response to two articles

After reading the two articles "Unhappy meals" and "Angels and vegetables: A brief history of food advice in America", which were written by Michael Pollan and Melanie Du Puis respectively, I found that these two articles both talked about food advice. The difference between these two is that Pollan came up with food advice "eat food, not too much and mostly plants" in his article, however, Puis question the necessity and authenticity of food advice in America. Also, Puis introduced several reasons that why Americans are rely on food advice from government and nutritionists, which includes Americans' faith about religions and science.

In terms of my own eating habits and opinion, I never listen to the suggestion from so-called expert to arrange and restrict my diet. I always eat whatever I want and whenever I need. Still, I understand what Puis explained about the reason why people are used to depend on food advice in her article "Because we have lost our faith in both religion and science as guides to eating, we rely on popular writers to steer us through a welter of confusing and contradictory"(34) after reading her description about the development of food advice. But my opinion is that there is no perfect nutrition arrangement for everyone because every person has his or her own constitution. 

I am also interested in what Pollan wrote "Don't eat anything your great-great-grandmother wouldn't recognize as food"(15). I am totally disagree with it. There are more than one century between our generation and our great-great grandmother generation. So we definitely have tons of differences about values, lifestyle and eating habit. It is ridiculous that we tell what we should eat or not according to their judgement.