The Balanced Diet

 

Whilst it is true that man cannot live without air and water, the thing that nourishes the body is food. Hence the saying, food is life.

Food can be divided into three categories : vegetarian, flesh and mixed. Flesh food include fowl and fish. Milk is an animal product and cannot be any means be included in a strictly vegetarian diet. It serves the purpose of meat to a very large extent. In medical language it is classified as animal food. A layman does not consider milk to be a animal food. On the other hand eggs are regarded by the layman as a flesh food. In reality, they are not. Nowadays sterile eggs are also produced. The hen is not allowed to see the cock and yet it lays eggs.

A sterile egg never develoves into a chick. Therefore, he who can take milk should have no objection to take sterile eggs. Medical opinion is mostly in favor of a mixed diet, although there is a growing school, which is strongly of the opinion that anatomical and physiological evidence is in favor of man being a vegetarian. His teeth, his stomach, intestines etc., seem to improve that nature has men man to be a vegetarian.

Vegetarian diet besides grains, pulses, edible roots, tubers and leaves, includes fruits, both fresh and dry. Dry fruits include nuts like almonds, pistachio, walnut etc.

I have always been favor of pure vegetarian diet. But experience has taught me that in order to be perfect fit, vegetarian diet must include milk and milk-products such as curd, butter, ghee, etc. This a significant departure from my original idea. I excluded milk form my diet for six years. At that time, I felt none the worse for the denial. But in year 1917, as a result of my ignorance, I was laid down with severe dysentery. I was reduced to a skeleton, but I stubbornly refused to take any medicine and with equal stubbornness refused to take milk or buttermilk. But I could not build up my body and pick up sufficient strength to leave the bed. I had taken a vow of not taking milk. A medical friend suggested that at the time of taking a vow, I could have had mind only the milk of cow and buffalo; why would the vow prevent me from taking goat's milk? My wife supported him and I yielded. Really speaking, for one who has given up milk, thought at the time of taking the vow only the cow and the buffalo were in mind, milk should be taboo. All animal milks have practically the same composition, through the proportion of the components varies in each case. So I may be said to have kept merely the letter, not the spirit, of the vow. Be that as it may, goat's milk was produced immediately and I drank it. It seemed to bring me new life. I picked up rapidly and was soon able to leave the bed. On account of this and several similar experiences, I have been forced to admit the necessity of adding milk to the strict vegetarian diet. But I have convinced that in the vast vegetable kingdom there must be some kind, which, while supplying those necessary substances which be derive form milk and meat, is free from their drawbacks, ethical and others.

In my opinion there a definite drawbacks in taking milk or meat. In order to get meat we have to kill. And we are certainly not entitled to any other milk except the mother's milk in our infancy. Over and above the moral drawback, there are other, purely from the point of view of health. Both milk and meat bring with them the defects of the animal from which they are derived. Domesticated cattle are hardly ever perfectly healthy. Just like man, cattle suffer from innumerable diseases. Several of these are over-looked even when the cattle are subjected to periodical medical examinations. Besides, medical examination of all the cattle in India seem to be an impossible feat, at any rate for the present. I am conducting a dairy at the Sevagram Ashram. I can easily get help from medical friends. Yet I cannot say with certainty that all the cattle in the Sevagram Dairy are healthy. On a contrary, a cow that had been considered to be healthy by everybody was found to be suffering from tuberculosis. Before this diagnosis was made, th milk of that cow had been used regularly in the Ashram. The Ashram also takes milk from the farmers in the neighborhood. Their cattle had not been medically examined. It is difficult to determine whether a particular specimen of milk is safe for consumption or not. We have to rest content with as much safety as boiling of the milk can accrue us of. If the Ashram cannot boast of fool-proof medical examination of its cattle, and be certain of the safety of its dairy products, the situation elsewhere is not likely to be much better. What applies to the milch cattle applies to a much grater extent to the animals slaughtered for meat. As a general rule, man just depends upon luck to escape from such risks. He does not seem to worry much about his health. He considers himself to be quite safe in his medical fortress in the shape of doctors, voids and hakims. His main worry and concern is how to get wealth and positive in society. This worry overshadows all the rest. Therefore, so long as some selfless scientist does not, as a result of patient research work, discover a vegetable substitute for milk and meat, man will do on taking meat and milk.

Now let us consider mixed diet. Man requires food which supply tissue building substances to provide for the growth and daily wear and tear of the body. It should also contain something which can supply energy, fat, certain salts and roughage to help the excretion of waste matter. Tissue building substances are known as proteins.

They are obtained from milk, meat, eggs, pulse and nuts. The protein contained in milk and meat, in other words, the animal protein being more digestible and assailable, are much valuable than vegetable proteins. Milk is superior to meat. The medicos tell us that in cases when meat cannot be digested, milk is digested quite easily. For vegetarians milk being the only source of animal proteins, is a very important article of diet. The proteins in raw eggs are considered to be the most easily digestible of all proteins. But everybody cannot afford to drink milk. And it is not available in all places. I would like to mention here a very important fact with regards to milk. Contrary to the popular belief, skimmed milk is a very valuable article of diet. There are times when it proves even more useful than whole milk. The chief function of milk is to supply animal proteins for tissue building and tissue repair. Skimming while it partially removes the fats, does not affect the proteins at all. Moreover, the available skimming instrument cannot remove all the fats from milk. Neither there is any likelihood of such an instrument being constructed.

The body requires other things besides milk, whole or skimmed. I give the second place to cereals-wheat, rice, jowar, bajra etc. These are used as a staple diet. Different cereals are used to staple in different provinces in India. In many places, more than one kind of cereals are eaten at the same time. This mixture is not necessary for the nourishment of the body. It makes it difficult to regulate the quantity of food intake, and puts an extra strain upon digestion. As all these venialities supply starch mainly, it is better to take one only, at a time. Wheat may well be described a the king among the cereals. If we glance at the world map, we find that wheat occupies the first place. From the point of view of health, if we can get wheat, rice and other cereals become unnecessary. If wheat is not available and juwar, etc. cannot be taken on account of dislike or difficulty in digesting them, rice has to be resorted to.

The cereals should be properly cleansed, ground on a grinding stone, and the resulting flour used as it is. Sieving of the flour should be avoided. It is likely to remove the bhusi or the per carp which is a rich source of salt and vitamins, both of which are most valuable form the point of view of nutrition. The per carp also supplies roughage, which helps the action of the bowels. Rice grain being very delicate, nature has provided it with an outer covering or epicure. This is not edible. In order to remove this inedible portion, rice has to be pounded. Pounding should be just sufficient to remove the epicure on the outer skin of the rice grain. But machine pounding not only removes the outer skin, but also polishes the rice by removing its per carp. The explanation of the popularity of polished rice lies in the fact that polishing helps preservation. The per carp is very sweet and unless it is removed, rice is easily attracted by certain organisms. Polished rice and wheat without its per carp, supply us with almost pure starch. Important constituents of the cereals are lost with the removal of their per carp. The per carp of the rice is sold as rice polishing. This and the per carp of wheat can be cooked and eaten by themselves. The can be also made into chapattis or cakes. It is possible that rice chapattis may be more easily digestible than whole rice and in this form a lesser quantity may result in full satisfaction.

We are in the habit of dipping each morsel of chapatti in vegetable or dal gravy before eating. The result is that most people swallow their food without proper mastication. Mastication is an important step in the process of digestion, especially that of starch. Digestion of starch begins on its coming into contact with saliva in the mouth. Mastication ensures a thorough mixing of food with saliva. Therefore, starchy food should be eaten in a relatively dry form, which results in a greater flow of saliva and also necessitates their thorough mastication.

After the starch supplying cereals come the protein supplying pulses-beans, lentils etc. Almost everybody seems to think that pulses are essential constituent of diet. Even meat eaters should have pulses. It is easy to understand that those who have to do hard manual work and who cannot afford to drink milk, cannot without pulses. But I can say with out any hesitation whatsoever that those who follow sedentary occupations as for instance, clerks, business men, doctors and those who are not to poor to buy milk, do not require pulses. Pulses are generally considered to be difficult to digest and are eaten in a much smaller quantity than cereals. Out of variety of pulses, peas, gram and haricot beans are considered to be the most and mung and masoor the least difficult to digest.

Vegetables and fruits should come third on our list. One would expect them to be cheap and easily available in India. But it is not so. They are generally considered to be delicacies mint for the city people. In the villages fresh vegetable are a rarity, and in most places fruits are also not available. This shortage of greens and fruits is a slur on the administration of India. The villagers can grow plenty of green vegetables if they wish to. The question of fruits cannot be solved so easily. The land legislature is bad from the villager's standpoint. But I am transgressing.

Among fresh vegetables, a fare amount of leafy vegetables must be taken everyday. I do not include potatoes, sweet potatoes, saran etc, which supply starch mainly, among vegetables. They should be put down in same category as starch supplying cereals. A fair helping of ordinary fresh vegetables is advisable. Certain varieties such as cucumber, tomatoes, mustard and cress and other tender leaves need not be cooked. They should be washed properly and eaten in raw in small quantities.

As for fruits, our daily diet should include available fruits of the season, e.g. mangoes, grapes etc. should all be used in this season. The best time for taking fruits is in early morning. A breakfast of fruits and milk should give full satisfaction. Those who take an early lunch may have a breakfast of fruits only. Banana is a good fruit. But as it is very rich in starch, it takes the place of bread. Milk and banana make a perfect meal.

A certain amount of fat is also necessary. This can be had in the form of ghee or oil. If ghee can be had, oil becomes unnecessary. It is difficult to digest and is not so nourishing as pure ghee. An ounce and half of ghee per head per day, should be considered ample to supply the needs of the body. Whole milk is also a source of ghee. Those who cannot afford it should take enough oil to supply the need for fat. Among oils, sweet oil, cocoa-nut oil, and ground nut oil should be given preference. Oil must be fresh. If available, it is better to use hand-pressed oil. Oil and ghee sold in the bazaar are generally quiet useless. It is a matter of great sorrow and shame. But so long as honesty has not become an integral part of business morals, whether through legislation or through education, the individual will have to procure the pure article with patience and diligence. One should never be satisfied to take what one can get, irrespective of its quality. It is far better to do with ghee oil altogether than to eat rancid oil and adulterated ghee. As in the case of fats, a certain amount of sugar is also necessary. Although sweet fruits supply plenty of sugar, there is no harm in taking one to one and half ounces of sugar, brown or white in a day. If one cannot get sweet fruits sugar may become a necessity. But the undue prominence given to sweet things towards nowadays is wrong. City folk eat to much of sweet things. Milk puddings, milk sweets and sweets of other kinds are consumed in large quantities. They are all unnecessary and are harmful except when taken in very small quantity. It may be said without any fear of exaggeration that the partake of sweet meals and other delicacies, in a country where the millions do not get an ordinary full meal, is equivalent to robbery.

What applies to sweets, applies with equal force to ghee and oil. There is no need to eat food fried in ghee or oil. To use up ghee in making puris and laddus is thoughtless extravagancy. Those who are not used to such food cannot eat these things at all. Those who do eat them I have often seen fall ill. Taste is acquired, not born with us. All the delicacies of the world cannot equal the relish, whereas one who is not hungry will refuse the best of sweet meals.

Now let us consider how often and how much should one eat. Food should be taken as a matter of duty-even as a medicine-to sustain the body, never for the satisfaction of the palate. Thus, pleasurable feeling comes from satisfaction of real hunger. Therefore, we can say that relish is dependent upon hunger and not outside it. Because of our wrong habits and artificial way of living, very few people know what their system requires. Our parents who bring us into this world do not, as a rule, cultivate self-control. Their habits and their way of living influence the children to a certain extent. The mother's food during pregnancy is bound to affect the child. After that during childhood, the mother pampers the child with al sorts of tasty foods. She gives the child a little bit out of weather she herself may be eating and the child's digestive system gets a wrong training from its infancy. Habits once formed are difficult to shed. There are very few who succeed in getting rid of them. But when the realization comes to man that he is his own bodyguard, and his body has been dedicated to service, he desires to learn law of keeping his body in a fit condition and tries hard to follow them.

We have now reached a point when we can lay down the amount of various foods required by a man of sedentary habits, which most men and women who read this pages, are.

Cow's milk	2 lbs.
Cereals (wheat, rice, bajra in all)	6 oz.
Vegetable leafy	3 oz.
Vegetable others	5 oz.
Vegetables raw	1 oz.
Ghee	1 1/2 oz.
Butter	2 oz.
White Sugar	1 1/2 oz.

Fresh fruits according one's taste and purse. In any case it is good to take two sour limes a day. The juice should be squeezed and taken with vegetables or in water, cold or hot. All these weights are of raw stuff. I have not put down the amount of salt. It should be added afterwards according to taste.

Now, how often should one eat? Many people take two meals a day. The general rule is to take three meals: breakfast early in the morning and before going out to work, dinner at midday and supper in the evening or late. There is no necessity to have more than three meals. In cities some people keep on nibbling from time to time. This habit is harmful. The digestive apparatus requires rest.

Source : From the Book "Key To Health".

Polished vs Unpolished

 

By M. K. Gandhi

Polished vs Unpolished

If rice can be pounded in the villages after the old fashion the wages will fill the pockets of the rice pounding sisters and the rice-eating millions will get some sustenance from the unpolished rice instead of pure starch which the polished rice provides. Human greed, which takes no count of the health or the wealth of the people who come under its heels, is responsible for the hideous rice-mills one sees in all the rice-producing tracts. If public opinion was strong, it will make rice-mills an impossibility by simply insisting on unpolished rice and appealing to the owners of rice-mills to stop a traffic that undermines the health of a whole nation and robs the poor people of an honest means of livelihood.

But who will listen to the testimony of a mere layman on the question of food values? I, therefore, give below an extract from The New Knowledge of Nutrition by Mr. Collum and Simmonds which a medical friend, to whom I had appealed for help, has sent with his approbation:

"Rice is the most important cereal grain in the diet of more than half of the human race. It is used especially in the wettest parts of the world. It has never found much favour in the United States but is used in small amounts. Among primitive peoples rice is eaten without polishing, in which form it is known as red rice, but it is usually treated so as to lose a large part of its germ. This loss results from the pounding of the kernels in rude mortars. The bran layer, which is richer in mineral salts the endosperm of the seed, is retained in this process.

"Rice which is used for export and for sale in the large cities at some distance from the place of production is polished by abrasion. The abrasive action results in wearing away the bran and germ. This mixture is known as rice polishing. The germ of rice, like that of wheat or maize, consists of cellular structures which are the seat of protoplasmic activity, and is a more complete food than any other part of the kernel. It contains almost all the fats found in the grain, and is more efficient in nourshing insects as well as higher animals, than is the polished grain. Hamada (1923) reports that rice embryo protein has a high nutritive value. Unpolished rice loses its flavour owing to the fats becoming rancid when kept for considerable periods in a warm climate. Polished rice can be handled without commercial hazard.

"McCarrison (1923) concluded that vitamin A is present in paddy before it is milled. The milling of raw paddy does not remove the whole, content of this substance as it is not confined to the peripheral layers of the grain. He states that it is destroyed in great measure by steam passing through paddy when it is contained in the vats, as in parboiling.

"The practice of polishing rice had its origin in the desire to improve its keeping quality, and the incidental whitening of the kernels has led to the establishment of a demand for a white product. This and the artificially established liking for white flour and white corn meal, is an illustration of the failure of the instinct of man to serve as a safe guide in the selection of food. The aesthetic sense is appealed to in greatest measure in this case by the products of lowest biologic values.

"Attractiveness of rice to the eye is so important a factor commercially that the practice of artificial whitening of the polished kernels has come into vogue. This is accompanied by coating the kernels with talcum powder, the latter adhering by means of a thin coating of Glucose. The milky appearance of the water in which rice is washed is due to the talcum remaining in suspension. Rice which has been polished, but not coated in this way, is called brown rice as contrasted with the coated or white rice.

"Chart III shows that there are four dietary factors in which polished rice is of such poor quality as to require improvements before it becomes a complete food. Its proteins are of low value. It is too poor in all essential mineral elements to meet the needs of a growing animal, and is nearly free from vitamins A and B. The data in Chart III were obtained with the rats and do not bring out the fact that rice is lacking in the vitamin C. This substance is not essential in the diet of the rat.

"Kennedy (1924) found wild rice to contain a higher percentage of protein than most other cereals, but it resembles the cereals in containing proteins of rather low biological value. It also resembles other cereals in containing inorganic material unsuitable for the promotion of growth. Its content of vitamin A is low but it contains a sufficient amount to prevent xerophthalmia. Wild rice has a greater food value than the cultivated polished rice, because its proteins are of better quality. It contains adequate amounts of vitamin B for growth."[1]

The following is the result of my observations to date.

Whole, unpolished rice is unprocurable in the bazars. It is beautiful to look at and rich and sweet to the taste. Mills can never compete with this unpolished rice. It is husked in a simple manner. Most of the paddy can be husked in a light chakki without difficulty. There are some varieties the husk of which is not separated by grinding. The best way of treating such paddy is to boil it first and then separate the chaff from the grain. This rice, it is said, is most nutritious and, naturally, the cheapest. In the villages, if they husk their own paddy, it must always be cheaper for the peasants than the corresponding mill- husked rice, whether polished or unpolished. The majority of rice found ordinarily in the bazars is always more or less polished, whether hand-husked or mill-husked. Wholly unpolished rice is always hand-husked and is every time cheaper than the mill-husked rice, the variety being the same.

Subject to further research, the observations so far show that it is because of our criminal negligence that rice-eating millions eat deteriorated rice and pay a heavy price into the bargain. Let the village worker test the truth of these observations for himself.[2]

Wheat or Gur

Let us now take up wheat. It is the second most important article of diet, if not the first. From the nutritive standpoint, it is the king of cereals. By itself, it is more perfect than rice. Flour bereft of the valuable bran is like polished rice. That branless flour is as bad as polished rice is the universal testimony of medical men. Whole-wheat flour ground in one's own chakki is any day superior to, and cheaper than, the fine flour to be had in the bazars. It is cheaper because the cost of grinding is saved. Again, in whole-wheat flour there is no loss of weight. In fine flour there is loss of weight. The richest part of wheat is contained in its bran. There is a terrible loss of nutrition when the bran of wheat is removed. The villagers and others who eat whole-wheat flour ground in their own chakkis save their money and, what is more important, their health. A large part of the millions that flour-mills make will remain in and circulate among the deserving poor when village grinding is revived.

But the objection is taken that chakki grinding is a tedious process, that often wheat is indifferently ground and that it does not pay the villagers formerly to grind wheat themselves. If it paid the villagers formerly to grind their own corn, surely the advent of flour-mills should make no difference. They may not plead want of time, and when intelligence is allied to labour, there is every hope of improvement in the chakki. The argument of indifferent grinding can have no practical value. If the chakki was such an indifferent grinder, it could not have stood the test of time immemorial. But to obviate the risk of using indifferently ground whole-wheat flour, I suggest that, wherever there is suspicion, the flour of uneven grinding may be passed through a sieve and the contents may be turned into thick porridge and eaten with or after chapati. If this plan is followed, grinding becomes incredibly simple, and much time and labour can be saved.

All this change can only be brought about by some previous preparation on the part of workers and instruction of villagers. This is a thankless task. But it is worth doing, if the villagers are to live in health and elementary comfort.

Gur is the next article that demands attention. According to the medical testimony I have reproduced in these columns, gur is any day superior to refined sugar in food value, and if the villagers cease to make gur as they are already beginning to do, they will be deprived of an important food adjunct for their children. They may do without gur themselves, but their children cannot without undermining their stamina. Gur is superior to bazaar sweets and to refined sugar. Retention of gur and its use by the people in general means several crores of rupees retained by the villagers.

But some workers maintain that gur does not pay the cost of production. The growers who need money against their crops cannot afford to wait till they have turned cane-juice into gur and disposed of it. Though I have testimony to the contrary, too, this argument is not without force. I have no ready-made answer for it. There must be something radically wrong when an article of use, made in the place where also its raw material is grown, does not pay the cost of labour. This is a subject that demands local investigation in each case. Workers must not take the answer of villagers and despair of a remedy. National growth, identification of cities with villages, depend upon the solution of such knotty problems as are presented by gur. We must make up our mind that gur must not disappear from the villages, even if it means an additional pice to be paid for it by city people.[3]

Rice

The problem of rice is daily presenting interesting features. Shri Shankarlal Banker has already commenced experiments on unpolished rice. He writes:

"When formerly paddy was hand-husked, it underwent three polishes after the removal of the outermost husk, and many people indeed believe even now that that process has to be gone through. I therefore had some paddy got and, after removing the husk, had three polishes by pounding once, twice and thrice, of which specimens are being herewith sent. The rice that was only once polished was much sweeter to the taste than that which was polished twice and thrice. The first process of removing the husk was gone through by means of chakki, and the polishing or pounding was done by, using the village pestle and mortar. The rice which was obtained by merely removing the husk was in colour almost like that which was first polished. But it took a longer time to cook. The next time, therefore, I soaked the rice in water for some time, and there was no difficulty about cooking. The sweetness was all the greater. Some contend that rice that is not polished at all is difficult to digest. But this is not likely. The part that is removed by polishing contains vitamins and salts, which help digestion. If, however, this belief is not well-founded, you will perhaps procure authentic information. You will be interested to know that on removing the mere husk from 10 seers of paddy it was reduced to 7½, seers. Thus the weight was reduced by 25 per cent. On polishing three times it was reduced by 40 per cent. The paddy that I used for my observation was the variety called jirasal."

The only comment I would like to offer on this letter is that I do not think that any further medical opinion will help. The opinion I have gathered and reproduced in these columns is emphatic in favour of unpolished rice. But so far as I am aware, we have nothing in medical literature describing experiments of which Shri Banker has, like many of us, made the commencement. Proof of the pudding is in the eating; let everyone make the experiment for himself.

One caution, however, as a practised cook I would like to utter. Among the many domestic quarrels I used to have with my wife was one over rice-cooking. She would have every grain separated. I had developed into a dietetic reformer and I knew that that rice was not half as good as that which was well and properly cooked. Not an ounce of water in which I cooked rice was thrown away. But at that time I knew no distinction between polished and unpolished rice. I simply took the ordinary bazar rice and cooked it through till it became one mass. The reader will be glad to know that the quarrel ended in a victory for the reform, and the wife became a convert to properly cooked rice. The precaution about unpolished rice is all the more necessary, because the pericarp of rice, which contains all its richer constituents, requires to be cooked thoroughly. Therefore, if unpolished rice is soaked in cold water for at least three hours before cooking, and then well boiled, there is not only no danger of its proving undigestible, but it will be decidedly more palatable, as has already been found at Maganwadi, the abode of the Village Industries Association in Wardha. We have been having here what may be called half-polished rice, not the perfect variety that is described in the foregoing letter. Nevertheless, the rice is well cooked. Nobody has complained about its indigestibility. But, being far more nutritious than polished rice, which is almost pure starch, naturally unpolished rice, cannot be, and must not be, eaten in the same quantity as polished rice. This is true of all conservative cookery.[4]

No Waste!

Those who have been following what is being written in these columns on balanced diet will not have failed to understand the vast importance of bran which we simply throw away and give to our cattle. I do not grudge the cattle what they get. But it seems to me that we are thoughtless about cattle-feeding as about many other things. Cattle do not need bran so much as green fodder and seed cakes which they can easily divide with us if we will revert to the village oil-presses. But we need every ounce of the bran of wheat and rice if we are to become efficient instruments of production, not to be beaten on this earth by any race, and yet without the necessity of entering into killing competition or literally killing one another. But I must not prolong what is becoming a heavy preface to a simple recipe which a friend has passed on to me for treating wheat bran. He is obliged to his sister for it. Here it is:

 

Grind sufficient wheat coarse to give you one pound of bran which you get by passing the meal through a medium sieve. Add 112 lb. of cold water, eight tolas of pulverized clean gur and half a tea-spoonful of clean salt to the bran and stir well. Pour the mixture in a flat vessel, cover and let it stand for full half hour. Then put a well-fitting tava or dish on the pot containing the mixture and stand it on hot coal and heat hot coals on top. Keep the pot between the two fires for full five minutes. Then transfer the mixture on to an iron kadai and roast on a slow fire till the water is fairly dried out. Then take the pot off the chula and let the contents cool. Then strain them through a sieve with clean hands and the contents will drop on a clean cloth or board in the form of threads. Expose these to the sun till thoroughly dry. These can be taken as they are or with hot or cold milk or hot water or whey. Two ounces will make a good breakfast and is claimed to be a valuable aid to remove constipation the bane of civilized life and precursor of many diseases.[5]

 

 

---

[1] Harijan, 26-10-1934

[2] Harijan, 25-1-1935

[3] Harijan, 1-2-1935

[4] Harijan, 15-2-1935

[5] Harijan, 12-10-1935