Io8 READINGS IN BIOLOGICAL SCIENCE 



has attempted, by publishing the true facts, to correct the false impres- 

 sions. Thus several brands of oleomargarine bear its Seal of Acceptance, 

 and much has been done to wear down the opposition to bread. Let me 

 quote from Dr. Fishbein's comment on bread: 



Before making a definite statement as to the actual value of white flour bread 

 as contrasted with whole wheat, it should be emphasized again that neither white 

 flour bread nor whole wheat bread constitutes a single article in diet for any in- 

 telligent person. x\s pointed out by McCollum, there are many reasons why the 

 American can eat white flour bread satisfactorily. "White flour," he says, "keeps 

 much better than whole wheat flour, and so can be handled with less commercial 

 hazard. The American public likes white flour bread, and I do not see any reason," 

 he continues, "why this taste should be disturbed. The important thing is to insist 

 upon the consumption of a sufficient amount of what I have termed the protec- 

 tive foods — milk and vegetables of the leafy type — to insure that calcium de- 

 ficiency, and the vitamin deficiency of white bread, will be made good." 



The supporters of whole wheat as against white flour for dietary purposes 

 argue that the human bowel requires a certain amount of roughage in order to ex- 

 ercise its functions satisfactorily. This point must not be considered without 

 reference to the varying conditions that may exist in different individuals. Dr. 

 W. C. Alvarez of the Hooper Foundation for Medical Research has vigorously 

 attacked the unguarded and unqualified recommendation of coarse food sub- 

 stances: "Some men and women can be greatly helped by bran," he says, "and 

 their constipation can be cured if they happen to have the digestion of an ostrich; 

 but if they happen to have congenitally defective or handicapped digestive tracts; 

 if they have ulcers or narrow places, they cannot handle the mass of indigestible 

 material, and they promptly get into trouble." Many other dietary substances 

 such as celery, lettuce, spinach, and raisins provide roughage. Why ask bread to 

 be like Messalina — all things to all men? 



The various activities of the Council not only have borne fruit as re- 

 gards the standards of advertisers of accepted products; the influence also 

 is apparent in the advertisements of products not submitted or even of those 

 that have been rejected. This is true for Ovaltine and Fleischman's Yeast, to 

 which reference was made above; not tliat the advertising of either of these 

 products would be acceptable now, without considerable revision, but 

 that in both cases improvement has occurred. The same can be said of 

 the advertising of the Kellogg products from Battle Creek and of Cream 

 of Wheat, and numerous other well-known brands of processed foods. 

 Advertisers are appreciating that elevating their standards is as helpful 

 to them as it is to the public. 



An authoritative pamphlet entitled "Facts, Fads and Frauds in Nutri- 

 tion," prepared by Mitchell and Cook and published by the Massachusetts 

 State College, contains the following quotation from Dr. L. Jean Bogert: 



The fact is that food fads flourish because people want them. It makes little 

 diff"erence to the food faddist whether the particular dietary cult he follows in- 

 corporates a few grains of truth along with the dross or not; he is attracted to 

 this cult because it satisfies some craving to try a novel dietary, to be in fashion, 

 to attract attention by being unusual in diet, or from the desire to do something 



