Many other factors combine to jeopardize our nutritional health. The environmental pollution, pesticides, petrochemicals, electronic emanation from our contemporary technology – all increase our needs for nutrients that, by acting as anti oxidants, are necessary to detoxify our systems from this chemical burden. The wide spread use of antibiotics has created a generation of people with shortages of beneficial bacteria that help keep pathogenic yeast in check. High stress levels as well as drug and alcohol consumption also increase nutrient nee well beyond current recommendations. As we age, we may have inadequate hydrochloride acid or pancreatic enzymes to assimilate the nutrients in our food. Finally, a variety of illnesses affect our nutrient intake, and a variety of medications block their function. Thus it is strikingly apparent that we are not getting and cannot get optimal nutrition only from the foods we eat. Supplements are necessary, and many studies confirm this fact.
Virtually every study comparing supplement takers with a matched group that does not take supplements shows that those taking nutrients are far healthier. Those of the nutritional old guard who believe that our nutrients must be provided by the food we eat accept that dogma on faith, stubbornly unmoved by the avalanche of multinational published research that demonstrate one major clinical application of nutritional therapy after another. One would wonder why.
Although the “food must supply the nutrients” position came about for honest albeit unscientific reasons. The cozy interdependence of the major food industry giants and many nutrition department heads at major institutions has been well documented. Consider this: The profit margins within the food industry are highest when packaged, processed; long-shelf-life food is purchased and are lowest when fresh produce, meat, fish, eggs and milk are purchased. The quintessential high mark up items is cereals, pasta, crackers and packaged bread. Is it a coincidence that this nutritional rogue’s gallery has been proposed to be the basis of our food pyramid? If you were the CEO of one of the food con-glomerates, would you not pursue a business strategy leading to greater consumption to high profit cereal type foods than low-profit fresh foods. For the past half century the most effective strategy has been to convince nutritionally naïve citizens and public officials that cereal is good for you. But considering the fact that scientific data shows these highly allergenic refine carbohydrates to be more harmful than beneficial, such convincing takes some doing.
No problem – all you have to do is endour enough nutrition departments. The department heads, in turn, will put the desired spin on scientific observations, keep economically incorrect scientific papers out of the peer – reviewed journals they control, dictate the areas appropriate for further research, and most important, give the government honchos no alternative ideas to consider. The successful strategy has long been that when scientific evidence is lacking, stack the panel with “experts” who not only know their bread, but also know which side it’s buttered on.