“if it’s just calories that turn us on, why do we pay so much money for wines from burgundy, which have no more calories than an $8-bottle of red wine out of some crappy factory?” says schatzker.
“i think there’s so much more to it. and i think the experience of eating suggests that it just can’t possibly be that simple.”
brunstrom was intrigued by schatzker’s presentation but skeptical. “i went to see him at the end and basically said: ‘great talk, but i think you’re probably wrong. do you want to test it?’”
instead of sparking an argument, their differing opinions launched a four-year research project. as it turns out, the study supports schatzker’s original proposition: our mealtime decision-making is influenced, in part, by micronutrients.
scientists tend to think of food choice as being governed by a single factor, says brunstrom — whether an attraction to highly calorific foods or sweetness. but their research shows that it’s more nuanced than that.
“it demonstrates that food, cuisine, our interactions with food, are meaningful in the sense that it looks like we are seeking out complex interactions between micronutrients,” brunstrom explains.
“it’s a bit of a game changer, i suppose, because it makes us recognize what chefs might have known all along. but as scientists, it should make us recognize that there’s a hidden complexity to food choice that we need to understand.”
“animals are quite sophisticated,” says toronto-based author mark schatzker. “cows just don’t mindlessly munch on plants. they’re very picky.”
william west
/
afp via getty images