The definition of what a food is appears to be ambiguous, still, and agenda driven.

The clearest and simplest definition I have found is as follows:

“Food is any substance consumed to provide nutritional support for an organism. It is usually of plant or animal origin, and contains essential nutrients such as vitamins, fats, proteins, minerals, and carbohydrates. It is the substance ingested by an organism and assimilated by the organism's cells to provide energy, maintain life, or stimulate growth.”

~ Editors of Encyclopedia Brittanica, 2017

On some level, this definition would have been meaningful to the nomadic hunter/gatherers. Food was simply any item that could be captured or harvested and consumed daily, to provide nutrients needed for energy production and to maintain life. It can therefore be inferred that these folks were able to recognize what it is they were eating, and whence it came, even if it were a bit charred.

As humankind advanced and communities formed, the need to preserve food for times of scarcity saw to the development of preservation techniques, some of which are still in use today. As we continued to evolve, settle and industrialize, the need to feed and shelter our growing populace became a priority. Food preservation became a science and ways to enhance food production, supplement or even subvert nature became imperative.

Enter the era of the mass production and the inevitable commercialization of food. Guidelines were deemed mandatory to keep things above board. Some countries developed a legal definition for food or “foodstuffs”, as it is referred, which goes as follows:

“Food is any item that is to be processed, partially processed, or unprocessed for consumption. The items included as food include any substance intended to be, or reasonably expected to be, ingested by humans. In addition to these foodstuffs, drink, chewing gum, water, or other items processed into said food items are part of the legal definition of food.”

“Items not included in the legal definition of food include animal feed, live animals (unless being prepared for sale in a market), plants prior to harvesting, medicinal products, cosmetics, tobacco, and tobacco products, narcotic or psychotropic substances, and residues and contaminants.”

~~ UK Office of Public Sector Information

Again, fast forward a few years, when the biochemists entered the picture with promises of creating better tasting food that was convenient and simple to prepare. An industry developed that saw to the creation of new and enticing substances to enhance taste and preserve food for as long as it was needed. In order to standardardize and bring conformity to the scientific research processes, this circular scientific definition of food was created:

“Food is an article manufactured, sold or represented for use as food or drink by man, chewing gum, and any ingredient that may be mixed with food for any purpose whatever.”

~~ Science Direct

These definitions then allow anything to be labeled as food, regardless of nutrient content, its ability to be digested and assimilated by the body, or its capacity to facilitate life.

Who knew defining this ubiquitous, essential item, so necessary for survival would be so enigmatic?

Notice that not one of these definitions addresses standards for quality or safety of the substances classified as food or “foodstuffs”. Should we then infer that the items proffered for consumption need not be safe or at minimum, meet some standard according to the industry?

The complexity of defining food arises, I believe, because of the commercialization and mass manufacture of food for the benefit of convenience, to subserve our busy lifestyle and the ceaseless demand for food that is cheap, quick and easy to prepare.

Food that was easy to obtain, simple to prepare, abundant in variety, last “forever”, and were tastier than you could ever envision it could be, became readily available and necessary to maintain the new way of being in this evolved society.

No longer is the backyard garden or farm a possibility or necessity, especially since the procurement and preparation of food was outsourced and simplified.

Here, made for our consumption is food that bore no resemblance to the most exotic animal or plant we could ever harvest. It came in vibrant colors not usually found in nature, to capture our imagination and stimulate our taste buds. It was made with concoctions synthesized in the laboratories of food scientists from chemicals that we are not even able to pronounce, and ingredients modified and enhanced for added nutrition, flavor and longer shelf life.

The fact that these concoctions provided no nutritional benefit being that they are incompatible with our fragile digestive ecosystem seems irrelevant. The fact that many are toxic and not life affirming seems hardly a deterrent.

Technology had met nature and impossible foods and miraculous edibles are being created, for our convenience, of course; a convenience that is culling us in droves in exchange for profit, comfort and instant gratification.

According to the FDA, there are over 18 different categories of food ingredients (well over 6000 individual substances) that can be added to prepared foods and over 6000 additional chemicals that can be used in the cultivation (organic and conventional) of foods we consume. Food ingredients range from preservatives and sweeteners to humectants and stabilizers, while some of the chemicals used in agriculture include copper and its derivatives, rotenone and various and sundry acids, aids and repellants.

In addition to food ingredients and pesticides, there are substances that are “generally recognized as safe” (GRAS) that can be added to foods. These are “chemicals or substances added to food that is considered safe by experts, and so is exempted from the usual Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA) food additive tolerance requirements”.
Many of these allowed ingredients appear to have been analyzed and incorporated into the food chain since the 1970s and does not appear to have been reassessed using new technology.

Moreover, in addition to the aforementioned, there are substances called processing aids that do not have to appear in the food label as an ingredient – since “they are only found in the final product in ‘safe and insignificant amounts’.” Some examples include sodium stearoyl lactylate - a dough strengthener, dimethylamine epichlorohydrin copolymer – a decoloring agent, trisodium phosphate and ammonium hydroxide – antimicrobials.

Unfortunately, current rules do not require us to be informed of the presence of or names of the compounds and substances included in our food, and therefore, we never see them listed on our food labels.

I will be remiss if I do not mention the scary debacle that is GMO (genetically modified organisms) food or organic foods at this time. I plan to devote other posts exclusively to those topics. In the meantime, rejoice!

The USDA announced the “National Bioengineered Food Disclosure Standard”, which requires food manufacturers to label foods that contain genetically modified or bioengineered ingredients. The implementation date is January 1, 2020. The mandatory compliance date is January 1, 2022. Certain products made from the 13 bioengineered crops and foods on the USDA’s list do not require labeling such as those made with alfalfa, canola, corn, cotton, potato, salmon (AquAdvantage), soybean, squash, sugar beet and certain varieties of apple, eggplant, papaya and pineapple.

Meanwhile, as we continue advancing forward in the creation of more exotic food-like items for consumption and profit, we are escalating the biochemical production of food-like substances to a new level, with the creation of food analogues. This new paradigm, with sustainability and as is raison d'être, is bringing us gems like vegetarian fish, meat-free burgers, and chicken-less eggs.

These are products made from manipulating vegetarian ingredients to approximate the aesthetics of meat protein in terms of texture, flavor, appearance and chemical characteristics. But do these otherwise harmless foods remain healthy and life promoting after being subject to various chemical manipulations?

As we continue to create fantastical foodstuff with incredible characteristics using nameless substances and bioengineered ingredients, what other than sustainability should inform our endeavors?

Do the scientists creating these fascinating compounds, the company owners that employ them and the regulators that approve them for mass consumption eat these foods on a regular basis?

Do they proudly present them at their family dinners for their progeny to partake of?

Also, I wonder, do the ingredients present in “safe and insignificant amounts” build up in the system over time and become “unsafe and significant” amounts, ever?

How long does that take?

We are not sure, but time will surely tell.

We are not and may never be sure how these “ingredients” and the resultant ultra-processed foods are interacting with our bodies. However, we are aware that more people are becoming sensitive and even allergic to “food”, and more illnesses are being successfully managed with the elimination of processed foods from the diet.

When nature from whom we evolved, and who provides bountiful provisions for our consumption and nurturing is allowed to resume suckling the miraculously complex and resilient organism she created, health ensues.

Many years ago, Hippocrates supposedly said, “Let food be thy medicine and medicine be thy food.”

Since food as we all understand it, should be sourced from animal and plant products that were exposed to sunlight and soil, rather than to the sterile confines of the petri dish, can we then agree that natural plant and animal products should be the medicine that allow us to maintain our health?

So, what is health and how best can we promote it?