*To give some context, he is discussing the French Paradox and the ability of Americans to latch onto any food fad as quickly as we do based on one man's ideas (Atkins...), one experiment, cookbook, etc. *
"Perhaps because we have no such culture of food in America almost every question about eating is up for grabs. Fat or carbs? Three squares or continuous grazing? Raw or cooked? Organic or industrial? Veg or vegan? Meat or mock meat? Foods of astounding novelty fill the shelves of our supermarket, and the line between a food and a "nutritional supplement" has fogged to the point where people make meals of protein bars and shakes. Consuming these neo-psuedo-foods alone in our cars we have become a nation of antinomian eaters, each of us struggling to work out our dietary salvation on our own. Is it any wonder Americans suffer from so many eating disorders? In the absence of any lasting consensus about what and how and where and when to eat, the omnivore's dilemma has returned to American with an almost atavistic force. This situation suits the food industry just fine, of course. The more anxious we are about eating, the more vulnerable we are to the seductions of the marketer and the expert's advice. Food marketing in particular thrives on dietary instability and so tends to exacerbate it. "
Pollan, Michael. "The Omnivore's Dilemma, A Natural History of Four Meals". New York: The Penguin Press, 2006.
What do you think?