Holiday Digressions by John Harvey Kellogg

Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association · Battle Creek, Mich. · Dec 1, 1874

Holiday Digressions.

By John Harvey Kellogg

Last month we offered a few thoughts respecting “Thanksgiving Dinners.” The same will apply to Christmas and New Year's dinners with equal force. We do not intend to recapitulate those remarks, however, but wish to call attention to some further considerations of moment which have a bearing upon the subject of diet.

Every really sincere and thorough-going reformer has often noticed with regret the tendency so frequently manifested by those who call themselves hygienists, to allow themselves to make occasional digressions from what they know to be the proper mode of action as relating to diet. Especially is this tendency manifested on festive occasions in celebration of the holidays. As an illustration, we will suppose a case, the exact counterpart of which has often fallen under our immediate notice, in which the whole family have for some months wholly discarded the use of animal food in any form. As the result, they have experienced an increase of mental and physical vigor, and have enjoyed freedom from sickness. Sufficient time has elapsed to allow the usual changes in the system consequent upon the change of diet to be fully completed, so that there can be no physical necessity for the recurrence to use of meat. So, also, the use of cakes and rich pastry has been likewise abandoned with manifest benefit to health, and the taste has been in a good measure restored to a normal, healthy condition. But upon the advent of some popular holiday or anniversary, a departure is made from the “better way” which has proved to be so much superior to the unwholesome and pernicious mode of life for which it was substituted. The parents feel as though their duty to their children demanded that they should in some manner recognize the day which has been anticipated so eagerly; and, flattering themselves that “just this once” will do no harm, they make provision for a holiday feast very much like those in which they indulged before becoming enlightened upon the relation of diet to health, and spread before their family a tempting array of “mince pies,” “short-cakes,” roast beef, and kindred dishes. All indulge their appetites without restraint, regardless of the slight remonstrances which offended stomachs may offer.

Let us consider the results of this course. Are they so harmless as was unwisely anticipated? By no means. Both physical and moral injury of a most serious character has been wrought. We will notice, first, the physical results.

PHYSICAL EFFECTS.

As the result of indulging in the use of the highly seasoned and stimulating viands once discarded, the old tastes are renewed. Old appetites which had been overcome, are revived in all their tyranny. The simple food, unadulterated with irritating condiments is rendered insipid, when contrasted with the pungent, savory compounds which, though tempting and palatable, are well known to be injurious. In short, the whole disagreeable experience which made the escape from the thralldom of appetite so arduous at first, must be again renewed if the individual would re-instate himself in the way which reason and experience have taught him is the best.

Again, the direct damage to the vital organs of the system is not inconsiderable. The task of digesting unwholesome food imposed upon the stomach is a stupendous one, and impairs its function. And, furthermore, the extraordinary labor of eliminating from the body the irritating foreign matters introduced, results in more or less damage to the organs of excretion.

The notion so commonly entertained that an occasional departure from dietetic rectitude cannot result in any material damage, is a wholly mistaken one. The truth in the matter is that these occasional departures are often more fatal than habitual transgression. Thus, it is well known that individuals who are habitual opium-eaters often take, several times a day, doses of the drug a single one of which would be surely fatal if given to the same individual after an abstinence of a few weeks. The same principle holds true with reference to tobacco and other poisons, and is readily explained by certain well-established physiological laws. Just so it is in matters of diet. The system, after a time, learns to tolerate substances which from their nature are of necessity unusable, and hence deleterious, but which seem to lose their injurious properties solely from this toleration. But when they have been once discarded, they cannot be again renewed without producing the full effect of their injurious qualities.

MORAL EFFECTS

These are quite as important as the physical effects, though less noticeable. It is most apparent in the children. Aside from the detriment to morals which always results from impairment of physical health, the actual and immediate damage to the conscientiousness of a child is almost irreparable. Let us view the case as it really is. By an infinite amount of patient labor the little ones have been weaned from the use of those articles which their infant tastes had so early learned to love. Hundreds of times have they been told that pepper and spice and rich pies and cakes are bad, and not fit to be eaten, although the assertion has always seemed to them a very hard saying. As many times have they been assured that meat is an article which was never designed by the Creator for the food of man; and they are told of the great liability of animal food to disease, and contamination with poisonous products. They are, also, again and again assured that simple food is not only more healthful, but also more palatable than the harmful food commonly used, and that they will find that oatmeal pudding is every way superior to beef-steak or roasted turkey.

By the time they have come to partially believe these oft-repeated statements, Christmas, New Year's, or the birthday of one of the little ones approaches. Of course all are jubilant at the thought of “something good” to eat on the expected day; and they are assured by their parents that they shall have “something good.” The day arrives and they receive such a dinner as we have already described. Now what must be the conclusion of those children? Their sanguine minds will not fail to arrive at the thorough conviction that their parents do not themselves believe a single word of what they have been teaching them; for have they not plainly declared that pies, cakes, rich sauces, and meats are better than simple food healthfully prepared? The answer is obvious, and the effect certain.

Too much cannot be said respecting the importance of constantly instilling into the minds of children, by example, as well as precept, the great truths of health reform. If a feast is to be prepared, in celebration of any day or event, make it “rich” with wholesome food. Does not the vegetable kingdom supply an abundance of truly wholesome “good” things? Surely no one could wish for more delicate or toothsome articles than the ingenious housewife can provide without the slightest transgression of the laws of hygiene. A few varieties of foreign fruits and nuts, added to our domestic productions, would make a “feast of fat things” which would tempt an epicure.—J. H. K. in Health Reformer.