I found this interview to be very frustrating, as Brook seemed to allow that author to throw around his fancy new word "nutritionism" without adequately explaining his position on the concept. While he complained about "treating foods as if the sum of their nutrients were all that mattered", he never was really forced to say why that was bad, or what *does* matter about food if not the nutrients. I would imagine "taste" might be an appropriate answer, but it was never mentioned. Overall, this seemed like more of a general "we're so absurd about food" rant than it was a clear (or new) position on anything. If there was a point, I missed it.