In
 1906 I went to the Arctic with the food tastes and beliefs of the 
average American. By 1918, after eleven years as an Eskimo among 
Eskimos, I had learned things which caused me to shed most of those 
beliefs. Ten years later I began to realize that what I had learned was 
going to influence materially the sciences of medicine and dietetics. 
However, what finally impressed the scientists and converted many during
 the last two or three years, was a series of confirmatory experiments 
upon myself and a colleague performed at Bellevue Hospital, New York 
City, under the supervision of a committee representing several 
universities and other organizations.
Not 
so long ago the following dietetic beliefs were common: To be healthy 
you need a varied diet, composed of elements from both the animal and 
vegetable kingdoms. You got tired of and eventually felt a revulsion 
against things if you had to eat them often. This latter belief was 
supported by stories of people who through force of circumstances had 
been compelled, for instance, to live for two weeks on sardines and 
crackers and who, according to the stories, had sworn that so long as 
they lived they never would touch sardines again. The Southerners had it
 that nobody can eat a quail a day for thirty days.
There
 were subsidiary dietetic views. It was desirable to eat fruits and 
vegetables, including nuts and coarse grains. The less meat you ate the 
better for you. If you ate a good deal of it, you would develop 
rheumatism, hardening of the arteries, and high blood pressure, with a 
tendency to breakdown of the kidneys – in short, premature old age. An 
extreme variant had it that you would live more healthy, happily, and 
longer if you became a vegetarian.
Specifically
 it was believed, when our field studies began, that without vegetables 
in your diet you would develop scurvy. It was a “known fact” that 
sailors, miners, and explorers frequently died of scurvy “because they 
did not have vegetables and fruits.” This was long before Vitamin C was 
publicized.
The 
addition of salt to food was considered either to promote health or to 
be necessary for health. This is proved by various yarns, such as that 
African tribes make war on one another to get salt; that minor campaigns
 of the American Civil War were focused on salt mines; and that all 
herbivorous animals are ravenous for salt. I do not remember seeing a 
critical appendix to any of these views, suggesting for instance, that 
Negro tribes also make war about things which no one ever said were 
biological essentials of life; that tobacco was a factor in Civil War 
campaigns without being a dietetic essential; and that members of the 
deer family in Maine which never have salt or show desire for it, are as
 healthy as those in Montana which devour quantities of it and are 
forever seeking more.
A 
belief I was destined to find crucial in my Arctic work, making the 
difference between success and failure, life and death, was the view 
that man cannot live on meat alone. The few doctors and dietitians who 
thought you could were considered unorthodox if not charlatans. The 
arguments ranged from metaphysics to chemistry: Man was not intended to 
be carnivorous – you knew that from examining his teeth, his stomach, 
and the account of him in the Bible. As mentioned, he would get scurvy 
if he had no vegetables in meat. The kidneys would be ruined by 
overwork. There would be protein poisoning and, in general hell to pay.
With
 these views in my head and, deplorably, a number of others like them, I
 resigned my position as assistant instructor in anthropology at Harvard
 to become anthropologist of a polar expedition. Through circumstances 
and accidents which are not a part of the story, I found myself that 
autumn the guest of the Mackenzie River Eskimos.
The 
Hudson’s Bay Company, whose most northerly post was at Fort McPherson 
two hundred miles to the south had had little influence on the Eskimos 
during more than half a century; for it was only some of them who made 
annual visits to the trading post; and then they purchased no food but 
only tea, tobacco, ammunition and things of that sort. But in 1889 the 
whaling fleet had begun to cultivate these waters and for fifteen years 
there had been close association with sometimes as many as a dozen ships
 and four to five hundred men wintering at Herschel Island, just to the 
west of the delta. During this time a few of the Eskimos had learned 
some English and perhaps one in ten of them had grown to a certain 
extent fond of white man’s foods.
But 
now the whaling fleet was gone because the bottom had dropped out of the
 whalebone market, and the district faced an old-time winter of fish and
 water. The game, which might have supplemented the fish some years 
earlier, had been exterminated or driven away by the intensive hunting 
that supplied meat to the whaling fleet. There was a little tea, but not
 nearly enough to see the Eskimos through the winter – this was the only
 element of the white man’s dietary of which they were really fond and 
the lack of which would worry them. So I was facing a winter of fish 
without tea. For the least I could do, an uninvited guest, was to 
pretend a dislike for it.
The 
issue of fish and water against fish and tea was, in any case, to me six
 against a half dozen. For I had had a prejudice against fish all my 
life. I had nibbled at it perhaps once or twice a year at course 
dinners, always deciding that it was as bad as I thought. This was pure 
psychology of course, but I did not realize it.
I 
was in a measure adopted into an Eskimo family the head of which knew 
English. He had grown up as a cabin boy on a whaling ship and was called
 Roxy, though his name was Memoranna. It was early September, we were 
living in tents, the days were hot but it had begun to freeze during the
 nights, which were now dark for six to eight hours.
The 
community of three or four families, fifteen or twenty individuals, was 
engaged in fishing. With long poles, three or four nets were shoved out 
from the beach about one hundred yards apart. When the last net was out 
the first would be pulled in, with anything from dozens to hundreds of 
fish, mostly ranging in weight from one to three pounds, and including 
some beautiful salmon trout. From knowledge of other white men the 
Eskimos consider these to be most suitable for me and would cook them 
specially, roasting them against the fire. They themselves ate boiled 
fish.
Trying
 to develop an appetite, my habit was to get up soon after daylight, say
 four o’clock, shoulder my rifle, and go off after breakfasts on a hunt 
south across the rolling prairie, though I scarcely expected to find any
 game. About the middle of the afternoon I would return to camp. 
Children at play usually saw me coming and reported to Roxy’s wife, who 
would then put a fresh salmon trout to roast. When I got home I would 
nibble at it and write in my diary what a terrible time I was having.
Against
 my expectation, and almost against my will, I was beginning to like the
 baked salmon trout when one day of perhaps the second week I arrived 
home without the children having seen me coming. There was no baked fish
 ready but the camp was sitting round troughs of boiled fish. I joined 
them and, to my surprise, liked it better than the baked. There after 
the special cooking ceased, and I ate boiled fish with the Eskimos.
Part II
By 
midwinter I had left my cabin-boy host and, for the purposes of 
anthropological study, was living with a less sophisticated family at 
the eastern edge of the Mackenzie delta. Our dwelling was a house of 
wood and earth, heated and lighted with Eskimo-style lamps. They burned 
seal or whale oil, mostly white whale from a hunt of the previous spring
 when the fat had been stored in bags and preserved, although the lean 
meat had been eaten. Our winter cooking however, was not done over the 
lamps but on a sheet-iron stove which had been obtained from whalers. 
There were twenty-three of us living in one room, and there were 
sometimes as many as ten visitors. The floor was then so completely 
covered with sleepers that the stove had to be suspended from the 
ceiling. The temperature at night was round 60*F. The ventilation was 
excellent through cold air coming up slowly from below by way of a trap 
door that was never closed and the heated air going out by a ventilator 
in the roof.
Everyone
 slept completely naked – no pajama or night shirts. We used cotton or 
woolen blankets which had been obtained from the whalers and from the 
Hudson’s Bay Company.
In 
the morning, about seven o’clock, winter-caught fish, frozen so hard 
that they would break like glass, were brought in to lie on the floor 
till they began to soften a little. One of the women would pinch them 
every now and then until, when she found her finger indented them 
slightly, she would begin preparations for breakfast. First she cut off 
the head and put them aside to be boiled for the children in the 
afternoon (Eskimos are fond of children, and heads are considered the 
best part of the fish). Next best are the tails, which are cut off and 
saved for the children also. The woman would then slit the skin along 
the back and also along the belly and getting hold with her teeth, would
 strip the fish somewhat as we peel a banana, only sideways where we 
peel bananas, endways.
Thus
 prepared, the fish were put on dishes and passed around. Each of us 
took one and gnawed it about as an American does corn on the cob. An 
American leaves the cob; similarly we ate the flesh from the outside of 
the fish, not touching the entrails. When we had eaten as much as we 
chose, we put the rest on a tray for dog feed.
After
 breakfast all the men and about half the women would go fishing, the 
rest of the women staying at home to keep house. About eleven o’clock we
 came back for a second meal of frozen fish just like the breakfast. At 
about four in the afternoon the working day was over and we came home to
 a meal of hot boiled fish.
Also
 we came home to a dwelling so heated by the cooking that the 
temperature would range from 85* to 100*F. or perhaps even higher – more
 like our idea of a Turkish bath than a warm room. Streams of 
perspiration would run down our bodies, and the children were kept busy 
going back and forth with dippers of cold water of which we naturally 
drank great quantities.
Just
 before going to sleep we would have a cold snack of fish that had been 
left over from dinner. Then we slept seven or eight hours and the 
routine of the day began once more.
After
 some three months as a guest of the Eskimos I had acquired most of 
their food tastes. I had to agree that fish is better boiled than cooked
 any other way, and that the heads (which we occasionally shared with 
the children) were the best part of the fish. I no longer desired 
variety in the cooking, such as occasional baking – I preferred it 
always boils if it was cooked. I had become as fond of raw fish as if I 
had been a Japanese. I like fermented (therefore slightly acid) whale 
oil with my fish as well as ever I liked mixed vinegar and olive oil 
with a salad. But I still had two reservations against Eskimo practice; I
 did not eat rotten fish and I longed for salt with my meals.
There
 were several grades of decayed fish. The August catch had been 
protected by longs from animals but not from heat and was outright 
rotten. The September catch was mildly decayed. The October and later 
catches had been frozen immediately and were fresh. There was less of 
the August fish than of any other and, for that reason among the rest, 
it was a delicacy – eaten sometimes as a snack between meals, sometimes 
as a kind of dessert and always frozen, raw.
In 
midwinter it occurred to me to philosophize that in our own and foreign 
lands taste for a mild cheese is somewhat plebeian; it is at least a 
semi-truth that connoisseurs like their cheeses progressively stronger. 
The grading applies to meats, as in England where it is common among 
nobility and gentry to like game and pheasant so high that the average 
Midwestern American or even Englishman of a lower class, would call them
 rotten.
I 
knew of course that, while it is good form to eat decayed milk products 
and decayed game, it is very bad form to eat decayed fish. I knew also 
that the view of our populace that there are likely to be “ptomaines” in
 decaying fish and in the plebeian meats; but it struck me as an 
improbable extension of the class-consciousness that ptomaines would 
avoid the gentleman’s food and attack that of a commoner.
These
 thoughts led to a summarizing query; If it is almost a mark of social 
distinction to be able to eat strong cheeses with a straight face and 
smelly birds with relish, why is it necessarily a low taste to be fond 
of decaying fish? On that basis of philosophy, though with several 
qualms, I tried the rotten fish one day, and if memory servers, like it 
better than my first taste of Camembert. During the next weeks I became 
fond of rotten fish.
About
 the fourth month of my first Eskimo winter I was looking forward to 
every meal (rotten or fresh), enjoying them, and feeling comfortable 
when they were over. Still I kept thinking the boiled fish would taste 
better if only I had salt. From the beginning of my Eskimo residence I 
had suffered from this lack. On one of the first few days, with the 
resourcefulness of a Boy Scout, I had decided to make myself some salt, 
and had boiled sea water till there was left only a scum of brown 
powder. If I had remembered as vividly my freshman chemistry as I did 
the books about shipwrecked adventurers, I should have know in advance 
that the sea contains a great many chemicals besides sodium chloride, 
among them iodine. The brown scum tasted bitter rather than salty. A 
better chemist could no doubt have refined the product. I gave it up, 
partly through the persuasion of my host, the English-speaking Roxy.
The 
Mackenzie Eskimos, Roxy told me, believe that what is good for grown 
people is good for children and enjoyed by them as soon as they get used
 to it. Accordingly they teach the use of tobacco when a child is very 
young. It then grows to maturity with the idea that you can’t get along 
without tobacco. But, said Roxy, the whalers have told that many whites 
get along without it, and he had himself seen white men who never use 
it, while the few white women, wives of captains, none used tobacco. 
(This, remember, was in 1906.)
Now 
Roxy had heard that white people believe that salt is good for, and even
 necessary for children, so they begin early to add salt to the child’s 
food. That child then would grow up with the same attitude toward salt 
as an Eskimo has toward tobacco. However, said Roxy, since we Eskimos 
were mistaken in thinking tobacco so necessary, may it be that the white
 men are mistaken about salt? Pursuing the argument, he concluded that 
the reason why all Eskimos dislike salted food and all white men like it
 was not racial but due to custom. You could then, break the salt habit 
as easily as the tobacco habit and you would suffer no ill result beyond
 the mental discomfort of the first few days or weeks.
Roxy
 did not know, but I did as an anthropologist, that in pre-Columbian 
times salt was unknown or the taste of it disliked and the use of it 
avoided through much of North and South America. It may possibly be true
 that the carnivorous Eskimos in whose language the word salty, 
mamaitok, is synonymous with with evil-tasting, disliked salt more 
intensely than those Indians who were partly herbivorous. Nevertheless, 
it is clear that the salt habit spread more slowly through the New World
 from the Europeans than the tobacco habit through Europe from the 
Indians. Even today there are considerable areas, for instance in the 
Amazon basin, where the natives still abhor salt. Not believing that the
 races differ in their basic natures, I felt inclined to agree with Roxy
 that the practice of slating food is with us a social inheritance and 
the belief in its merits a part of our folklore.
Through
 this philosophizing I was somewhat reconciled to going without salt, 
but I was nevertheless, overjoyed when one day Ovayuak, my new host in 
the eastern delta, came indoors to say that a dog team was approaching 
which he believed to be that of Ilavinirk, a man who had worked with 
whalers and who possessed a can of salt. Sure enough, it was Ilavinirk, 
and he was delighted to give me the salt, a half-pound baking-powder can
 about half full, which he said he had been carrying around for two or 
three years, hoping sometime to meet someone who would like it for a 
present. He seemed almost as pleased to find that I wanted the salt as I
 was to get it. I sprinkled some on my boiled fish, enjoyed it 
tremendously, and wrote in my diary that it was the best meal I had had 
all winter. Then I put the can under my pillow, in the Eskimo way of 
keeping small and treasured things. But at the next meal I had almost 
finished eating before I remembered the salt. Apparently then my longing
 for it had been what you might call imaginary. I finished without salt,
 tried it at one or two meals during the next few days and thereafter 
left it untouched. When we moved camp the salt remained behind.
After
 the return of the sun I made a journey of several hundred miles to the 
ship Narwhal which, contrary to our expectations of the late summer, had
 really come in and wintered at Herschel Island. The captain was George 
P. Leavitt, of Portland, Maine. For the few days of my visit I enjoyed 
the excellent New England cooking, but when I left Herschel Island I 
returned without reluctance to the Eskimo meals of fish and cold water. 
It seemed to me that, mentally and physically, I had never been in 
better health in my life.
.jpg)
Part III
During
 the first few months of my first year in the Arctic, I acquired, though
 I did not at the time fully realize it, the munitions of fact and 
experience which have within my own mind defeated those views of 
dietetics reviewed at the beginning of this article. I could be healthy 
on a diet of fish and water. The longer I followed it the better I liked
 it, which meant, at least inferentially and provisionally, that you 
never become tired of your food if you have only one thing to eat. I did
 not get scurvy on the fish diet nor learn that any of my fish-eating 
friends ever had it. Nor was the freedom from scurvy due to the fish 
being eaten raw – we proved that later. (What it was due to we shall 
deal with in the second article of this series.) There were certainly no
 signs of hardening of the arteries and high blood pressure, of 
breakdown of the kidneys or of rheumatism.
These
 months on fish were the beginning of several years during which I lived
 on an exclusive meat diet. For I count in fish when I speak of living 
on meat, using “meat” and “meat diet” more as a professor of 
anthropology than as the editor of a housekeeping magazine. The term in 
this article and in like scientific discussions refers to a diet from 
which all things of the vegetable kingdom are absent.
To 
the best of my estimate then, I have lived in the Arctic for more than 
five years exclusively on meat and water. (This was not, of course, one 
five-year stretch, but an aggregate of that much time during ten years.)
 One member of my expeditions, Storker Storkersen, lived on an exclusive
 meat diet for about the same length of time while there are several who
 have lived on it from one to three years. These have been of many 
nationalities and of three races – ordinary European whites; natives of 
the Cape Verde Islands, who had a large percentage of Negro blood; and 
natives of the South Sea Islands. Neither from experience with my own 
men nor from what I have heard of similar cases do I find any racial 
difference. There are marked individual differences.
The 
typical method of breaking a party into a meat diet is that three of 
five of us leave in midwinter a base camp which has nearly or quite the 
best type of European mixed diet that money and forethought can provide.
 The novices have been told that it is possible to live on meat alone. 
We warn them that it is hard to get used to for the first few weeks, but
 assure them that eventually they will grow to like it and that any 
difficulties in changing diets will be due to their imagination.
These
 assertions the men will believe to a varying degree. I have a feeling 
that in the course of breaking in something like twenty individuals; two
 or three young men believed me completely, and that this belief 
collaborated strongly with their youth and adaptability in making them 
take readily to the meat.
Usually
 I think, the men believe that what I tell of myself is true for me 
personally, but that I am peculiar, a freak – that a normal person will 
not react similarly, and that they are going to be normal and have an 
awful time. Their past experience seems to tell them that if you eat one
 thing every day you are bound to tire of it. In the back of their minds
 there is also what they have read and heard about the necessity for a 
varied diet. They have specific fears of developing the ailments which 
they have heard of as caused by meat or prevented by vegetables.
We 
secure our food in the Arctic by hunting and in midwinter there is not 
enough good hunting light. Accordingly we carry with us from the base 
camp provisions for several weeks, enough to take us into the long days.
 During this time, as we travel away from shore, we occasionally kill a 
seal or a polar bear and eat their meat along with our groceries. Our 
men like these as an element of a mixed diet as well as you do beef or 
mutton.
We 
are not on rations. We eat all we want, and we feed the dogs what we 
think is good for them. When the traveling conditions are right we 
usually have two big meals a day, morning and evening, but when we are 
storm bound or delayed by open water we eat several meals to pass the 
time away. At the end of four, six or eight weeks at sea, we have used 
up all our food. We do not try to save a few delicacies to eat with the 
seal and bear, for experience has proved that such things are only 
tantalizing.
Suddenly,
 then we are on nothing but seal. For while our food at sea averages ten
 percent polar bear there may be months in which we don’t see a bear. 
The men go at the seal loyally; they are volunteers and whatever the 
suffering, they have bargained for it and intend to grin and bear it. 
For a day or two they eat square meals. Then the appetite begins to flag
 and they discover as they had more than half expected, that for them 
personally it is going to be a hard pull or a failure. Some own up that 
they can’t eat, while others pretend to have good appetites, enlisting 
the surreptitious help of a dog to dispose of their share. In extreme 
cases, which are usually those of the middle-aged and conservative they 
go two or three days practically or entirely without eating. We had no 
weighing apparatus; but I take it that some have lost anything from ten 
to twenty pounds, what with the hard work on empty stomachs. They become
 gloomy and grouchy and, as I once wrote, “They begin to say to each 
other, and sometimes to me, things about their judgment in joining a 
polar expedition that I cannot quote.”
But 
after a few days even the conservatives begin to nibble at the seal 
meat, after a few more they are eating a good deal of it, rather under 
protest and at the end of three or four weeks they are eating square 
meals, though still talking about their willingness to give a soul or 
right arm for this or that. Amusingly, or perhaps instructively, they 
often long for ham and eggs or corned beef when, according to theory, 
they ought to be longing for vegetables and fruits. Some of them do 
hanker particularly for things like sauerkraut or orange juice; but more
 usually it is for hot cakes and syrup or bread and butter.
There
 are two ways in which to look at an abrupt change of diet – how 
difficult it is to get used to what you have to eat and how hard it is 
to be deprived of things you are used to and like. From the second 
angle, I take it to be physiologically significant that we have found 
our people, when deprived, to long equally for things which have been 
considered necessities of health, such as salt; for things where a drug 
addiction is considered to be involved, such as tobacco; and for items 
of that class of so-called staple foods, such as bread.
It 
has happened on several trips, and with an aggregate of perhaps twenty 
men, that they have had to break at one time their salt, tobacco, and 
bread habits. I have frequently tried the experiment of asking which 
they would prefer; salt for their meal, bread with it, or tobacco for an
 after-dinner smoke. In nearly every case the men have stopped to 
consider, nor do I recall that they were ever unanimous.
When
 we are returning to the ship after several months on meat and water, I 
usually say that the steward will have orders to cook separately for 
each member of the party all he wants of whatever he wants. Especially 
during the last two or three days, there is a great deal of talk among 
the novices in the part about what the choices are to be. One man wants a
 big dish of mashed potatoes and gravy; another a gallon of coffee and 
bread and butter; a third perhaps wants a stack of hot cakes with syrup 
and butter.
On 
reaching the ship each does get all he wants of what he wants. The food 
tastes good, although not quite so superlative as they had imagined. 
They have said they are going to eat a lot and they do. Then they get 
indigestion, headache, feel miserable, and within a week, in nine cases 
out of ten of those who have been on meat six months or over, they are 
willing to go back to meat again. If a man does not want to take part in
 a second sledge journey it is usually for a reason other than the 
dislike of meat.
Still,
 as just implied, the verdict depends on how long you have been on the 
diet. If at the end of the first ten days our men could have been 
miraculously rescued from the seal and brought back to their varied 
foods, most of them would have sworn forever after that they were about 
to die when rescued, and they would have vowed never to taste seal again
 – vows which would have been easy to keep for no doubt in such cases 
the thought of seal, even years later, would have been accompanied by a 
feeling of revulsion. If a man has been on meat exclusively for only 
three or four months he may or may not be reluctant to go back to it 
again. But if the period has been six months or over, I remember no one 
who was unwilling to go back to meat. Moreover, those who have gone 
without vegetables for an aggregate of several years usually thereafter 
eat a larger percentage of meat than your average citizen, if they can 
afford it.
