Food science communicators are not all bad, but many are misleading or overly simplistic. In New York City, you can walk down a busy street and find yourself surrounded by Cinnabon, Carvel, Popeye’s, taco joints, smoke shops, delis, grills, wine and spirit stores, and a 7-Eleven. Food carts sell donuts, sodas, energy drinks, and processed meats. This is not unique to New York, it is the landscape of modern food retail. It is overwhelmingly dominated by processed, fried, and refined food.
The problem is that many food science communicators are not offering meaningful solutions. Instead of promoting businesses that provide unprocessed, plant-heavy meals, they get bogged down in academic debates and reductionist arguments like “sugar is sugar.” According to this line of thinking, the sugar in an apple is the same as the sugar in a fried apple pie. That is technically true on a molecular level, but it ignores context. An apple comes with fiber, water, vitamins, and antioxidants, which dramatically affect how the body metabolizes that sugar, while a fried apple pie is loaded with trans fats, refined flour, and excess calories. To equate them is misleading.
The truth is simple, even if unpopular: people need to eat far less processed food and make most of their diet fruits and vegetables. Some animal protein can be included, but it should not dominate every meal or every day. Humans are omnivores, but we thrive best on diets where plant foods are the foundation.
animal protein and the industry
The belief that high protein diets are inherently healthy is a myth. Most people in wealthy countries already consume more protein than they need. Excessive animal protein intake is linked to higher risks of heart disease, certain cancers, and metabolic disorders when compared to diets centered on plant foods.
The poultry and livestock industries are built on efficiency, not nutrition. Industrial chicken is cheap because it is easy to mass produce, not because it is an ideal protein source. Seafood, while often considered healthier, is collapsing global fisheries and damaging ecosystems at alarming rates. These are not sustainable systems.
The average consumer is not eating grass-fed beef or cleanly caught fish. They are eating products of factory farming, processed meats, and low-quality protein sources that carry environmental and health consequences. Whether demand drives supply, or industry manipulates demand, the result is the same: destructive practices, cheap calories, and widespread chronic disease.
vitamins, juice, and smoothies
Vitamins are another area where food science communication is confusing. Many supplements on the market are poorly regulated, contaminated, or offer little benefit. The best evidence shows that most healthy adults who eat a varied diet do not need multivitamins. Yet the supplement industry is worth billions, built on exaggerated claims and consumer gullibility.
Doctors are right to laugh at most vitamins, but they are often just as quick to dismiss juice, smoothies, and fruit-heavy diets by scaring people with the word “sugar.” This is misguided. Whole fruits and vegetables are not the same as refined sugars. The body processes them differently. How much sugar you can safely consume from fruit depends on your size, activity level, overall diet, and health.
food and emotion
Almost no one in mainstream nutrition talks enough about the emotional side of food. Anxiety, compulsion, and trauma are powerful drivers of what people eat. Societies live in a constant state of stress and post-traumatic behaviors, which fuels food addictions, phobias, and compulsive eating patterns. Junk food companies exploit this anxiety. They sell comfort disguised as nourishment.
The solution is not just telling people to “eat better.” It is offering better options in real environments. If people cannot find something to satisfy cravings for sweetness, they will fall back on refined sugar. If there is nowhere to buy fresh, clean, satisfying meals, then processed food will win.
breakfast, conditioning, and diet myths
Our ideas about what we “should” eat at certain times are cultural conditioning. There is no biological law that says breakfast must be bacon, eggs, and toast. A large salad in the morning is unconventional, but nutritionally sound. Fruit or cooked grains like oatmeal are also excellent, easier-to-digest morning foods.
Transitioning from a protein-heavy diet to a carbohydrate-based one may feel uncomfortable at first. People may experience lightheadedness or changes in blood sugar as the body adapts. But in the long run, plant-based diets are linked with lower risk of chronic disease, better longevity, and improved metabolic health. Even diabetics, under medical supervision, can thrive on a diet centered around whole fruits and vegetables when refined foods and excess animal products are eliminated.
the failure of both science and quackery
It is not only mainstream science that misleads. Holistic and alternative medicine often makes unsupported claims and charges high prices for bogus treatments. Consumers are caught between two extremes: a scientific establishment that often defaults to pharmaceuticals and dismisses lifestyle change, and alternative practitioners who oversell unproven remedies.
True medicine should begin with diet and lifestyle. Doctors should offer patients a real choice: do you want to address this naturally or unnaturally? Natural means dietary correction, exercise, and stress reduction first. If that is not enough, then pharmaceutical or surgical intervention has its place.
what should change
If we truly care about public health, we need systemic reform. Fried food, alcohol, refined sugar, and processed foods should not be cheaper than fruits, vegetables, and whole grains. Tax policies and subsidies should reflect what is actually good for society. Alcohol, which drives enormous health and social costs, should not be normalized and untaxed.
At the same time, companies that prioritize health, transparency, and sustainability should be given advantages to help them compete against junk food conglomerates. This is not about restricting freedom, it is about creating fairness and reducing the massive collective burden of diet-related disease.
conclusion
Food science communicators could be powerful allies in this mission, but too often they distract the public with confusing debates, industry-friendly narratives, and rigid dogma. What people need to hear is not complicated: eat fewer processed foods, more fruits and vegetables, and small amounts of clean protein if desired. Recognize the emotional and cultural dimensions of eating. See diet as both a personal practice and a societal responsibility.
The goal is simple. Create a food system that heals instead of harms.