Obviously, we all need food to live. In that we need food to live and need to live to be happy, the answer is yes. But do we need a lot of food to be happy? If this is true, than how much food is enough food to make us happy? So we don’t starve? Until we are full? How full? Until we can fit no more into our ever growing bellies? Where do we stop?
In today’s New York Times, Roger Cohen takes on food and happiness in a column he modestly titles “The Meaning of Life”. The piece is an analysis on a 30 yr old study that shows that mammals which eat 30% less calories than their peers live exceedingly longer lives.
It’s the difference between the guy who got the marbleized rib-eye and the guy who got the oh-so-lean filet. Or between the guy who got a Château Grand Pontet St. Emilion with his brie and the guy who got water. As Edgar notes in King Lear, “Ripeness is all.” You don’t get to ripeness by eating apple peel for breakfast.
Roger argues, yes this is nice and all, but why bother trying to live longer if you have to turn down that extra slice of cherry pie and that makes you sad? Which is true. Maybe. For some people. If you’re a true gourmet, and eating (and cooking) is your life, then yes cutting out a third of your calories may not be worth the extra years of your life. But what about the rest of us, who mindlessly chomp away at those large fries that we’ve had a hundred times before and barely even taste anymore? When we eat just to eat, is it worth the extra 500 calories when that can be the difference between living to 70 and living to 80?
How many Americans are eating just to eat? It sure seems like a lot. 20% of the American calorie intake is snacks. Yes, these items hit the main points - high in salt and fat that keeps you coming back for more. Not only are they not good for you, but they also have none of the complexity that can make food truly great and really sing. How many bags of potato chips are equal to a bite of cotton candy foie gras on the happiness scale? Even for many of us who can’t afford Jose Andres’ spectacular inventions, there is a case to be made that one may get more happiness by forgoing a week’s worth of hamburgers and hot dogs so that one may splurge of a truly great steak once a week is true happiness. Or skipping the dairy queen trips for the month to invest in some truly great Ben & Jerry’s Strawberry Cheesecake Ice Cream.
And what if happiness is good health? Calorie restriction has been show to cut down on disease, so how does that get added to the happiness quotient?
“There is plenty of evidence the calorie restriction can reduce your risks for many common diseases including cancer, diabetes and heart disease,” Weiss said. “And you may live to be substantially older.”
When cutting calories, Weiss warns that it is imperative to maintain a healthy diet by eating nutrient-rich foods. Cutting 300 to 500 calories per day is equivalent to skipping dessert or substituting a turkey sandwich instead of a Big Mac and fries.
Eating less, even eating significantly less does not have to mean a life of denial. My great-grandmother, who lived to be 98 years old could not have been more 98 pounds when she died (from sudden heart failure, not from a protracted illness - truly the way to go). She barely ate much more than a sandwich a day, but she sure did love to break out her unrivaled rice pudding on occasion. And I gotta say, she seemed pretty happy.
