[Second Opinion] Unlimited rice, empty stomachs

by Gideon Lasco
Philippine Daily Inquirer

I don’t think Cynthia Villar anticipated that her comments on prohibiting “unlimited rice” will draw so much resentment and ridicule. But as she probably knows by now, “unli rice” is not just a gluttonous indulgence for Filipinos but also a compensatory recourse for those with limited means. I hope she also realizes that prohibitionism is not always the answer to our health problems.

To be fair to the senator, however, the idea of discouraging Filipinos from eating too much rice has been raised by experts for many years. In 2012, PhilRice lamented that each Filipino wastes two tablespoons of rice every day, “which, when not wasted, could result in import savings as high as P6.2 billion and could feed 2.6 million hungry Filipinos in a year.”

Her pronouncements mirror PhilRice’s lament and actually sound like something a nutritionist would say: “If possible, we should shift to brown rice so Filipinos would eat less and so that finally, we can be self-sufficient… Unlimited rice is bad for the health. We should learn how to eat more vegetables.” In this, the doctor in me heartily agrees with her.

Of course, what drew the most attention was her misguided suggestion that fast-food chains’ offerings of “unli rice” be prohibited. But now that she has backed down from it, her overall concerns remain salient. Leaving the specifics of rice sufficiency to the economists and agriculturists (which Cielito Habito discussed in his latest column here), what can we do to improve our state of (mal)nutrition?

To appreciate the magnitude of the problem, we have to bear in mind that one in three Filipino children remains stunted. Aside from making Filipinos among the shortest in the region, stunting has dire consequences for children’s health and overall development. Rice, in this context, remains very important because for many Filipinos, it is the main source not just of carbohydrates but also of protein. Ironically, while many are eating too much rice, the poor need more of it.
Instead of prohibiting unlimited rice, a more positive approach is to incentivize the offering of whole-grain (i.e., brown, red, or black) rice, which satiates the eater faster, has more fiber and vitamins, and is easier to produce (even if longer to cook). Surely, increased demand will lower prices.

Another is to go beyond rice and encourage the consumption of other kinds of carbohydrates. Granted, our very word for eating, “kain,” is linguistically and cognitively related to the word for rice, “kanin”—many Pinoys don’t feel full if they don’t eat rice. Also, our viands are prepared in such a way that their flavors are balanced by rice: Can you imagine eating kare-kare by itself?

There are alternatives, however, that can take the place of rice—though we may need to  develop more recipes for them. Despite their lowly reputation, root crops like kamote, gabi and ube are uber-healthy, not to mention easy to grow. There’s white corn, too—which UP Los Baños scientists recommend mixing with rice.

But beyond carbohydrates, a big problem is protein energy malnutrition—the lack of ulam caused by the prohibitive cost of meat and fish. In olden days, Filipinos had more diverse sources of protein: Even insects (now recommended by the World Health Organization) were part of the diet.

What may be more culturally acceptable and practical today, however, are beans and legumes. As the Food Nutrition Research Institute’s Charina Javier tells me, farmers usually plant these in between rice cropping cycles to enhance soil quality. Encouraging the public to embrace beans and root crops, alongside being “rice-ponsible” (as the Department of Agriculture puts it), will surely go a long way.

But what of the urban poor with nary a place to lay their heads, let alone plant crops? Ultimately, we must also address the structural causes of hunger and malnutrition, which include the flooding of our markets with cheap but unhealthy food, the miserable plight of our food growers, and, above all, the extreme poverty that leaves people with no choice but to eat what little — if any — food they can find.

In this age of “unli rice,” no Filipino should have to live with an empty stomach.

Originally published in the Philippine Daily Inquirer: http://opinion.inquirer.net/104983/unlimited-rice-empty-stomachs

Pantawid-gutom: Negotiating hunger in the Philippines

by Gideon Lasco, MD

TO TIDE OVER, through the sea of hunger from one island of satiety to another: such is the image conveyed by the term “pantawid-gutom”. For people who eat three meals a day, and meriendas in between, it may be a term that we rarely encounter in our everyday lives. But it means a lot for people who regularly experience what it feels to have an empty stomach.

What makes a good ‘pantawid-gutom’? The foremost and most obvious consideration is the ability to momentarily alleviate hunger. Second, it has to be easy to prepare and consume. Finally, it has to be affordable. After all, lack of funds is what keeps most people from buying better food in the first place.

Street foods are perhaps the most common form of pantawid-gutom. Doreen Fernandez surveyed Filipino street foods in the early 90's, dutifully chronicling some of their colourful names: Adidas for chicken feet, PAL for wings, Walkman for pigs’ ears. Over two decades later, these foods have been joined by pancit canton and other ‘instant’ foods such as candies and junk foods. High in oil, simple sugars, and artificial flavors, many of these foods have “empty calories” that do provide some energy, but without nutrients the body needs. Moreover, they have been implicated in the rise of non-communicable diseases like hypertension and heart disease as well as communicable ones like Hepatitis A and gastroenteritis. When people see what they eat as pantawid-gutom, they themselves recognise that these are not the ideal foods for their bodies, but given the circumstances, they would suffice.

Some also use certain drugs as pantawid-gutom. In my own research on the use of shabu (methamphetamine), I found that one of the drug’s desirable effects (for its users) is its potent ability to suppress hunger. This, and shabu’s other effects, such as giving alertness and allowing people to stay awake, makes it a particularly appealing choice for people who have to work all day and night, such as vendors and drivers, among many others. “Rugby” often used by street children, as well as the nicotine in cigarettes can have a similar effect. Much of the discourse around drugs has focused on how they are linked to addiction, peer pressure, and criminality, but often overlooked are the ways in which they are used by people to deal with their physiologic needs and everyday problems - such as hunger.

Who in our society commonly resort to pantawid-gutom? First, the urban poor, for whom access to food is as good as the money they could earn for the day - a “food insecurity” that we commonly express as “isang kahig, isang tuka” (one scratch, one bite). Children are not spared of this predicament, and the impact is particularly alarming: lack of healthy food leads to stunting and future health problems, as well as weak immune systems that contribute to more infant and child deaths.

Second, we have people who have to work for long hours without food. These include construction workers, laborers, street vendors, drivers, and many others. Often, these are people who belong to the informal sector, unprotected by labor laws. Their lack of funds and time to prepare for food impels them to eat just enough pantawid-gutom to stave off hunger until they get home.

Finally, we have overworked individuals - whether in the corporate world, in call centers, hospitals, schools, and various other institutions. They too, sometimes resort to pantawid-gutom to finish their tasks.

Drawing on the meanings of pantawid-gutom, the government named its conditional cash transfer scheme as “Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino Program”, or ‘4Ps’. While there have been indications of positive results, its wider impact remains unclear. According to a recent SWS survey, 4.8 million Filipino families said they experienced hunger in the past month, representing 22% of our entire population.

***

THE WHOLE NOTION of pantawid-gutom speaks to us of the hunger that many Filipinos experience on a daily basis, and the tactics (“diskarte”) they deploy in order to get by (“makaraos”). Sadly, many of us have been desensitised to images of children sniffing rugby, or families on the streets partaking of pancit canton and whatever else they can find. Moreover, access to healthy foods among people working in different sectors, formal or informal, have oftentimes been overlooked.

The challenge for nutritionists and policymakers is to come up and promote food alternatives that are safer and healthier, but just as accessible and affordable. Admittedly, this is not an easy task, because for food to be “instant” and “cheap”, a lot of nutritional sacrifices have to be made. But we can start with foods that already there, like protein-rich taho (sweetened snack made of soy), boiled bananas, and kamote-cue. In addition, these efforts should go hand in hand with strengthening the agricultural sector to increase yield and lower food prices. Moreover, for people who resort to pantawid-gutom out of convenience, not out of necessity, education about the health risks of an unbalanced diet can go a long way.

As for those for whom there is little choice, we are called upon to show understanding, empathy, and solidarity. Many Filipinos rely on pantawid-gutom - unsafe and unhealthy foods and even drugs - to tide them over, even as the economic gulf grows wider, and the islands of satiety seem fewer and further apart. Rather than be judgmental or indifferent to their predicament, we should examine and act on the circumstances that have led to their chronic hunger in the first place.

Quezon City
February 26, 2015

Thou shall not eat: An overview of the relationships between food and religion

By Gideon Lasco, MD

BACKGROUND
The anthropology of food and religion can be organized into two major domains: food in religion and religion in food.  In this paper, we focus on the latter: religion in food, or how religions and belief systems have played a role in determining what we eat, who eats what, how we eat.

There are two main approaches in nutritional anthropology, the materialist perspective and the idealist (Harris, 1970). As this paper aims to provide an overview, perspectives from both schools of thought will be included in the discussion.

Considering the divergence of major religions, one way to present “religion in food” would be a comparative survey, that is, to discuss each of the major religions of the world, and discuss the relationship of each to food. However, considering that the orientation of anthropology is to arrive at explanations, I would aver that a more anthropologically-oriented way of presenting this topic is to look into the various relationships of religion in food, looking at religion as causal domain and food as outcome. The different religions can be then be used as illustrations for each of the relationships we identified.

Finally, this paper speculates on the future of food in terms of religion in an increasingly post-religious, secular world.

CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK
Given two interacting variables, food and religion, we can construct statements like this to state relationships based on the review of literature:

Religion __________ Food

And come up with some relationships:

1. Religion determines what is food (food preferences) and what isn’t (food taboos)
2. Religion dictates how we should eat and prepare food and where (food practices)
3. Religion sets limits on how much food we should eat in our everyday lives (food rationing)
4. Religion prescribes occasions for eating and avoiding food (feasting and fasting)

These relationships form the outline of our main discussion of religion in food.

RELIGION AS DEFINER OF WHAT IS FOOD AND WHAT ISN’T
Historically, religion has functioned as a definer of what can be eaten, and what cannot, and perhaps this is the major function of religion in food. The English term for the latter is taboo, which itself is derived from the Tahitian language where it means “unclean or cursed”. Other cultures have terms for both what should be eaten, and what should not, and these terms are used in the context of religion; they are essentially religious laws.

In Islam, for instance, the concept of halal and haram is rooted in the Holy Koran (Al-Jallad, 2008), on which the following verse is found:

“Forbidden unto you (for food) are carrion and blood and swine-flesh, and that which hath been dedicated unto any other than Allah, and the strangled, and the dead through beating, and the dead through falling from a height, and that which hath been killed by (the goring of) horns, and the devoured of wild beasts, saving that which ye make lawful (by the death-stroke), and that which hath been immolated unto idols.: (5:2)

This is similar to the kosher rules of Judaism, which likewise forbid the consumption of swine, most insects, and the mixing of milk and meat. These prohibitions can be traced to the commandments of Moses in two of the earliest books of the Bible, Leviticus and Deuteronomy.

Much of the discussion on Islamic and Jewish rules on food centers on, and is best illustrated the pig taboo, or the ban on what Harris calls ‘the abominable pig’ (Harris, 1970). In the traditional perspective, religion itself is the explanation; there is no need to probe beyond it (i.e. theological explanation) because it is what was ordained from time immemorial.

Mary Douglas, on the other hand, called for a symbolic, interpretive interpretation. She argued that prohibiting certain foods was a way of “carving up the natural world into the pure and the impure”, thereby creating a model for thinking about the purity of the Divine.

Regarding the pig, she said that while most animals are cloven-hoofed and cud-chewing such as the cow, the goat, or the sheep, the pig had cloven hoof but did not chew cud. This classificatory ambiguity is what she calls a "taxonomic anomaly", which she then claims as the basis for the pig taboo based on a symbolic or interpretive perspective (Douglas, 1966).

On the other hand, Marvin Harris argued for a materialist explanation of the pig taboo. He says that the environment of the Middle East makes pig raising highly inefficient. Because pork tastes good to humans, it must be proscribed religiously, otherwise, its husbandry will be maladaptive.

To raise pigs in arid, open environments requires heavy expenditure of water and supplementary food, and are thus expensive to keep and grow.  Moreover, the pigs eat what humans eat. The pig has another disadvantage: unlike sheep, goats, and cattle, it is not a ruminant. These factors make pig growing ecologically unsustainable, which favored the establishment of a religious proscription.

On the other hand, in Christian Europe, there are forests where pigs can thrive; it is a totally different environment. Therefore, you have a different attitude toward them compared with what continues to exist in the Middle East.

Of course, there is a religious explanation to the lifting of the pig taboo in Christianity:  In Peter’s vision in the book of Acts, it was revealed to him that there are no more unclean and clean animals; everything can now be eaten.

Arguments run along the same lines in trying to explain “sacred cow” in India and other Hindu nations like Nepal. At face value, as Heinricher (1981) observes, the situation seems to support an idealist perspective:

The case of India's sacred cattle is often cited by ideationalists as an example of blatant economic wastefulness in the name of spiritual satisfaction. Why else would starving people refuse to eat all of those cattle roaming the cities and clogging the highways, if not because of religious sanctions?5
In the idealist school of thought, it is "ahisma", the doctrine of non-violence towards all life that provides the basis for a religious proscription on cow slaughter and consumption, however contrary it seems against the rational choice. Ahimsa is also essentially the premise of vegetarianism, which is espoused by the two major schools of Buddhist thought. 

On the other hand, Harris and others, once again employing a materialist approach, says that it made ecological sense to have a prohibition of cow slaughter, considering the value of the cow in an agricultural society such as India, considering the amount of dung it produces, which is then used as fertilizer. Moreover, he critiques the acceptance of ‘ahimsa’ as preventing cow slaughter, saying that cow slaughter does happen, either by sins of omission or covert acts.

Moreover, “cow eating” does happen, by untouchables, or even by a growing number of Indians who embrace beef eating . Mencher (1971) writes that many urban middle-classed Hindus would admit to liking beef curry once informed that "upper caste" American like beef.

An interesting conclusion of Harris is found in the last paragraph of his article:

I have yet to encounter a flourishing religion whose food taboos make It more difficult for ordinary people to be well nourished. (79)

In other words, he is saying that at the weakest form of the materialist approach, religion may dictate foodways, but it is constrained by the nutritional needs of the people.

Christianity at large has lifted food taboos, as we explained earlier. However, various Christian sects have food rules and restrictions. The Jehovah’s witnesses, for instance, avoid eating the flesh of animals that have not been properly bled because they believe it is wrong to eat blood. Here, the role of food as “definer of group identity” comes into play. Many studies have demonstrated that food is a particularly potent symbol of personal and group identity, forming one of the foundations of both individuality and a sense of common membership in a larger, bounded group and this can very well apply to religion. (Wilk, 1999, Ohnuki-Tierney, 1993 et al).

As a final illustration of how religion has dictated food, the arrival of Christianity in the Pacific islands is attributed as the reason for the elimination of the practice of cannibalism. With the changing of people’s belief systems, cannibalism, has entered into a taboo (Hadden, 2009).

In sum, we can look at these relationships between religion and food according the materialist explanations about food taboos were enumerated by Meyer Rochow (2009):
-Food taboos for certain members of the society and to highlight special events
-Food taboos to protect human health
-Food taboos during pregnancy and food changes over the course of the menstrual cycle
-Food taboos as an ecological necessity to protect the resource
-Food taboos in order to monopolize a resource
-Food taboos as an expression of empathy
-Food taboos as a factor in group-cohesion and group-identity

On the other hand, we can follow the perspective of Mary Douglas, who called fof a more symbolic / interpretive explanation, looking at food as a function of culture, of which religion comprises a very big part.

RELIGION AND FOOD PRACTICES
Religions provide a “morality of food”, in the sense that it mandates how food is to be eaten and shared. There are religions, for instance, that emphasize sharing of foods, such as Christianity, which has plenty of references and illustrations in the Bible as regards the sharing of food.

Religion likewise provides an explanation of how food comes to us, and provides the means and the object of thanksgiving. Hence, the religious usually say a prayer of thanksgiving before each meal. Jesus Christ, in his famous “The Lord’s Prayer”, says:

Give us this day our daily bread (Matthew 6:-13; Luke 11:2-4 ESV) 

Acknowledging that food is from God makes food a ‘blessing’, a received substance, and thus, thanksgiving must be rendered unto the Giver. Highly symbolic, thus, was the episode in the Book of Exodus, when “manna from heaven” rained down the Israelites, literally food that came from heaven.

Saying ‘grace’ before a meal is not a unique feature of Christianity. In Judaism, the Birkat Hamazon is uttered, a series of blessings that take the form of a prayer after meals. The scriptural source for the requirement to say birkat hamazon is Deuteronomy 8:10 "When you have eaten and are satisfied, you shall bless the LORD your God for the good land which He gave you".

In Islam, the "Bismillah ar-Rahman, ar-Raheem", a common religious expression meaning "In the name of God, Most Gracious, Most Merciful" is uttered before a meal. There are also counterparts of saying grace in Hinduism

Finally, even in Japan where religion is not organized, and people are non-religious, people say "Itadakimasu" before a meal, which means "I humbly receive"; the status of food as blessing is still implied.

Another food practice of everyday life, upon which materialist explanations can readily be advanced, is the ritual washing of hands. This is practiced by Judaism, Islam, and many other religions.
Likewise, religions emphasize virtues that favor sharing of food, i.e. compassion, charity, kindness, and goodness. It is considered impious to throw away food; parents tell their children not to waste food, coming as it is from God. Materialists, again, would look at the sharing of food (i.e. compassion, charity kindness) as a very rational function of religion, which is to distribute resources from the rich to the poor, and to provide a social safety net by which starvation can be prevented.

RELIGION AND HOW MUCH FOOD WE SHOULD EAT
Religion does not merely regulate the quality of food (i.e. what is eaten); it also has something to say about the quantity of food (i.e. how much is eaten).
In Christianity, over-indulgence in food is known as gluttony, and many writers have commented about it. St. Gregory the Great, a doctor of the Church, described five ways by which one can commit sin of gluttony, and corresponding biblical examples for each of them (Orby, 1875):

1. Eating before the time of meals in order to satisfy the palate. Biblical example: Jonathan eating a little honey, when his father Saul commanded no food to be taken before the evening. [1Sa 14:29]

2. Seeking delicacies and better quality of food to gratify the "vile sense of taste." Biblical example: When Israelites escaping from Egypt complained, "Who shall give us flesh to eat ? We remember the fish which we did eat in Egypt freely ; the cucumbers and the melons, and the leeks and the onions and the garlic," God rained fowls for them to eat but punished them 500 years later.[Num 11:4]

3. Seeking after sauces and seasonings for the enjoyment of the palate. Biblical example: Two sons of Eli the high priest made the sacrificial meat to be cooked in one manner rather than another. They were met with death.[1Sa 4:11]

4. Exceeding the necessary amount of food. Biblical example: One of the sins of Sodom was "fullness of bread."[Eze 16:49]

5. Taking food with too much eagerness, even when eating the proper amount, and even if the food is not luxurious.Biblical example: Esau selling his birthright for ordinary food of bread and pottage of lentils. His punishment was that the "profane person . . . who, for a morsel of meat sold his birthright," we learn that " he found no place for repentance, though he sought it

To recapitulate, St Gregory the Great said that one may succumb to the sin of gluttony by: 1. Time (when); 2. Quality; 3. Stimulants; 4. Quantity; 5. Eagerness

Most other religions frown on over-indulgence; there are many verses in the Koran condemning gluttony, and eastern religions that emphasize penance and asceticism are doubtless disapproving of behaviors.

In sum, religions set a limit of what is the acceptable amount of eating. Juxtaposing this limit with the virtues of generosity, giving, and kindness, it is easy to see how materialists can explain gluttony as sin: such an injunction favors the distribution of excess food among the people who do not have access to it.

On the other hand, there is also much symbolism in religious passages that make for plausible parallels with food, to the extent that it will also be easy to offer an idealist explanation on how food is regulated in terms of its quantity. As nourisher of our physical bodies, food is metaphor for material pleasures, and the ability to control our diets is seen as a sign of religious discipline.

FEASTING AND FASTING
In the first three arguments, we have discussed how religion affects the food of everyday life (what, how, and how much). On the other hand, religion has produced special occasions, and food is essentially the medium by which these occasions are celebrated or performed (i.e. when to eat a lot). These occasions are called feasts. It can be averred that most, if not all religions have feasts. On the other hand, the withholding of food is likewise a religious act, often commendable, and it is called fast (i.e. when not to eat). As regards feasts, Twiss (2008) introduces her subject:

Feasting is a universal human phenomenon. It is powerful and often transformative; through feasting, social identities are both enacted and altered, political competitions are undertaken, and ideologies are inculcated. Feasting can play a key role in constructing and validating social norms by valorizing innovative materials, concepts, and practices.

We see these food practices prominently in Christianity, where, as Bynum (1985) avers, “feasting and fasting are at the heart of the Christian tradition.” In Christianity, the major feast of Christmas is a time of celebration in many countries, accompanied with an abundance of food. In the Philippines, for instance, the Christmas season is at least a weeks-long festivity, heralded with numerous “Christmas parties”, a noche buena on Christmas eve and a media noche on New Year’s Eve.

In Islam, the Ramadan is a whole month of fasting, followed by a day of feasting, the Eid al Fitr.
Materialist explanations of feasts include the creation of opportunities to distribute proteins and other essential foods. For instance, Diskin (1978) and Greenberg (1981) have suggested that high-quality protein and vitamin-rich foods distributed during the cycles of festivals in the rural Mexican villages they studied may make substantial contributions to the diets of poor participants. Furthermore, the timing of the festivals seems to have been such that food distribution took place during periods when the population was most in need of protein and nutrients.

Other anthropologists trace feasts as occasions of thanking the gods and divine forces for harvest, with the hope of an abundant year to come. Also, the many social functions of a feast are well described in anthropological literature; they are “central arenas of social action that have had a profound impact on the course of historical transformations...they articulate and inculcate existing social categories, such as status, power, gender, and age.” (Dietler and Hayden, 2001). Still, some archaeologists suggest that feasting, with its emphasis on the consumption of large animals, may have actually contributed to the domestication of animals (Twiss, 2008).

Fasting, on the other hand, is invested with much symbolic meaning, but rational explanations have included the health benefits of caloric restriction. Moreover, some studies have looked into the health benefits of specific religious practices. For instamce, Sarri (2001) found that adherence to Greek Orthodox fasting periods contributes to an improvement in the blood lipid profile, including a decrease in total and LDL cholesterol, and a decrease in the LDL to HDL cholesterol ratio.

POSTSCRIPT: RELIGION IN FOOD IN A SECULAR, MODERN WORLD
Even with the apparent decline of religion as the dominant force in society, its roles on food has, in some ways persisted. “Food is the last bastion of culture” and perhaps this can be said too of religion. On the other hand, religion has been supplanted in some ways by other forces, such as medicine and the government.

 For instance, it can be seen that biomedicine has taken over religion as the prescriber of which foods to eat and which to avoid. Gluttony may have been dangerous to your soul, but today, obesity is dangerous to your health. The Bible cautions against drinking too much alcohol, but today it is the government that requires the placement of “drink moderately” on advertisements. Vegetarianism, once a religious decision, is now motivated by numerous health reasons.

Some aspects of religion in food, however, have been strengthened by other institutions. For instance, by explaining the health reasons for some religious proscriptions, they can be reinforced, such as the washing of hands. Also, governments with a sizeable Muslim population have actually standardized and regulated halal foods by establishing regulatory bodies. In the Philippines, the Islamic Da’wah Council of the Philippines, Inc., (IDCP) is the duly recognized Halal Certification and Accreditation Authority under G.R. No. 153888 dated July 09, 2003.

On the other hand, what began as religious institutions have become secularized, or are now used in non-religious contexts. Hunger strikes, for instance, are political acts that remain a potent weapon used by activists, most famously Mahatma Gandhi, and its power can be traced to its spiritual significance. Likewise, religious feasts are now celebrated as purely secular events. In the Philippines, this is seen in the Christmas holiday season, which is arguably the season during which the most amount (and variety) of food is consumed in the Philippines. A critical approach to Christmas would look at how politico-economic structures, such as commercial institutions, have helped perpetuate this tradition.

On a final note, the technological advances of the modern age is creating “new foods”, and it is interesting how the acceptance of these foods can still be seen in terms of religious proscriptions. It can be said that there is a “taboo on genetically modified foods”, and in spite of the advantages, the popular opposition against them remains strong and can we not harken back to Mary Douglas’ words and call these foods “taxonomic anomalies”? Indeed, nutritional anthropology is needed, more than ever, in light of these emerging issues.

CONCLUSION
In this paper, we have discussed how religion has shaped what we eat, how we eat, how much we eat, and when we eat more (and when we do not eat). Understanding food practices, that is, nutritional anthropology, must always involve an understanding of the various religions of a certain society. For as long as humans eat, food will be inextricably linked with religion, mediator and mediated by it, and even where the influence of religion has waned, we will always be told that we ought to eat, and for whenever and whatever we ought not to eat, and the voice will not be too far that says: “Thou shall not eat.”

REFERENCES
Bynum C (1985). Fast, Feast, and Flesh: The Religious Significance of Food to Medieval Women Representations No. 11 (Summer, 1985), pp. 1-25 University of California Press

Dietler and Hayden (2001). Digesting the feast—good to eat, good to drink, good to think: an introduction ,in: M. Dietler, B. Hayden (Eds.), Feasts: Archaeological and Ethnographic Perspectives on Food, Politics, and PowerSmithsonian Institution Press, Washington, D.C (2001), pp. 1–22

Diskin, M. (1978). Discussion. Symposium on Mexican Food Systems. 77th annual meeting of the American Anthropological Association, Los Angeles, Calif.

Douglas M (1966). Purity and Danger: An Analysis of Concepts of Pollution and Taboo. Routledge and Keegan Paul pp. 50-61

Greenberg, J.( 1981). Santiago's Sword. University of California Press, Berkeley, Calif.

Hadden, R. (2009) Food culture in the Pacific Islands.  Greenwood Publishing House, USA. pp. 25-35

Harris M (1988). Good to Eat: Riddles of Food and Culture

Mencher, Joan (1971) Comments on Alan Heston's 'An Approach to the Sacred Cow of India.' Current Anthropology 12:202-204.

Ohnuki-Tierney, Emiko (1993). Rice as Self: Japanese Identities through Time. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1993.

Sarri et al (2003). Effects of Greek Orthodox Christian church fasting on serum lipids and obesity. BMC Public Health 2003, 3:16

New Year and the marginalisation of native fruits in the Philippines

Three kinds of native fruits in Palawan: Even if they are rounded fruits, it is very
unlikely that Filipinos will have these in their New Year's Eve table

by Gideon Lasco, MD

Fruits come to mind as New Year's Eve celebrations loom, because they been part of the tradition of media noche or the New Year's Eve celebrations. Serving 12 rounded fruits, it is said, would bring prosperity for the 12 months of the coming year. In a Xinhua article, Malinao (2013) explains: 

This is a Chinese tradition in welcoming the New Year which the Filipinos have adopted. The Chinese, however, need to have only eight round fruits on the table because the number 8 signifies good luck. For Filipinos the belief is that the 12 round fruits represent 12 months of the year and assure good fortune to the family members all year round.

He adds that assembling this ensemble of fruits isn't difficult: "As a tropical country, it is not difficult in the Philippines to find round-shaped fruits such as oranges, watermelons, mangoes, pineapples, guavas, rhambutans (sic), jackfruits, pomelos and peaches."

Anthropologists have seen fruits as an important part of food culture.  In the Philippines, as in other parts of the world (cf. Manderson, 1987), fruits belonged to the 'cold' classification under a hot/cold categorisation, which implicates foods in illness causation and treatment. Tan (2008:85) writes: "Fruits are considered "cold" and therefore avoided in the morning, the coldest part of the day, with the belief this intensification of the cold condition could result in ailments like diarrhoea and an aggravation of respiratory problems such as pneumonia. Doubtless, this belief contributes to the making of the typical Filipino breakfast, which characteristically does not include fruits, but as looks very much like the rice-based lunch and dinner (Fernandez, 1994). 

There are also certain fruits that have particular beliefs. Eating guavas, for instance, was believed to cause appendicitis - a belief that has parallels in many countries, including the United States where tomato seeds and grape seeds are implicated instead of guavas. Likely impelled by this popular belief, a study by Engin and others (2011) concluded that "most of the people eat fruit seeds and plant residuals do not develop appendicitis generally", but this belief continues to be widely held by the popular sector. Of another fruit, santol, Alano (2008) writes in her column in Philippine Star: "We were mortally afraid of swallowing santol seeds because we were told that if we did, a santol tree would grow inside our stomach. With all the seeds we had swallowed, we would have grown an orchard!" 

There is much more about fruits to discuss in terms of various beliefs ascribed to particular ones, but I would like to dwell on what I consider as a more pressing concern: that of the marginalization of native fruits in the Philippines.

What are these native fruits?  First let me disclaim that the word "native" is not a botanical claim of endemicity, as surely, many of these fruits have actually come from elsewhere, given the Philippines' long history. Rather, I use the term 'native' to mean fruits that can actually grow in the country, and does not have to be imported from elsewhere. These fruits are too many to mention: the atis (sugar-apple; Annona squamosa), guyabano (soursop), langka (jackfruit), chico (sapodilla; Manilkara zapota), macula (Syzygium samarangense), duhat (Syzygium cumini), siniguelas (Spanish plum), and many more. The abundance of these fruits owes to the wealth of biodiversity in the country but also the heritage of international exchange, with some of these fruits coming from the Americas, as introduced by the Spanish colonial settlers.

When I was a schoolchild, I would see mangoes and santol sold as snacks in front of the school, accompanied by rock salt or bagoong (fish paste) as condiments. Bananas and jackfruits figure in snacks like turon, which were sold in the school canteen. Just a block away from our school, there were trees that had wild berries. We didn't have any name for them so we called them 'raspberries' because that was the closest thing we can identify them with. 

Fruits, by themselves and as ingredients, had many roles.

Today, however, these fruits have dwindled in importance. Though the fruity snacks can still be found, especially in rural areas, in many places, they have given way to junk foods, candies, among others. Moreover, it has become increasingly more difficult to find native fruits. Temperate fruits such as apples, oranges, grapes, are most prominent in supermarkets nowadays. Statements like "An apple a day keeps the doctor away" came with the Americanization of education, arguably further strengthening the place of these fruits in our imagination. At a time when apples and oranges were hard to get, they likewise functioned as "prestige foods" (Tan, 2008) - a perception that has persisted today even as their global scale of production and the instruments of globalisation have allowed these fruits to be distributed and sold in the Philippines at very affordable prices.

On the other hand, native fruits have been marginalized. With little demand for them, there was little impetus to conduct research on the fruits, and turn them into commercial varieties. Mangoes, perhaps owing to their sheer deliciousness, have not suffered this fate. However, ironically it is more expensive to buy local mangoes than imported apples or pears. On the other hand,  the dalanghita or dalandan, a citrus fruit which probably has virtually the same nutritional content as the orange, can be had for 20-30 pesos ($0.45-$0.70) per kilo even in Metro Manila - the same price as a single piece of orange. Yet, it is under-utilised, perhaps seen as a "poor man's orange". Whenever I could, I would drink a whole glass of pure, freshly-squeezed dalandan juice in the morning for a half the price of a bottled, artificially-sweetened juice drink!

From both a nutritional and an economic perspective, this disparity is unfortunate. For example, in Palawan, I discovered three kinds of fruits that I never even knew existed: the tabo, the aritum, and another fruit whose name escapes me at the moment (see the cover photo for this article). Harvested from the forests and with flavours rivalling that of the mangosteen, these fruits deserve a wider audience, not least of which because of their nutritional potential. Farmers would have an additional source of income if the fruits that just grow in land would grow in economic significance. 

Much has been said about our agricultural industry languishing, but there is little hope indeed if even the consumers would rather patronize the produce of other countries. We have to celebrate our fruits, not just seeing these fruits as part of New Year's Eve, but as a healthy part of our everyday diet. Scientific studies by our local scholars can advance this cause by demonstrating that the nutritional value of these fruits, not just an apple, can keep the doctor away. Perhaps it is not just the injunction against "cold" fruits in the morning that have discouraged people from buying fruits as part of their everyday diet, but the cost of it. But if only native fruits were to be made more available and affordable, then the population will given a health boost.

This is not entirely a lost cause. Spurred by a growing health consciousness or healthism (Crawford, 1980), the middle and upper classes are buying more varieties of native fruits, and this is evidenced by their proliferation in high-end supermarkets in Metro Manila. Coconut juice has entered the mainstream market as an everyday beverage, certainly a much better choice over those artificial "fruit juice drinks" - and a very sensible drink in a country that has a lot of coconuts. In Indonesia and Malaysia, however, I see jus jambu (guava juice), jus belimbing (starfruit juice), among others, in mall stores - a sign that these fruits are not quite as marginalised as they are in the Philippines. 

We have to take pride in our native fruits if we are to benefit from the nutritional and economic benefits they can give us. This involves, among others, the government prioritising research on these fruits, and looking at ways on how the educational system might have innocuously promoted foreign fruits as 'prestige foods', using them as examples in illustrations and drawings while failing to highlight our own botanical heritage. 

With these thoughts, I wish you a fruitful new year! 

REFERENCES

Crawford, R. (1980). Healthism and the medicalization of everyday life. International journal of health services, 10(3), 365-388.

Engin, O., Yildirim, M., Yakan, S., & Coskun, G. A. (2011). Can fruit seeds and undigested plant residuals cause acute appendicitis. Asian Pacific journal of tropical biomedicine, 1(2), 99-101.

Fernandez, D. (1994). Tikim: essays on Philippine food and culture. Manila: Anvil Publications.

Manderson, L. (1987). Hot-cold food and medical theories: overview and introduction. Social Science & Medicine, 25(4), 329-330.

Tan, M. L. (2008). Revisiting usog, pasma, kulam. Quezon City: UP Press.

NEW YEAR'S EVE TRADITIONS IN THE PHILIPPINES 

Part 1: Children jumping during New Year's Eve 

Part 2: Round fruits and the New Year

Part 3: Firecrackers and fireworks