Traditional food
Leave a Comment








New, invented and patented foods are the mirror opposite of traditional, natural, real food.They are unbiquitous in convenience foods and increasingly the market for fresh produce. They are the very fakes we should all be weary of.

A bold assertion particularly given that  new, invented and patented foods have regulatory approval. Food scientists assure us they are safe to eat. The experts tell us novel foods are composed of the same chemical molecules that we find in traditional, natural and real food. Has mankind not been cross-breeding species for millenia to improve our selection of food? According to a majority of food scientists there is no difference between traditional, natural, real food and new, invented and patented foods. This version is currently accepted by governments and food agencies.

There are, in fact, big differences between patented, invented foods and tradtional/natural foods and the differences do matter. The chemical molecules found in new, invented and patented foods are found in proportions, quantities, alterations and levels that we would never see in nature – indeed in proportions, quantities, alterations and levels that nature alone would be incapable of offering us.

This is problematic for our metabolism which has evolved over thousands of years to digest the quantities seen in nature. When we consume new, invented man made foods we introduce a new construct to our bodies which it has no history of digesting. Occassional consumption of fake foods is harmless. Dependancy on them can result in modern malnutrition.


Metabolising our food is a complex, highly-integrated and finely balanced choreography.

We know that from a technological piont of view it is now relatively simply to alter the natural construct of food intended for ingestion. Mankind’s metabolism, on the other hand is anything but simple. Our ability to digest food is a complex, highly-integrated and finely balanced choreography, which is still not fully understood or appreciated. More money has been devoted to devising new foods than has been spent on fully understanding how the human body metabolises food.

Those that do study the metabolism of food all agree that for us to benefit from the food we consume a number of actors (enzymes, bacteria, nutrients, acids, genes etc.) must perform their lines and steps with precision. The performers have been dancing their complex, integrated choreography for thousands of years. Any changes to the food consumed that may have occurred over the centuries, such as natural mutations or cross-breeding would have been limited, occurred slowly and been introduced into our diet gradually, over a lengthy period of time. This more modest, slower and natural introduction of changes to the food eaten allowed the metabolic performers to adjust to their new choreography without too much of a strain on the human physiology.

With the onslaught of new foods in recent decades the chorus-line is now focusing all its energies on learning their new script, neglecting their set pieces, getting confused and gifting us chronic food related illnesses as opposed to robust good health. Our brains are acting like some of the world’s top cycling athletes racing ahead with innovative new food solutions. The human metabolism, on the other hand, is plodding along like a horse and cart as the pace of evolution. The rope that binds the two together – intellect ad metabolism – is put under great strain and when it snaps the fall out is chronic disease.


The incentive and financial reward to generate ever newer foods is too hard for the food industry to ignore. What we are now witnessing is a growing biotechnology industry that has become adept at expropriating the food that nature gifted us. Their only justification for inventing new foods is financial gain. The need for us to consume new, invented foods is negligible. Nature and traditional cooking has provided us with a huge variety of real foods with which to prepare a new dish, sauce or condiment every day of the year for a life time.


Many would agree that there is something truly rotten at the very heart of the modern system of food innovation. It is highly questionable whether an industry should “own” the rights to natural foods and seeds. The need for devising new foods is flimsy given that when properly managed nature can provide us with all the food we need for a balanced and varied diet. Most significantly modern, patneted foods are potentially one of the greatest causes of the rise and rise in chronic food related diseases we are witnessing today. (See Modern Malnutrition).

With regulatory approval for new foods, a multi-billion dollar industry at stake and with governments beholden to the biotech industry do not expect these foods to be classified as chronically toxic for years to come. The only way to cut out the rot at the heart of our modern diet is to do what our ancestors would have done when their gut, rather than a scientific quarterly, told them their food was rotten. Avoid eating it.

Vote with your feet: buy, prepare and eat only traditional foods according to traditional practice. Avoid, where ever possible new, invented and patented foods.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s