|

I studied medicine, but I dropped out
when I was very near to my doctorate, when I started my macrobiotic
practice in 1974. I thought macrobiotics was a better way
to help the people regaining their health, and never regretted
that choice.
Together with my wife, in 1978 I founded and managed a very
active macrobiotic centre, then a store, a restaurant, and
a natural foods distribution company that is still very successful
today.
In 1981 I graduated Associated Teacher, and since then I have
been teaching the philosophy and practice of macrobiotics
until now. I say this only because what I say here could be
seen as somewhat far off and strange, and I wish to emphasize
that it comes from a pretty wide and practical experience.
Following are some reflections
about the practice of the macrobiotic way of eating, arising
also - but not only - from the more or less serious health
problems experienced by a few old macrobiotic friends and
teachers. I believe that we must accurately reconsider some
aspects of our practice, openly discussing new possible
changes.
Thanks to the efforts of Michio and Aveline, and George
Ohsawa before them, I think we have a real treasure in our
hands, that can potentially benefit many people and the
humanity as a whole. However, it risks disappearing and
is forgotten, if we are not able to renovate it.
There are many ways to address the reflection about the
macrobiotic way of eating. Here, I will start from an evolutionary
point of view, putting it in relation with our macrobiotic
beliefs and habits regarding the way of eating.
WHICH IS THE FOOD OF THE HUMAN BEING?
-
According to what is known
on this subject, during their 6+ million years of evolution,
human beings have been eating a wide range of foods. Among
them are seeds (among which are wild cereals), tubers,
wild vegetables and seasonal amounts of fruits, plus various
kinds of animal foods: primarily insects and larvae, eggs,
small animals, birds, mussels, and more recently fish
and big game.
In colder climates animal food has been a must, but even
in warmer climates, where most of our evolution has taken
place, it has represented an important and valued part
of the diet, provided that it was available. This wide
range of foods is the foundation of our human constitution,
and health.
-
From the agricultural revolution
on, diet changed substantially. However, when traditional
societies had the possibility (i.e. when they were not
at war, or in the midst of some natural disaster), they
managed to maintain a pattern of eating similar to the
evolutionary one. In this pattern animal food was present,
while sugar was absent and fruit seasonal. All simple
sugars even if not under refined form, are a very recent
entry in the human diet, at least in substantial amount.
In facts, the only natural source apart from honey is
wild fruit, which is low in sugars compared to the cultivated
one. This is absolutely true in temperate climates, while
in very hot ones it may contain more sugars, but less
than what we usually think. Also vegetable oils, rather
rare in wild foods, are a condiment that have been developed
in this period and context.
-
The discovery of the fermentation
processes, which gave birth to new foods and beverages
as bread, miso, wine, beer, etc., helped in many ways
to overcome the problems created by the changes in the
diet, including the increased consumption of grains and
legumes, and the different nutritional value of farmed
grains, vegetables, fruits and meats compared to the wild
ones.
STANDARD MACROBIOTIC DIET AND MACROBIOTIC WAY OF EATING
-
No population has ever
been eating the standard macrobiotic diet, at least not
for long periods of time. That means that we don't
have a long historical experience with it. Standard
Macrobiotic Diet has been created by M. Kushi in the
USA, in the 70s, as a way to help people without any connection
with a traditional way of eating to orient themselves
toward a healthier and balanced diet. This has been wonderful,
and many of us owe our life to his effort, but we must
now consider the pros and cons of this approach.
-
These few decades of experience
with Standard Macrobiotic Diet indicate that it can be
very effective in correcting a number of physical problems
affecting people living in affluent societies, such as
allergies, cardiovascular disease, diabetes, autoimmune
disease, and more. It appears to be less effective against
cancer even if, probably, a partially preventive effect
is there. On the negative side, it doesn't seem to be
the best diet for children, and the prolonged use in adults
tends to create a depleted condition.
-
Considering the question
in this perspective, it seems clear that Standard Macrobiotic
Diet is a very balanced diet (in terms of Yin-yang), and
a very cleansing one, suitable to help people that have
been eating too much, and in a extreme way, to find a
better balance and possibly heal themselves. However,
once this goal has been attained, Standard Macrobiotic
Diet must be abandoned in favour of a more personal and
wide way of eating.
Also, it must be made clear that not everybody can heal
himself by the diet alone, and that it is useless to continue
a very strict diet beyond a certain point. In that case,
it is better to find a more comfortable point of balance,
regarding eating, and add other approaches complementary
to food in order to solve the problem. Otherwise, people
may stay trapped in Standard Macrobiotic Diet beyond its
useful point.
-
The macrobiotic way of eating
is not confined to the Standard Macrobiotic Diet. The
macrobiotic way of eating is using all the foods suitable
for the human being in a creative way, choosing and preparing
them according to Yin-yang, intuition, pleasure, and attention
to the feedback that we get from eating them.
Macrobiotic people must feel free to choose among a wider
range of foods, of course taking care that they are truly
foods for the human being.
We often say that grain is the food of the human being,
but even that is not strictly true. Grains as we know
them became available only in recent times, after the
agricultural revolution some 8/ 10.000 years ago, and
since then their quality has still changed very much.
Before, we ate wild grains that where even more different
from the present ones: for example, they contained more
proteins, calcium, iron and fats, and fewer carbohydrates.
Moreover, for millions of years far more seeds from wild
grass than grains have been eaten, and they are similar
but not equal to wild grains.
Grains as we know them are the food that fed human civilization,
not human evolution. So whole grains are fine, but they
too have their limits, and all foods that have been part
of our evolutionary process can and must be consumed.
-
Foods and products very
well considered and appreciated by macrobiotic people
as grain syrups and grain beverages (very rich in simple
sugars), tofu and soy spreads (very rich in vegetable
oils and proteins), bakery products (especially if made
with a combination of flour, sweeteners and oil), desserts
(even if sweetened with the best sweeteners), can hardly
be considered in harmony with our human constitution and
evolutionary eating habits.
They are good for the transition from a very unbalanced
way of eating to a better one, and also for an occasional
consumption, but nothing more. At the same time, animal
foods, animal fats and fruit, usually avoided or limited,
are more in harmony with our constitution, provided that
their quality is good and the quantity appropriate to
our real needs.
NUTRIENTS, BINGEING, AND THE CHOICE OF FOOD
-
Complex carbohydrates
are yang, while proteins and fats are yin. Moreover,
complex carbohydrates are substances which provide energy,
while proteins and some fats create structure, although
they can be used to provide energy. If people consume
a lot of whole grains, rich in complex carbohydrates but
poor in proteins and fats, they become very yang.
At the same time, they become also thin, as the structural
part of the food, proteins and fats, is consumed in too
little quantity. Inevitably, in time they start looking
for yin. Very often they are attracted by desserts, but
in this way they cannot solve their problem, because what
they actually need is more proteins and fats, a different
kind of yin, that provide the appropriate structural quality.
-
Sometimes, a little more
oil and vegetable protein can do the job, but much more
often even that is not enough. In fact, even if vegetable
protein must definitely be the majority of the proteins
eaten (at least in our climate), their role must not be
stretched over its natural limit. The same is true for
vegetable fats: what the EPA and DHA contained in fat
fish can do, cannot be done by the alfa - linolenic acid
contained in green vegetables. Things go even worse with
the many products made from vegetable proteins and fats
available from the natural food stores, which are not
foods to which we are evolutionary adapted, being essentially
modern and fairly technological / industrial products.
-
Trying to stick to a
too strict diet leads to an excessive effort to cook "perfectly",
using the "perfect" amount of salt and oil,
chewing "thoroughly", and so on. As time
passes, since the appropriate yin is still lacking, people
try to correct the excess yang by reducing salt, and then
cooking time. Doing this, after a while they are forced
to reduce oil, too, because at that point they find it
difficult to digest it. It is a road to depletion, as
many valuable nutrients begin to lack. What started as
a path to freedom ends in eating in an abstract, non-intuitive
and rigid way, which keeps little contact with our human
needs and goals?
-
Sooner or later, everybody
gets out from the strict SMD period. The problem is
how they do that necessary step. Since people often misunderstand
which is the real range of the human foods, and often
end up eating more and more vegetable proteins and fats,
and simple sugars under the form of macrobiotic desserts
and bakery products. Definitely, a diet based on grains,
vegetables, a lot of vegetable protein and fat, desserts
and baked products, grain and soy beverages, plus a little
fish, cannot be considered a balanced way of eating, and
has very little to do with our real needs. It creates
a deep insuline imbalance, and the depletion of many essential
nutrients. Moreover, in many cases this is still not enough,
and people start bingeing on extreme and often unnatural
foods.
-
We can judge if we are
choosing well our food simply by checking if we are attracted
by extreme or "non-human" foods. If we reached
a good balance, we simply don't wish to eat sugars or
desserts, bakery, ice creams or artificial foods. We don't
even need to eat regularly macrobiotic desserts, natural
baked products, and very elaborated vegetable protein-and-fat
products. Of course we can, from time to time for fun,
pleasure and variety, but we don't need. Instead, the
"politically correct way of macrobiotic eating"
considers normal to eat "very well" day by day,
and then regularly binge.
But, as a matter of fact, bingeing on "non-human
foods" disappears when a good balance of "human
foods" is reached. This is a kind of hypocrisy that
covers a misunderstanding in both macrobiotics and human
needs. It is better to widen the diet in a balanced way
rather than bingeing, because most of the bingeing is
only trying to satisfy, in a non-efficient way, an unbalanced
and often poor diet. When you binge you roughly and partially
satisfy a need, but you do not create balance.
-
Talking of healing,
the same attitude leads to believe that, when you face
a problem, you have always to "clean" your diet
more, to make it stricter, because all problems come from
excess. This is not true.
-
Actually, many macrobiotic
people presently need to widen their diet and to include
more rich food. Especially to reconstitute the basic
strength of the body, animal food has always been considered
important by all the traditions in the world. For example,
you can activate or sedate the kidney energy easily with
various vegetable foods, but if you want to reconstitute
the basic energy of this organ, animal food is better.
The fact that in our affluent society animal food is eaten
in crazy amounts, and that its preciousness and power
is not recognized anymore, does not make it a poison,
as we tend to think.
-
This seems to be a real
problem for the macrobiotic community. Why white meat
fish is still often presented as the only appropriate
animal food? And why only "one to two times a week",
or even less frequently? Valuable omega-3 fats, which
exert a preventive effect on cancer and inflammation processes,
are present in fat fish, and also in eggs and free-range
meats. And what about B12? And Vitamin D, if people do
not stay often out in the sun? Poultry, white meat, eggs,
maybe even red meat are fine, if chosen in a reasonable
amount and frequency, prepared in the correct way, and
of good quality, i.e. free range and organic, and finally,
cooked and served with careful balance each meal, as we
macrobiotic should be well trained to do.
In general, very little quantity of a variety of animal
food eaten frequently, as an ingredient of predominantly
vegetable dishes based on grains and vegetables, is a
good point of balance. Think of the many examples offered
by the traditional Asian or Mediterranean cuisine. If
sometimes we need more, we can balance a rather extreme
ingredient by the way we prepare it. Maybe we can use
eggs in a soup, or as an ingredient for an omelette together
with a lot of green vegetables, and serve it with a salad.
White meat can be cooked with ginger and vegetables, and
a glass of good wine is probably a better way to balance
it than a macrobiotic dessert. Fruit can be very good,
too, and definitely better than most brick-type or soy-based
"natural" desserts.
-
I am not advocating the
consumption of big quantities of animal food. I just
say that it has a more important role than we usually
attribute to it, and this is especially true for the yin
nutrients contained in this yang food. Eating some more
animal food, balancing it with more vegetables and fruits,
while reducing at a minimum desserts, sweeteners, baked
goods and technologically / industrially made "natural
and organic" foods, means going nearer to our traditions
and evolutionary needs.
We must rely on Yin/yang, and on the ability to judge
we are born with, to choose how much grains, vegetables,
fruits, vegetal and animal protein and fat we need. However,
this flexibility becomes impossible if we believe that
certain food are not "macrobiotic". The concept
of "macrobiotic food" stays within the boundaries
of "human food"; it is a focused application
of a wide opportunity of choice.
Of course, these considerations are for generally healthy
people, as specific illnesses may necessitate a more strict
approach.
-
There are a lot of traditional
recipes to rediscover and evaluate from the vintage point
of the Unifying Principle, that can help us on this way.
Humbly studying the traditional way of eating and the
cuisine of many world peoples, especially those living
in temperate climates, is a Must for macrobiotic cooks
and teachers. When we adopt this attitude in considering
the macrobiotic way of eating, a deep admiration and gratitude
for the wisdom of our ancestors starts to flow in our
hearts.
CONCLUSION
These lines are focused on
what I feel are the most urgent questions regarding the contemporary
way of macrobiotic eating; so many other important aspects
of the relation between way of living and health cannot be
discussed here. However, it is necessary at least to emphasize
that physical activity is of the utmost importance for the
human being (and the same is true for staying outside in the
sun and open air). While we always said that this is true,
our practice often has been weak regarding this point.
It is far better to eat a wider range of good, "human"
foods, and metabolize them by being physically active, than
to restrict our diet more and more, in order to keep balance
while lacking physical activity. Lack of physical activity
is probably one of the reasons of the restrictive attitude
of many macrobiotic friends toward food. Conversely, it is
very difficult to attract to the macrobiotic way of eating
the active, hard working people with a diet that it is unnecessarily
restrictive.
Some long time macrobiotic teachers maybe have already widened
their diet, but still think that it is better not to say these
things to the beginners, as they fear the possibility to justify
any kind of excess with the excuse of a "personal way
of eating". However, it is worse to convey a feeling
of false security encouraging the people to stick to a dogma,
than accepting the risk for mistakes.
Trying to stick to very strict and unrealistic rules, for
fear of facing the reality of life, means only that we are
likely to meet troubles soon, and our recent experiences in
the macrobiotic community should have demonstrated that. We
must clearly state that Standard Macrobiotic Diet is only
a transitory point of balance, aimed to a specific goal, and
that the macrobiotic way of eating is a much wider approach.
We need to experiment ourselves; learning to make a lively
balance using a little more extreme foods, and create a new
and fresh approach that can be confidently shared by all the
people of the world.
|