Extremes in Diet
167
Because we, from principle, discard the use of those things which
irritate the stomach and destroy health, the idea should never be given
that it is of little consequence what we eat. I do not recommend an
impoverished diet. Many who need the benefits of healthful living
and from conscientious motives adopt what they believe to be such,
are deceived by supposing that a meager bill of fare, prepared with-
out painstaking and consisting mostly of mushes and so-called gems,
heavy and sodden, is what is meant by a reformed diet. Some use milk
and a large amount of sugar on mush, thinking that they are carrying
out health reform. But the sugar and milk combined are liable to cause
fermentation in the stomach, and are thus harmful. The free use of
sugar in any form tends to clog the system and is not unfrequently
a cause of disease. Some think that they must eat only just such an
amount, and just such a quality, and confine themselves to two or three
kinds of foods. But in eating too small an amount, and that not of the
best quality, they do not receive sufficient nourishment
There is real common sense in health reform. People cannot all
eat the same things. Some articles of food that are wholesome and
palatable to one person may be hurtful to another. Some cannot use
milk, while others can subsist upon it. For some, dried beans and peas
are wholesome, while others cannot digest them. Some stomachs have
[155]
become so sensitive that they cannot make use of the coarser kind of
graham flour. So it is impossible to make an unvarying rule by which
to regulate everyone’s dietetic habits.
Narrow ideas and overstraining of small points have been a great
injury to the cause of hygiene. There may be such an effort at economy
in the preparation of food, that, instead of a healthful diet, it becomes a
poverty-stricken diet. What is the result? Poverty of the blood. I have
seen several cases of disease most difficult to cure, which were due
to impoverished diet. The persons thus afflicted were not compelled
by poverty to adopt a meager diet, but did so in order to follow out
their own erroneous ideas of what constitutes health reform. Day after
day, meal after meal, the same articles of food were prepared without
variation, until dyspepsia and general debility resulted.
Many who adopt the health reform complain that it does not agree
with them; but after sitting at their tables I come to the conclusion
that it is not the health reform that is at fault, but the poorly prepared
food. I appeal to men and women to whom God has given intelligence: