Green-Mountain freeman. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1844-1884, 1881-07-27
Instinct as a Guide In Dietetics.

Instinct" as Ftlstatf says, "is a great
NATTER" and it is curious and instructive
to note how. in the absence of scientific
in the selection and preparation of their
food rs well as such knowledge could have
guided them, and in some cases even bet
ter. 1t has sometimes been right when
science for the time was wrong, and the
latter has eventually had to acknowledge
the mistake it had made. 1t is not many
years since the discovery was announced
that the bran of wheat has IL high nutritive
value. and forthwith we were admonished
by dietetc reformers that fine wheaton
bread was not an economical food for the
workingman. But that unscientific per-
sonage had learned to prefer the fine white
loaf to the coarse brown one, and declined
to be II convert to the new theory. His
scientific brother naturally ascribed this to
the force OF habit or prejudice, and WIS
very severe upon the obstinate was eful
ness of the poor in throwing away an
important part of their scanty fare. But,
rs we now know, the instinct that led the
workingman to stick to the bread which
the experience of many generations had
taught him to prefer was right in its
choice. The brown bread did, indeed
contain more nutriment than the white,
but in the process of digestion the body
got more nutriment from the latter than
the former. The action of the bran par
tlcles on the alimentary canal caused the
coarse bread to pass through it too rapidly,
and the loss ia this way was greater than
the gain in the other. Improved processes
now furnish us fine -four in which the
old waste of nutritious material is largely
prevented; but even under the old meth
ods OF milling, the notion that "white
bread is the poor man S food" was cor
rect. 1t was brown bread that was the
luxury, suited 10 the dyspeptic rich man.
but too dear for the healthy and hard
working poor. Science was too hasty in
its first inierences, and has since learned
that the digestibility of food and its apti
tnde for assimilation must be considered,
and not merely its chemical composition.
Equally based upon sound principles is
the workingman's liking for animal food.
Scientific men have demonstrated that
vegetable food contains essentially the
same nutritive matter, while it is II good
deal cheaper. They have explained that
the tibrine of flesh has very close analo-
gy to the gluten of wheat. and is fitted to
serve the same purpose in nourishng the
body, and 80 with animal fats and vegeta-
BILE oils, and the other leading constituents
of the two kinds of diet; but the poor
man nevertheless persists in spending AS
much of his hard earnings for meat AS he
can possibly afford. If he cannot have
the coveted food every day. he will have
it when he can. if only once week
Recent German inve e,tigations prove that
this preference for flesh has somewhat the
same economical arguments in its favor
as that for the fine bread in comparison
with the coarse. 1t has long been known
that as a general rule, flesh is easier of
digestion. and is therefore perfectly assim-
Hated, than bread and other vegetable
food. We must consider not merely how
much nutriment each puts into the body,
but how much of it remains there and how
much is rejected as waste. Good author
tiles have stated that, if equal nu ritve
quantities Of each are eaten, the loss from
the vegetable is twice as much rs from
the animal food; but il would seem from
these recent experiments and analyses
that the waste of nutriment is often much
greater in the case of vegetables.