ABS 300: Food and Culture FALL 2015 1
How have humans and our food ways co-evolved?
How do our biological needs for food affect our culture?
How do our cultures affect our biological needs and responses to food?
Introductory Video (Transcript)
“”
This week's learning objectives:
1. To understand how humans have evolved to eat the way that we do
2. Gain a basic overview of various human adaptions to the foods we eat
3. Explore the biocultural perspective to studying food and nutrition
4. Understand how biological aspects of eating affect our cultural systems of food and eating
Remember, if you have questions related to the course, please post to Hallway Conversation or, if it is a
personal matter, email your TA.
Module 4 Discussion Question:
Our class discussion boards for each module are meant to facilitate interaction in the course. Each
module requires a discussion post that is worth 15 points (with the exception of Module 7).You are
encouraged to respond to other student's posts to facilitate a lively discussion, but your discussion post
grade will only be based on your original response to the discussion question.
Because this discussion board does not require previous knowledge, you can (and should) make your
post early in the week; however, they are due by 11:59pm on Friday, November 13th.
Note: In this and future discussion board posts, you may want or need to cite some outside sources in
order to develop your response. Remember that proper citation practice includes knowing the best ways
to quote and paraphrase your sources. To avoid improper citations and possible plagiarism, check out
the links in the Writing Help Center to aid you in distinguishing between proper and improper use of
source materials.
Skim the contents of a popular diet website or diet book advocating the Paleodiet. Answer the following
questions:
1. What "scientific" assertions do they make?
2. Based on the TED talk and other readings, how accurate are these assertions?
3. Why do you think the Paleo diet fad is so appealing?
To receive the full 15 points for your original discussion post, you must adhere to the following
guidelines:
Discussion posts must be 100-200 words and be written in complete sentences and use correct
grammar (i.e. no abbreviations or emoticons allowed) [2 pts].
Have an interesting or provocative title (so that other students will want to read your post and
respond) [1 pt].
Appear in a new thread in response to the original discussion question posed to the class. [1 pt].
Address all parts of the original question posed [11 pts].
MODULE 3: Environmental & Ecological Approaches
,ABS 300: Food and Culture FALL 2015 2
Required Readings:
Chapters 10-13 of The Omnivore's Dilemma - Note: you will not be quizzed on The Omnivore's
Dilemma reading in this module's quiz, but we recommend you read these chapters to keep on
pace to finish the book in time for our book club in week 7
Leonard, W. R. (2003). Food for Thought. Scientific American, 13, 62-71.
Pelto, G.H., Dufour, D.L., Goodman, A.H. (2012). The Biocultural Perspective in Nutritional
Anthropology.In Dufour, D. L., Goodman, A. H., & Pelto, G. H. (Eds.) Nutritional Anthropology:
Biocultural Perspectives on Food and Nutrition, (2012), 218-230. Oxford University Press.
These two Variations of an aphorism that describes the relationship between some individuals and their
food have become commonplace in popular American discourse. The first is Often intended as a thinly
veiled accusation Of y, It good-naturedly caricatures an individual whose interest in food exceeds a level
that is "seemly" (ülatis, culturappropriate). Food is slow in preparation and maximally social. The second
is also often used with a mildly pejorarive intent. It carries the implication that the individual being 'bed
is insufficiently interested in the "finer" (that is, y valued) aspects of food. It conjures up an image of who
«wolfs dowd' food and is oblivious to the senand social pleasures Of eating. Food is fast; in and out as as
possible. Together, these two variations of the aphorlsm capture the extremes Of an implicit cl_lltural
dimension how people should relate to food, and in so doing they the varied significance Of food in
American culture. As is true of many aphorisms, the characterimtion in the 'eat-to-live" and live-to-eat"
observations derive their punch from the fact that they rest on an underlying truism. In this the truism is
that humans, li_ke all living organisms, must eat food to obtain the nutrients that are essential to life,
and, at the same time, We humans invest with a host of symbolic and social qualities that enhance its
meaning beyond that Of sustaining physical functioning. A tacit recognition Of the interplay Of these two
elements is invoked in the popular aphorism. This interplay between food as a biological necessity and
the social and cultural factors that condition its availabdity and consumption is the focus Of a number Of
fields Of research , Nutrition and/ or food are the subjects of study in many disciplines, from
biochemistry and molecular biology to philosophy, folklore, and history. Contemporary scholarship on
food and nutrition covers the full range from questions that are exclusively biological to ones that are
exclusively about social issues. Some disciplines, including nutritional epidemiology, public health
nutrition, community nutrition, and nutritional anthropology, focus on the middle ground in the
spectrum from biological to social aspects offood and nutrition. Each Of these "middle-of-the-spectrurri'
disciplines has its identity and orientation, which are determined to a large extent by the types Of
questions With which it is concerned. As a field of study, nutritional anthropology is fundamentally
concerned With understanding the interrelationships of biological and social forces in shaping human
food use ant the nutritional Status of individuals and populations. Food, What is bioculturally defined as
edible, contains nutrients anc Other substances. Once food is consumed, the human tive tract begins to
conveft food to its chemical constituents One result Of variation in the amount and quality Of consumed
is variation in nutritional status, or the state ofbal. ance resulting from the supply and expenditure Of
nutrients. Nutritional status is important because it is linked to a host oi health and functional
consequences. A simplified flow of the precess linking food to function is presented below, Nutritional
Status*Functional Outcomes In pursuing knowledge Of this important process, nutritional
anthropologists use theory from both biological and social sciences and employ research methods from
biological sciences, from cultural anthropology, and from Other social sciences. In addition, they also
MODULE 3: Environmental & Ecological Approaches
,ABS 300: Food and Culture FALL 2015 3
draw on humanistic scholarship as a source of insights into the cultural and historical aspects Of food. In
this essay, we outline key elements Of the concepts and approaches that characterize the field Of
nutritional anthropology, AN ECOLOGICAL MODEL OF FOOD AND NUTRITION The ecological model Of
food and nutrition, published a number Of years ago by Jerome, Kandel, and Pelt0 (1980), is a
conceptual model that has been invaluable in helping us think about the myriad of factors and forces
that shape human food use and nutritional status. This model (Figure I ) identifies the main social a_rld
environmental sectors in a truly holistic analysis Of the factors that affect the nutrition Of a population.
In any particular study, investigators may focus their attention primarily on one of these sectors, but the
hallmark Of a biocultural approach is the examination of interactions among them. Augmented With a
Chronological perspective and attention to interactions Of genetics, disease, and the biological
characterrstics of foods, the ecological model provides a framework for a biocultural approach to
understanding food systems and nutrition. The sectors in the model are defined as follows. The physical
environment includes climate; water resources, soil Characteristics, naturally occurring flora and fauna,
and other features that establish the conditions for food curement and production. The social
environment refers to the larger, external environment (other societies, regions, and communities)
whose food production and distribution behavior can have profound effects on the society or social
group in question. Social organization encompasses a large set Of social institutions and arrangements,
from the Structure and organization Of the household to the political and economic Structures that
relate to the production, distribution, and consumption Of food. Technology includes the entire range of
tools and techniques that are used for production, distribution, acquisition, storage, and preparation Of
food. Culture (systems Of thought and ideology) refers to ideas and concepts related to food, such as
food preferences and restrictions, the use of food In social interactions, religious beliefs involving foods
and ideas about food and health. In our own society the knowledge that We refer to under the rubric Of
"nutritional science" would be part Of the cultural systems component of the ecological model. In the
center Of the model is diet, which includes everything that is consumed. Nested v,'ithin diet are
nutritional needs and nutritional status. The latter refers to the biological status, or health Of the
population, as determined by dietary intake. TO the original model we have added a "cloud" to represent
the global forces that impinge on local populations to a much greater extent today than they did when
the model was first published. These forces include things like food Commodity prices, multinational
trade agreements, and the marketing behavior of multinational food processing companies. "lhe
bidirectional arrows in the diagram are intended to indicate the dynamic, interactive nature Of the
model. Only some Of the interrelationships are shown because the diagram would be difficult to
decipher if all the sectors were connected to each other With two-way arrows. In theory, however, there
are multiple ways in which these sectors are linked, and changes and developments in each affect all
Ofthe Others. TO illustrate, consider the effects ofglobal warming— an aspect Of the physical
environment. This phenomenon can be examined in terms Of not only its immediate effects on the food
supply in specific locations but also changes in idea systems (culture) as new language, new concepts,
and even new fears enter the Vocabulary Of daily life. The effects of global warming are identifiable in
the invention of new technologies and in alterations in economic exchanges and in the policies and
organizational structures that facilitate these exchanges. No sector in the ecological model is unaffected
by a change in the physical environment, and each Of these changes influences dietary intakes to some
degree. The same principle Of "interconnectedness" holds for changes that begin in other sectors Of the
model. In other words, the ecological model on which research in nutritional anthropology is based is
filndamentally a systems model. FOOD SYSTEMS IN NUTRITIONAL ANTHROPOLOGY The concept Of food
MODULE 3: Environmental & Ecological Approaches
, ABS 300: Food and Culture FALL 2015 4
as a dynamic system is one Of the most central concepts in nutritional anthropology. Anthropologists use
food Systems in at least two different Ways. The phrase "food system" can be used to refer to the totality
of activities, social institutions, material inputs and outputs, and cultural beliefs Within a social group
that are involved in the production, distribution, and consumption of food. This holistic definition is
clearly related to the ecological model described previously. 'lhe different compo. nents of physical and
social actions that are concerned With food are seen as constituting an interactive and interdependent
system. An important trend in human history is toward increasing "delocalization" Of food systems, by
which food production and consumption are geographically separated. And, Of course, the local foods
movement has developed as an effort to reverse this trend. Many of the chapters in this book examine
the internal workings Of specific food systems (for examples, see sections on "Explaining Food Ways" and
"Dietary Transitions and Globalization"). A second, less common definition of "food systems" is based on
the means of food acquisition and in this usage is synonymous With subsistence system. The food quest
is so central to the functioning Of societies that anthropologists have made extensive studies of
subsistence systems. The differences in the Ways that human groups obtain and use food resources have
powerful effects on social organization, kinship Structure, religious pr actices, child rearing practices, and
many other aspects of life. In the most simplified form, the categorization distinguishes among (I)
hunting-gathering subsistence systems; (2) pastoralist systems; (3) agricultural systems, which are
subdivided into horticultural (or gardenIng) systems and more intensive (or plow) agricultural systerns;
and (4) industrialized agricultural systems. Before we turn to an overview of these different types of food
systems, we should review the axndamental similarities that have characterized human food use
throughout our evolution as a species, regardless Of the type Of systems we create. Universals in Human
Food Use The vide variation that one finds in contemporary and historical food systems is a function of
interactions among eco logical/cultural determinants in relation to the plasticity and flexibility Of the
human biological template. Compared With those Of Other animals, human food systems are distinctive
in a number Of ways, and despite their great diversity, it is possible to identify core characteristics Of
basic hurnan biocultural food patterns: • Homosapiens are omnivores. Unlike many species that are
adapted to specific foods, humans can derive all of their nutrients from an extremely wide spectrum of
sources. • Moreover, humans cook. All human groups prepare at least some of their food by cooking,
which includes boiling, roasting, frying, and steaming, usually with the addition of various flavoring
elements, including salt, sweeteners, or other substances that modify the taste of the prepared foods. •
Humans use fire. The use Of fire and Other food preparation techniques means that humans spend more
time in the preparation and alteration Of foods than do Other animals, • Foods are meaningful. Humans
everywhere have elaborate systems Of food distribution, sharing, and exchange. These systems of food
sharing have resulted in complex ideologies Of meaning. • Humans select their foods. From the process
of selecting goods to eat from the larger pool Of potentially edible plants and animals, all human groups
have created food prohibitions as well as food preferences. Together with the symbolic Structures that
have developed through the regulation of social exchanges around food, these ideological elements Of
preference and prohibition have powerful influences on dietary intakes. Variations in the Food Quest
Hunting-Gathering Subsistence Systems. For most Of our history, humans lived as hunter-gatherers,
collecting food from land and water, but not cultivating plant foods or raising animals. In most
environments, the distribution Of food resources was such that human groups Were small, seminomadic
bands, utilizing fairly large land areas, Populalion density Was low, and population growth Was slow.
Only in unusually rich environments, especially riverine and coastal areas, were food resources
suÆciently concentrated to allow for permanent settlement and the development Of more complex
MODULE 3: Environmental & Ecological Approaches
How have humans and our food ways co-evolved?
How do our biological needs for food affect our culture?
How do our cultures affect our biological needs and responses to food?
Introductory Video (Transcript)
“”
This week's learning objectives:
1. To understand how humans have evolved to eat the way that we do
2. Gain a basic overview of various human adaptions to the foods we eat
3. Explore the biocultural perspective to studying food and nutrition
4. Understand how biological aspects of eating affect our cultural systems of food and eating
Remember, if you have questions related to the course, please post to Hallway Conversation or, if it is a
personal matter, email your TA.
Module 4 Discussion Question:
Our class discussion boards for each module are meant to facilitate interaction in the course. Each
module requires a discussion post that is worth 15 points (with the exception of Module 7).You are
encouraged to respond to other student's posts to facilitate a lively discussion, but your discussion post
grade will only be based on your original response to the discussion question.
Because this discussion board does not require previous knowledge, you can (and should) make your
post early in the week; however, they are due by 11:59pm on Friday, November 13th.
Note: In this and future discussion board posts, you may want or need to cite some outside sources in
order to develop your response. Remember that proper citation practice includes knowing the best ways
to quote and paraphrase your sources. To avoid improper citations and possible plagiarism, check out
the links in the Writing Help Center to aid you in distinguishing between proper and improper use of
source materials.
Skim the contents of a popular diet website or diet book advocating the Paleodiet. Answer the following
questions:
1. What "scientific" assertions do they make?
2. Based on the TED talk and other readings, how accurate are these assertions?
3. Why do you think the Paleo diet fad is so appealing?
To receive the full 15 points for your original discussion post, you must adhere to the following
guidelines:
Discussion posts must be 100-200 words and be written in complete sentences and use correct
grammar (i.e. no abbreviations or emoticons allowed) [2 pts].
Have an interesting or provocative title (so that other students will want to read your post and
respond) [1 pt].
Appear in a new thread in response to the original discussion question posed to the class. [1 pt].
Address all parts of the original question posed [11 pts].
MODULE 3: Environmental & Ecological Approaches
,ABS 300: Food and Culture FALL 2015 2
Required Readings:
Chapters 10-13 of The Omnivore's Dilemma - Note: you will not be quizzed on The Omnivore's
Dilemma reading in this module's quiz, but we recommend you read these chapters to keep on
pace to finish the book in time for our book club in week 7
Leonard, W. R. (2003). Food for Thought. Scientific American, 13, 62-71.
Pelto, G.H., Dufour, D.L., Goodman, A.H. (2012). The Biocultural Perspective in Nutritional
Anthropology.In Dufour, D. L., Goodman, A. H., & Pelto, G. H. (Eds.) Nutritional Anthropology:
Biocultural Perspectives on Food and Nutrition, (2012), 218-230. Oxford University Press.
These two Variations of an aphorism that describes the relationship between some individuals and their
food have become commonplace in popular American discourse. The first is Often intended as a thinly
veiled accusation Of y, It good-naturedly caricatures an individual whose interest in food exceeds a level
that is "seemly" (ülatis, culturappropriate). Food is slow in preparation and maximally social. The second
is also often used with a mildly pejorarive intent. It carries the implication that the individual being 'bed
is insufficiently interested in the "finer" (that is, y valued) aspects of food. It conjures up an image of who
«wolfs dowd' food and is oblivious to the senand social pleasures Of eating. Food is fast; in and out as as
possible. Together, these two variations of the aphorlsm capture the extremes Of an implicit cl_lltural
dimension how people should relate to food, and in so doing they the varied significance Of food in
American culture. As is true of many aphorisms, the characterimtion in the 'eat-to-live" and live-to-eat"
observations derive their punch from the fact that they rest on an underlying truism. In this the truism is
that humans, li_ke all living organisms, must eat food to obtain the nutrients that are essential to life,
and, at the same time, We humans invest with a host of symbolic and social qualities that enhance its
meaning beyond that Of sustaining physical functioning. A tacit recognition Of the interplay Of these two
elements is invoked in the popular aphorism. This interplay between food as a biological necessity and
the social and cultural factors that condition its availabdity and consumption is the focus Of a number Of
fields Of research , Nutrition and/ or food are the subjects of study in many disciplines, from
biochemistry and molecular biology to philosophy, folklore, and history. Contemporary scholarship on
food and nutrition covers the full range from questions that are exclusively biological to ones that are
exclusively about social issues. Some disciplines, including nutritional epidemiology, public health
nutrition, community nutrition, and nutritional anthropology, focus on the middle ground in the
spectrum from biological to social aspects offood and nutrition. Each Of these "middle-of-the-spectrurri'
disciplines has its identity and orientation, which are determined to a large extent by the types Of
questions With which it is concerned. As a field of study, nutritional anthropology is fundamentally
concerned With understanding the interrelationships of biological and social forces in shaping human
food use ant the nutritional Status of individuals and populations. Food, What is bioculturally defined as
edible, contains nutrients anc Other substances. Once food is consumed, the human tive tract begins to
conveft food to its chemical constituents One result Of variation in the amount and quality Of consumed
is variation in nutritional status, or the state ofbal. ance resulting from the supply and expenditure Of
nutrients. Nutritional status is important because it is linked to a host oi health and functional
consequences. A simplified flow of the precess linking food to function is presented below, Nutritional
Status*Functional Outcomes In pursuing knowledge Of this important process, nutritional
anthropologists use theory from both biological and social sciences and employ research methods from
biological sciences, from cultural anthropology, and from Other social sciences. In addition, they also
MODULE 3: Environmental & Ecological Approaches
,ABS 300: Food and Culture FALL 2015 3
draw on humanistic scholarship as a source of insights into the cultural and historical aspects Of food. In
this essay, we outline key elements Of the concepts and approaches that characterize the field Of
nutritional anthropology, AN ECOLOGICAL MODEL OF FOOD AND NUTRITION The ecological model Of
food and nutrition, published a number Of years ago by Jerome, Kandel, and Pelt0 (1980), is a
conceptual model that has been invaluable in helping us think about the myriad of factors and forces
that shape human food use and nutritional status. This model (Figure I ) identifies the main social a_rld
environmental sectors in a truly holistic analysis Of the factors that affect the nutrition Of a population.
In any particular study, investigators may focus their attention primarily on one of these sectors, but the
hallmark Of a biocultural approach is the examination of interactions among them. Augmented With a
Chronological perspective and attention to interactions Of genetics, disease, and the biological
characterrstics of foods, the ecological model provides a framework for a biocultural approach to
understanding food systems and nutrition. The sectors in the model are defined as follows. The physical
environment includes climate; water resources, soil Characteristics, naturally occurring flora and fauna,
and other features that establish the conditions for food curement and production. The social
environment refers to the larger, external environment (other societies, regions, and communities)
whose food production and distribution behavior can have profound effects on the society or social
group in question. Social organization encompasses a large set Of social institutions and arrangements,
from the Structure and organization Of the household to the political and economic Structures that
relate to the production, distribution, and consumption Of food. Technology includes the entire range of
tools and techniques that are used for production, distribution, acquisition, storage, and preparation Of
food. Culture (systems Of thought and ideology) refers to ideas and concepts related to food, such as
food preferences and restrictions, the use of food In social interactions, religious beliefs involving foods
and ideas about food and health. In our own society the knowledge that We refer to under the rubric Of
"nutritional science" would be part Of the cultural systems component of the ecological model. In the
center Of the model is diet, which includes everything that is consumed. Nested v,'ithin diet are
nutritional needs and nutritional status. The latter refers to the biological status, or health Of the
population, as determined by dietary intake. TO the original model we have added a "cloud" to represent
the global forces that impinge on local populations to a much greater extent today than they did when
the model was first published. These forces include things like food Commodity prices, multinational
trade agreements, and the marketing behavior of multinational food processing companies. "lhe
bidirectional arrows in the diagram are intended to indicate the dynamic, interactive nature Of the
model. Only some Of the interrelationships are shown because the diagram would be difficult to
decipher if all the sectors were connected to each other With two-way arrows. In theory, however, there
are multiple ways in which these sectors are linked, and changes and developments in each affect all
Ofthe Others. TO illustrate, consider the effects ofglobal warming— an aspect Of the physical
environment. This phenomenon can be examined in terms Of not only its immediate effects on the food
supply in specific locations but also changes in idea systems (culture) as new language, new concepts,
and even new fears enter the Vocabulary Of daily life. The effects of global warming are identifiable in
the invention of new technologies and in alterations in economic exchanges and in the policies and
organizational structures that facilitate these exchanges. No sector in the ecological model is unaffected
by a change in the physical environment, and each Of these changes influences dietary intakes to some
degree. The same principle Of "interconnectedness" holds for changes that begin in other sectors Of the
model. In other words, the ecological model on which research in nutritional anthropology is based is
filndamentally a systems model. FOOD SYSTEMS IN NUTRITIONAL ANTHROPOLOGY The concept Of food
MODULE 3: Environmental & Ecological Approaches
, ABS 300: Food and Culture FALL 2015 4
as a dynamic system is one Of the most central concepts in nutritional anthropology. Anthropologists use
food Systems in at least two different Ways. The phrase "food system" can be used to refer to the totality
of activities, social institutions, material inputs and outputs, and cultural beliefs Within a social group
that are involved in the production, distribution, and consumption of food. This holistic definition is
clearly related to the ecological model described previously. 'lhe different compo. nents of physical and
social actions that are concerned With food are seen as constituting an interactive and interdependent
system. An important trend in human history is toward increasing "delocalization" Of food systems, by
which food production and consumption are geographically separated. And, Of course, the local foods
movement has developed as an effort to reverse this trend. Many of the chapters in this book examine
the internal workings Of specific food systems (for examples, see sections on "Explaining Food Ways" and
"Dietary Transitions and Globalization"). A second, less common definition of "food systems" is based on
the means of food acquisition and in this usage is synonymous With subsistence system. The food quest
is so central to the functioning Of societies that anthropologists have made extensive studies of
subsistence systems. The differences in the Ways that human groups obtain and use food resources have
powerful effects on social organization, kinship Structure, religious pr actices, child rearing practices, and
many other aspects of life. In the most simplified form, the categorization distinguishes among (I)
hunting-gathering subsistence systems; (2) pastoralist systems; (3) agricultural systems, which are
subdivided into horticultural (or gardenIng) systems and more intensive (or plow) agricultural systerns;
and (4) industrialized agricultural systems. Before we turn to an overview of these different types of food
systems, we should review the axndamental similarities that have characterized human food use
throughout our evolution as a species, regardless Of the type Of systems we create. Universals in Human
Food Use The vide variation that one finds in contemporary and historical food systems is a function of
interactions among eco logical/cultural determinants in relation to the plasticity and flexibility Of the
human biological template. Compared With those Of Other animals, human food systems are distinctive
in a number Of ways, and despite their great diversity, it is possible to identify core characteristics Of
basic hurnan biocultural food patterns: • Homosapiens are omnivores. Unlike many species that are
adapted to specific foods, humans can derive all of their nutrients from an extremely wide spectrum of
sources. • Moreover, humans cook. All human groups prepare at least some of their food by cooking,
which includes boiling, roasting, frying, and steaming, usually with the addition of various flavoring
elements, including salt, sweeteners, or other substances that modify the taste of the prepared foods. •
Humans use fire. The use Of fire and Other food preparation techniques means that humans spend more
time in the preparation and alteration Of foods than do Other animals, • Foods are meaningful. Humans
everywhere have elaborate systems Of food distribution, sharing, and exchange. These systems of food
sharing have resulted in complex ideologies Of meaning. • Humans select their foods. From the process
of selecting goods to eat from the larger pool Of potentially edible plants and animals, all human groups
have created food prohibitions as well as food preferences. Together with the symbolic Structures that
have developed through the regulation of social exchanges around food, these ideological elements Of
preference and prohibition have powerful influences on dietary intakes. Variations in the Food Quest
Hunting-Gathering Subsistence Systems. For most Of our history, humans lived as hunter-gatherers,
collecting food from land and water, but not cultivating plant foods or raising animals. In most
environments, the distribution Of food resources was such that human groups Were small, seminomadic
bands, utilizing fairly large land areas, Populalion density Was low, and population growth Was slow.
Only in unusually rich environments, especially riverine and coastal areas, were food resources
suÆciently concentrated to allow for permanent settlement and the development Of more complex
MODULE 3: Environmental & Ecological Approaches
