Che confusione…sarà perché ci piace.

We like to eat. Anyone against it? And everyone likes to eat well. Although it would be necessary to understand what is meant by eating well. Enough? Tasty? Healthy and balanced? The cover of the first edition of Pellegrino Artusi's cookbook in 1891 is already wonderful. At the top, the words “Hygiene — Economy — Good Taste” dominate. The title “Science in the kitchen and the art of eating well” and then four pearls of wisdom; a good meal and a half keep a man healthy; a lot of food and poor digestion does not make the body healthy and quick; he takes food to measure from the two kingdoms of nature and, translated from Latin, the first digestion takes place in the mouth. There was already a lot of what we try to make consumers understand today in directing them to a healthy and correct lifestyle and diet. I stress that the first word on the page was' hygiene ', from the Greek for 'healthy, which benefits health', that the correct definition of food hygiene indicates all the conditions and measures necessary to ensure that food is safe and acceptable for human consumption, and that the WHO definition of health refers not only to the absence of physical diseases and infirmities, but, in general, to a complex condition of physical, mental and social well-being. How to deny the role of food in this state of well-being. It's a pity that it is often the worst foods from a nutritional point of view that provide us with a certain well-being, at least in the short term. It is also impossible to deny that proper nutrition makes it possible to maintain a better physical health condition in the long term with repercussions on mental health. It is more difficult to convey the message convincingly to ignorant people who, in the etymological sense of the word, ignore in whole or in part (or who, despite knowing, want to ignore) the damage that can be caused by excessive and prolonged consumption of sugar, fat, alcohol, but not only. Already a few centuries ago Paracelsus said that everything is poison, nothing exists that is not poisonous and only the dose makes sure that the poison does not work. So it's useless for me to believe in miracle diets, but I can understand consumers' confusion. At the time of Artusi, the variety of sensory delicacies available was much smaller than the modern one. And the variety includes solutions that should help the consumer make better choices. Foods rich in protein, high in fiber, without sugar, low in fat, red or green traffic lights (not yet with us), without preservatives, low carb, ketogenic diet, intermittent fasting, supplements, attention to ultra-processed foods. Perhaps a step forward compared to the definition of junk foods, but I doubt it's clear to consumers what to do (run away away or moderate their consumption) and how to recognize them. I looked for help on the web on how to recognize ultra-processed foods in a few steps. 1) Look if there are ingredients you don't know (I'm screwed here... I know them all!) and suspect if there are more than three ingredients. 2) Check if the package contains a health claim. 3) There are ingredients whose names end in -osio. 4) Look if it contains palm oil. 5) See if it is produced by a multinational company. 5) Ask yourself if you could prepare it in your kitchen. An infallible guide.