issues (and have a positive effect on my skin and hair too!) caught me at vulnerable moment.
It didn't work, of course--it just made me more tired and stressed because I had to plan special meals and drink green smoothies, and my sleep and weight and hair quality stayed exactly the same. And this has been my experience in general with eating protocols. I've (fortunately) never been truly tempted by Paleo or keto or gluten-free diets, which promise equally dramatic results as long as you stay on them....forever; I've never done well with "forever" when it comes to eating restrictions, and I think that's a good thing. But like many people I'm frustrated with the never-ending fight against the first-world problem of creeping weight gain and the mixed messages coming at us from all sides about how to combat it. The media, celebrities (though I try to ignore them) and my friends (who as I said above aren't stupid and in most contexts don't fall for scams but as health-conscious people are susceptible to dubious messages about eating) all have opinions on this and, it often seems, certainty about what will work. At my most downcast, I too can be easy prey for the siren song of clean eating.
The Angry Chef's message is freeing. He hates the moralistic language around food: "clean" vs. "dirty" in particular. His scientific arguments against strict food rules and his clear explanation of WHY nutrition is complicated set you free to enjoy what you want to--even, gasp, some processed food (yay Oreos)--in moderation. I also found his mocking of celebrity health gurus like Gwyneth Paltrow hilarious and spot-on (I've often wondered who died and made her queen of nutrition; it's really easy to eat well when you are a wealthy actress, and it's also easy to have great skin and hair that way). Likewise his calling out of the weird obsessions that go along with some of these programs: enemas? really? for a healthy person?! no, thanks; such a dwelling on poop among these folks!! I also found his honesty refreshing and common-sensical: there are no easy answers. Much of this foolishness is just the Western preoccupation with being thin disguised as a quest to be healthy. Those two things aren't necessarily the same, and it's dishonest and damaging to conflate them.
The only thing I'd quibble with in this book is that while Warner rightly emphasizes the dangers of food pseudoscience for people suffering from scary illnesses like cancer as well as for all of us reasonably healthy people needlessly falling prey to its siren song of "getting the glow" and "our best body," and while it's true that we are all too worried about being thin, obesity also is a real health problem. Warner says we are wrong to blame the food industry and processed food for the obesity epidemic....and he may be right about that. But WHY, then, has it become such an issue? Being lean isn't just cosmetic. In most cases, the leaner a person is, the healthier they are too. Fat-shaming is horrible, and making people think they can escape the middle-aged spread by depriving themselves of the pleasure of food is also counterproductive....but weight gain is an actual health problem that needs to be dealt with. My parents--my direct genetic forebears--were in their youth much leaner on their pre-processed-foods 1950s and 1960s diets than I was at the same age in the 1980s and 1990s, when fast food and processed food hit their peak. It doesn't seem that far-fetched that this is more than just correlation implying a false causation.
But this is just a minor quibble with the important message of this book. As the Angry Chef himself would say, it's complicated. I can live with complication. To lose my extra pounds, I'm going to try to get more sleep, eat more veggies without giving up the occasional indulgence and ramp my running up as my injury allows. It's not easy and there's no real protocol for it, but nothing worthwhile or true is easy. I'm really glad I read this book.
January 10, 2021
Autor skutecznie obala wiele fałszywych teorii promowanych przez zwolenników "zdrowego jedzenia". Robi to jednak w taki sposób, który, obawiam się, nie jest w stanie trafić do osób wierzących w moc detoksu albo diety paleo. I właściwie nie powinienem spodziewać się czegoś innego po człowieku występującym jako Wściekły Kucharz, a nie Wyrozumiały albo Wspierający Kucharz. No ale efektem jest książka, która może służyć raczej temu, żeby osoby już sceptyczne wobec cudownych diet poczuły że są zajebiście mądre, niż żeby ktoś zweryfikował swoje poglądy. Do tego humor i jakaś lekkość pisania, których się spodziewałem, w większości chyba wyparowały w tłumaczeniu.
August 17, 2017
I am convinced of several points in this book. Anyway, I think potatoes do have some disadvantage; They have a very high GI index, as high as glucoses.
August 28, 2023
Incredibly important, and coming from someone who already lives by the doctrine of food being something joyous instead of scary, incredibly educational.
Warner does a superb job of setting up the book by laying out "correlation vs causation" as well as the instinctive brain and how this relates to peoples choices regarding food. The scientific and social explanations of why people follow unorthodox diets accompanied by Warner's complete breakdown of why these diets are pseudoscientific and thus shouldn't have any power over anyone, felt incredibly valuable. Needless to say there were some pretty distressing chapters, especially the ones focusing on the unfounded and harmful treatment of cancer and autism through restrictive dieting.
I did find some of the chapters in the middle slightly dry and skimmed a bit here and there. But have come away with a general feeling of empowerment. Food and restriction is a sensitive topic and the author's treatment of it felt both positive and encouraging.
Warner does a superb job of setting up the book by laying out "correlation vs causation" as well as the instinctive brain and how this relates to peoples choices regarding food. The scientific and social explanations of why people follow unorthodox diets accompanied by Warner's complete breakdown of why these diets are pseudoscientific and thus shouldn't have any power over anyone, felt incredibly valuable. Needless to say there were some pretty distressing chapters, especially the ones focusing on the unfounded and harmful treatment of cancer and autism through restrictive dieting.
I did find some of the chapters in the middle slightly dry and skimmed a bit here and there. But have come away with a general feeling of empowerment. Food and restriction is a sensitive topic and the author's treatment of it felt both positive and encouraging.
January 9, 2018
5 stars for readability
5 stars for his effusive love of food (which I share)
5 stars for making me think about many things in ways I had not thought about before
5 stars for his ideas about how science should be taught - not just as hard facts but also as a way of life - of thinking critically about the world, dealing with uncertainty and realizing how much we don’t know
However, I’ve got one sticking point with this book which is making it difficult for me to rate it overall - I don’t think he gets all of the story in. Eg towards the end he says that fussy eating can be a symptom of depression and that those people should really go to doctors to get help because that will save them... as someone with a chronic illness (endometriosis) whose symptoms are controlled quite well by food on top of conventional medicine (and my diet is extremely varied even though I limit my intake of certain foods) I don’t think he stresses enough how much conventional medicine does not have the answer for every ill, particularly for something as complex as depression or anxiety. Drugs don’t work well for everyone and they can have really horrible side effects that doctors dismiss and expect you to live with. He does mention medicine’s shortcomings at times in the book but then his aforementioned comments make me think that he doesn’t realize how much food can really affect people’s well-being and how it can be used as a tool for good in a healthy non-guilt-inducing way. I think mentioning the gut-brain connection would’ve helped (maybe he mentioned it and I forgot? Either way his comments on depression seem too simplistic).
Also he seems to ignore the fact that even though we are at a really good time in the world’s history in terms of having access to clean water/vaccines/antibiotics/etc, there are also a lot of new chemicals that we are producing that we don’t really know the effects of yet (or the ones which we’ve done studies on don’t look great so far). Dioxins for example are far more common than they used to be and exposure to it has been show to increase the risk of endometriosis (among many other conditions).
Also, saying that convenience food has helped women progress in the world and that getting rid of it would relegate women back to the kitchen again... that shouldn't be the case. Maybe realistically that is what would happen but men are responsible for cooking too, so that shouldn't be an argument pro-convenience food.
Disclaimer: I am a scientist so I tend to not accept stuff that I read straight away so that’s part of why he’s getting a bit of a hard time - overall I think it is enjoyable and very much a worthwhile read.
5 stars for his effusive love of food (which I share)
5 stars for making me think about many things in ways I had not thought about before
5 stars for his ideas about how science should be taught - not just as hard facts but also as a way of life - of thinking critically about the world, dealing with uncertainty and realizing how much we don’t know
However, I’ve got one sticking point with this book which is making it difficult for me to rate it overall - I don’t think he gets all of the story in. Eg towards the end he says that fussy eating can be a symptom of depression and that those people should really go to doctors to get help because that will save them... as someone with a chronic illness (endometriosis) whose symptoms are controlled quite well by food on top of conventional medicine (and my diet is extremely varied even though I limit my intake of certain foods) I don’t think he stresses enough how much conventional medicine does not have the answer for every ill, particularly for something as complex as depression or anxiety. Drugs don’t work well for everyone and they can have really horrible side effects that doctors dismiss and expect you to live with. He does mention medicine’s shortcomings at times in the book but then his aforementioned comments make me think that he doesn’t realize how much food can really affect people’s well-being and how it can be used as a tool for good in a healthy non-guilt-inducing way. I think mentioning the gut-brain connection would’ve helped (maybe he mentioned it and I forgot? Either way his comments on depression seem too simplistic).
Also he seems to ignore the fact that even though we are at a really good time in the world’s history in terms of having access to clean water/vaccines/antibiotics/etc, there are also a lot of new chemicals that we are producing that we don’t really know the effects of yet (or the ones which we’ve done studies on don’t look great so far). Dioxins for example are far more common than they used to be and exposure to it has been show to increase the risk of endometriosis (among many other conditions).
Also, saying that convenience food has helped women progress in the world and that getting rid of it would relegate women back to the kitchen again... that shouldn't be the case. Maybe realistically that is what would happen but men are responsible for cooking too, so that shouldn't be an argument pro-convenience food.
Disclaimer: I am a scientist so I tend to not accept stuff that I read straight away so that’s part of why he’s getting a bit of a hard time - overall I think it is enjoyable and very much a worthwhile read.
August 29, 2019
Highly enjoyable. There really is so much nonsense floating around about fad diets and cleanses and superfoods that it was quite refreshing to read something that debunked all the nonsense and steered by actual scientific evidence and common sense. (However, there was not nearly as much profanity or actual amusing ranting as expected - it's all very civil, really. I'll assume he saves the expletives for his blog.)
I wish I could say this book will be useful as a basis for initiating conversations with the dietetically obsessed in order to contribute to Warner's fight against "nutribollocks", but it is sadly true - as the book does point out - that too many people consider even hard evidence a matter of opinion and prefer to cling to simplistic pseudoscience and anecdotal evidence instead.
I wish I could say this book will be useful as a basis for initiating conversations with the dietetically obsessed in order to contribute to Warner's fight against "nutribollocks", but it is sadly true - as the book does point out - that too many people consider even hard evidence a matter of opinion and prefer to cling to simplistic pseudoscience and anecdotal evidence instead.
June 26, 2021
Minu arvamuse leiab blogist https://triinuraamatud.wordpress.com/...
Read
October 1, 2022Średniaczek. Nic specjalnie porywającego, ale mam teraz ochotę poczytać sobie o obecnym stanie wiedzy onkologicznej i o pułapkach poznawczych.
May 28, 2019
The Angry Chef’s Guide debunks pseudoscience in mainstream media and makes the convincing argument that pseudoscience is not harmless as you may think, but a gateway for dangerous beliefs such as anti-vaccination and naturopathic cures for cancer. The Angry Chef’s Guide champions the scientific method and passionately argues for the liberation of science from a list of facts to memorize in high school but to accept and surrender to science as the constant questioning of life and to live comfortably with uncertainty.
We must be “taught to think, but also be taught how we think” and remember science is about not knowing as much as it is to question. To be a scientific thinker means to catch ourselves before we conclude correlation is causation and to take anecdotes as hard evidence “because it sounded correct and [we] had believed it in the past. It did not matter that [we] could not remember why [we] knew it or where [we] had heard it first.”
A chef by trade, Anthony Warner began the Angry Chef blog because he was angry by Paltrow Science and nutritionists frolicking around. This is the first book in the series, and Warner’s intent is to educate the reader to think for themselves so that they are not scammed by the latest diet crazy spouted by nutritionists that have no scientific training. While the majority of us know pseudoscience is a marketing smokescreen, we may believe it’s harmless because we’re just trying it out. Everyone else is doing it. At the very least, we might lose a few pounds.
But the impact of letting bygones be bygones is letting those that are most vulnerable fall through the cracks. From pursuing questionable alternative treatments for autistic children that result in enemas for 2-year-olds or taking on restrictive diets as an alternative treatment to cure cancer, many people die when they could have been saved or die living the rest of their few years in misery. And for what?
Warner deeply loves food and he is angry at those that pervert food, that either use food to signify status or use food to purify themselves - those that distort science to sell whatever they want - but he also feels for the victims that get sucked in and ultimately lose big for betting on the wrong horse.
Warner also does a convincing job of showing everyone’s skin in the game: Why do we believe in the lies? Who are more susceptible to falling for them and falling for them in ways that may lead them to destroy their lives? What structures are in place to distort scientific research? How much of a role does media play and how much are scientists themselves at fault for this distortion of research?
Warner believes the secret to healthy eating is to eat lots of different stuff, not too much or too little and not to feel guilty about it because “the real science behind food is still driven by a lot of uncertainty as to how our diet affects our health.” He believes in the Mediterranean diet.
Fair enough.
But I found a fatal failing in The Angry Chef for how it portrayed Ayurvedic and Traditional Chinese Medicine, dismissing it under straw man arguments and blanket statements, out of his distaste for anything New Age and mystical. To immediately dismiss rich civilizations because of its popularity among New Age types and its “ancient” perceptions was a sweeping conclusion, and incredibly reductive. By equating these two ancient disciplines on the same level as moon dust is simply insulting.
Warner also tries hard to argue that everything is pretty good in the food industry, considering it used to be way worse! Did the food industry pay him to say that? Of course, it is just like everything else about society. Race, social mobility etc. and just like these issues of our times - the simple fact that we've made progress doesn't mean the work is done. The food industry desperately needs reform when it comes to traceability in the supply chain in order to reduce foodborne illness outbreaks.
Overall, a highly powerful and instructive read. A great plea for us to be critical and fight back against anyone who thinks they know the secret to eating right and healthy.
We must be “taught to think, but also be taught how we think” and remember science is about not knowing as much as it is to question. To be a scientific thinker means to catch ourselves before we conclude correlation is causation and to take anecdotes as hard evidence “because it sounded correct and [we] had believed it in the past. It did not matter that [we] could not remember why [we] knew it or where [we] had heard it first.”
A chef by trade, Anthony Warner began the Angry Chef blog because he was angry by Paltrow Science and nutritionists frolicking around. This is the first book in the series, and Warner’s intent is to educate the reader to think for themselves so that they are not scammed by the latest diet crazy spouted by nutritionists that have no scientific training. While the majority of us know pseudoscience is a marketing smokescreen, we may believe it’s harmless because we’re just trying it out. Everyone else is doing it. At the very least, we might lose a few pounds.
But the impact of letting bygones be bygones is letting those that are most vulnerable fall through the cracks. From pursuing questionable alternative treatments for autistic children that result in enemas for 2-year-olds or taking on restrictive diets as an alternative treatment to cure cancer, many people die when they could have been saved or die living the rest of their few years in misery. And for what?
Warner deeply loves food and he is angry at those that pervert food, that either use food to signify status or use food to purify themselves - those that distort science to sell whatever they want - but he also feels for the victims that get sucked in and ultimately lose big for betting on the wrong horse.
Warner also does a convincing job of showing everyone’s skin in the game: Why do we believe in the lies? Who are more susceptible to falling for them and falling for them in ways that may lead them to destroy their lives? What structures are in place to distort scientific research? How much of a role does media play and how much are scientists themselves at fault for this distortion of research?
Warner believes the secret to healthy eating is to eat lots of different stuff, not too much or too little and not to feel guilty about it because “the real science behind food is still driven by a lot of uncertainty as to how our diet affects our health.” He believes in the Mediterranean diet.
Fair enough.
But I found a fatal failing in The Angry Chef for how it portrayed Ayurvedic and Traditional Chinese Medicine, dismissing it under straw man arguments and blanket statements, out of his distaste for anything New Age and mystical. To immediately dismiss rich civilizations because of its popularity among New Age types and its “ancient” perceptions was a sweeping conclusion, and incredibly reductive. By equating these two ancient disciplines on the same level as moon dust is simply insulting.
Warner also tries hard to argue that everything is pretty good in the food industry, considering it used to be way worse! Did the food industry pay him to say that? Of course, it is just like everything else about society. Race, social mobility etc. and just like these issues of our times - the simple fact that we've made progress doesn't mean the work is done. The food industry desperately needs reform when it comes to traceability in the supply chain in order to reduce foodborne illness outbreaks.
Overall, a highly powerful and instructive read. A great plea for us to be critical and fight back against anyone who thinks they know the secret to eating right and healthy.
May 2, 2018
The content -- a scathing takedown of fad diets and pseudoscience around food -- is hilarious until the part about innocent people dying in agony because they are trying to cure their cancer with guacamole or to starve their child out of autism, as advised by various diet gurus. True believers in any of those cure-all diets will not enjoy this book. Nor will Gwenyth Paltrow or the real-life model for the two guys called "Jamie" and "Oliver."
It's sweary / quite raw in places, but honestly that's a strength. Other strengths: The chapter on Easter bunnies and correlation vs. causation and the discussion of the power of social media to help absolute quacks and frauds seem authentic. The factual content itself is worth between five and eleventy-nine stars.
The writing's a little uneven. Many books based on blogs (and Mr. Angry Chef started out as a blogger) are essentially strings of blog posts disguised as chapters with a little filler. Angry (do you mind if I call you Angry? Mr. Chef seems so formal) has written extensive content outside of the blog format and it doesn't work all that well. The conclusion is a bit preachy and it has almost as many false endings as the third Lord of the Rings movie.
The other problem with the book is who to recommend it to. I know several people who are true believers in one diet or another, and I can't imagine it will do my friendships any good to say "Here, read this ... the author proves pretty conclusively that the diet you've built your whole world view around is utter bullsh*t."
It's sweary / quite raw in places, but honestly that's a strength. Other strengths: The chapter on Easter bunnies and correlation vs. causation and the discussion of the power of social media to help absolute quacks and frauds seem authentic. The factual content itself is worth between five and eleventy-nine stars.
The writing's a little uneven. Many books based on blogs (and Mr. Angry Chef started out as a blogger) are essentially strings of blog posts disguised as chapters with a little filler. Angry (do you mind if I call you Angry? Mr. Chef seems so formal) has written extensive content outside of the blog format and it doesn't work all that well. The conclusion is a bit preachy and it has almost as many false endings as the third Lord of the Rings movie.
The other problem with the book is who to recommend it to. I know several people who are true believers in one diet or another, and I can't imagine it will do my friendships any good to say "Here, read this ... the author proves pretty conclusively that the diet you've built your whole world view around is utter bullsh*t."
August 20, 2023
I skimmed since this author was preaching to the choir in my case and I was already familiar with the pseudoscience popular in wellness circles. However, I'm 100% on board with the author's message when it comes to eating:
1. Eat lots of different stuff.
2. Not too much or too little.
3. Try to achieve a bit of balance.
4. Try not to feel guilty. Most important, never make others feel guilt or shame about the food they eat.
If someone has ever felt confused about common wellness claims relating to the benefits of detoxes, super foods, or trendy diets this is a book that does what it says and cuts through the bs. As a sidenote:
1. Eat lots of different stuff.
2. Not too much or too little.
3. Try to achieve a bit of balance.
4. Try not to feel guilty. Most important, never make others feel guilt or shame about the food they eat.
If someone has ever felt confused about common wellness claims relating to the benefits of detoxes, super foods, or trendy diets this is a book that does what it says and cuts through the bs. As a sidenote:
February 2, 2019
Keď mi knihu kamarát ponúkol na prečítanie, ani som si ju nechcel brať, však to bude určite nejaký motivačný bordel. Mýlil som sa. Ak odmyslím občasný nepríjemný pocit z redundantnosti textu (čo môže spôsobovať aj preklad), aj tak nemám prečo ubrať jedinú piatich hviezdičiek. S nadhľadom napísaná informovaná kritika všetkých možných stravovacích akože metód od čistých potravín, cez paleo, antioxidanty, až po rôzne zdravotné diéty, zásaditú stravu a podobne. [Hrôza sú diéty pre autistov.] Všetko pekne s odkazmi na relevatnú vedeckú literatúru a s citátmi hodnoverných vedcov z oblasti výživy, biológie či psychológie. Pekne vysvetľuje postupy ako odhaliť vedu a pavedu, šarlatánov a iných, ktorí na nevedomosti svojich zákazníkov(pardon, pacientov) chcú len zarobiť bez toho aby niesli zodpovednosť za neúspechy a smrť. Výborná kniha. Odporúčam všetkým, možno najviac čitateľom stránok typu "badatel"a podobných. Radím do poličky slušných vedecko-popularizačných kníh.
September 4, 2017
Chef Anthony Warner has made a second career out of "debunking Nutribollocks" on his blog and social media. In this, his first book, he talks about how we have been swept up in a craze of clean eating, detoxing, and wellness.
Split up into different chapters and sprinkled with humour, this was a really interesting and fun read. He debunks a lot of myths sold to us on a daily basis (detoxing IS NOT A THING), and investigates the darker side of some advertising - the way companies and organisations deliberately target vulnerable people by using dirty tricks designed to cause fear and hysteria in order to peddle some juice or tea.
This was full of common sense, and I really loved the author's style of writing.
Recommended.
Split up into different chapters and sprinkled with humour, this was a really interesting and fun read. He debunks a lot of myths sold to us on a daily basis (detoxing IS NOT A THING), and investigates the darker side of some advertising - the way companies and organisations deliberately target vulnerable people by using dirty tricks designed to cause fear and hysteria in order to peddle some juice or tea.
This was full of common sense, and I really loved the author's style of writing.
Recommended.
August 17, 2017
⭐️⭐️ Angry Chef looks at specific diets and fads and tries to dismantle nonsense spread by self-proclaimed food experts. Even though I agree with a lot of what Anthony Warner says, I just couldn’t go through this badly written rant. There are other, less angry and more convincing ways to talk about popular nutritional myths and debunk fad diets such as paleo, gluten-free, alkaline, the sugar conspiracy, or clean eating.
You really don’t need to read this book to know that when it comes to the food industry, common sense is key and eating a sensible and varied diet is better than any ‘superfood’ or detox.
You really don’t need to read this book to know that when it comes to the food industry, common sense is key and eating a sensible and varied diet is better than any ‘superfood’ or detox.
July 9, 2017
If I could give it more than 5* I totally would. It was just brilliant.
December 17, 2018
Fad diets? Bah. Superfoods? Rubbish. Just avoid processed foods and eat a variety of foods, all of them in moderation.
January 1, 2020
Nuda, źle napisana nuda. Jak można zarżnąć tak fajny temat? Po co te pop-psychologiczne wtręty?
Displaying 1 - 30 of 188 reviews