The article, “Why “Everything in Moderation” Doesn’t Work” by Jonathan Ross, is a very thought-provoking article. It details the flaws behind the oversimplification of moderation, how that issue affects our relationship with food, and the false nature of the term superfood. This article hit rather close to home for me, my fiancé was recently diagnosed with diabetes during a recent hospital stay and we have been attending diabetes courses to understand what exactly this means for him. The two instructors are a dietician and a nutritionist, and the one thing that they repeat to everyone, multiple times, is that they can eat anything they want as long as it is in moderation. I had never thought too much on this term, just went with the general idea of not eating an excess of anything. I am guilty of thinking of food in terms of good or bad choices, many consumers are these days, but that thinking is flawed. Categorizing food as good or bad can cultivate an unhealthy relationship with food that does us more harm than good as consumers. Since my fiancé was diagnosed we have been watching our nutritional intake very carefully and trying to pursue a healthier lifestyle. The proposed diet is something that I could not see myself doing. I like to eat healthy foods, I have gotten used to it and whenever I eat unhealthy or heavy greasy food I end up feeling sick. I would say that my definition of moderation does need some work though, I do not think I am at risk of chronic disease, but it is very easy to head in that direction. Consumers are constantly bombarded with ads centered around junk food and it is very easy to rationalize moderation to oneself as the article demonstrates. I plan to pursue this aspect of consumer health further as it could be beneficial for not only myself, but also for my fiancé. I believe the best place to start would be to keep a food journal for myself and see exactly what I am eating everyday as this will allow me to monitor if I am actually practicing moderation in a healthy form or not.