While a good book, this was no "Omnivore's Dilemma." "In Defense of Food" lacked the thoughtfulness, direction, and even-handedness of "Dilemma." One of the best things about the earlier book was that it presented a measured approach to food. Pollan went out and did his own investigations, talked to farmers, and actually ate the food that he was discussing. None of that is present in "Food" and it results in a book that feels rushed and impersonal. "Food" additionally falls into the trap of many books of this nature in that it both cites and berates studies, but gives no reasoning as to why each study falls into the good or bad category. This leaves the reader to simply believe Pollan because of who he is, which does not make for good science nor informative reading. While I have seemingly torn this book apart, it is still interesting and, if separated from its far superior big brother "Omnivore's Dilemma," it gets a four star review.