TOPIC: Should we really eat three scheduled meals a day?
What do you think is the most popular meal of the day? Which meal gets the most exposure in our society and in media, whether associated with a healthy tip or a condemning statistical study? Which meal is promoted the most through television/radio/newsprint advertisements? Which meal is the cool kid in the cafeteria? The rockstar at the hotel? The no-longer-with-us television and movie icon honored and remembered during an award show?
If you said, “Huh,” do not fret—the metaphor I applied is difficult to grasp. But if you are not confused, then you already know I am simply comparing the meals of the day to popularized aspects of our world because this is exactly what the “meals of the day” are: popularized, not natural or essential, but popularized scheduled times to consume sustenance. There is not any more need to stick a flaming hot dagger in your eye as there is for eating three square meals a day.
The idea of “meals of the day,” time frames taught to us as the healthiest and most proper manner to consume food is a relatively new tool promoted and propagated throughout our society to sell one more carton of milk or another dozen of those packed-full-of-fiber blueberry muffins or a stack of those microwavable soup containers with their own resealable lids provided.
That is right: the “meals of the day” are simply an advertising tool, made more and more popular throughout human history with the creation of supermarkets, restaurants, and specialized food products.
How many times have you sat down to lunch at work, realizing the breakfast you consumed was rather large, but you still proceed to set up your lunch area and prepare your food to eat it during your break? And then, after this big breakfast and habitual lunch, you come home only to eat a big dinner four to five hours later? The idea of “meals of the day” is a bunch of malarkey and has been one of the strongest enemies to overcome in the fight to lose weight for many individuals. You do not have to eat when you are not hungry; there is not any such thing, person, or organization such as the “Breakfast,” “Lunch,” or “Dinner” Police. So do not indulge in food when you do not have to and do not use society’s conformist ideas to justify your binging. Simply said: the “meals of the day” were created to sell food products, so eat only when you are hungry.
Still do not believe me? I did not think you would just take my word for it. So below I have compiled a couple of the origins for the idea of “meals of the day” from around the world:
ANCIENT GREEK MEAL TIMES
Meal times were variable, but a midday meal was called “ariston” or lunch, and an evening one, “deipon” or dinner. “Deipon” was usually the biggest meal of the day, and for most, the only meal.
BRITISH MEAL TIMES
In the Sixteenth Century, dinner began at 11:00 am. Over time, meals were eaten later and later in the day, and by the Eighteenth Century, dinner was eaten at 3:00 pm. Lunch, which up until the Nineteenth Century was considered a furtive, on-the-move-snack, became a sit-down-meal. The upper class ate their early meal earlier and their later meal later; and for a long time lunch was a very upper class habit. The working class ate in the early evening and learned to make it through the rest of the day with a midday snack.
Eating times varied depending on class and income, and for the lower class, viewed as a necessity not a pleasure. So how did all these unhealthy people stay strong enough to propagate future generations?
Just…um…food for thought.
And here are a couple of other articles I found while researching; maybe peruse while brushing those morning muffin crumbs from your chin or forking your recommended amount of daily vegetables at dinner time:
No comments:
Post a Comment