I just finished "In Defense of Food" by Michael Pollan. I found the book to be simultaneously enlightening and enraging.
On the enlightening side, it was full of fascinating facts about human food consumption and the food industry (e.g. Research suggests that Americans tend to judge when a meal is complete by external cues, like their plate being empty. Many other cultures tend to judge when a meal is complete by internal cues, like their stomach being "almost full"). I learned a boat-load of information that I will never forget.
On the enraging side, the author relies heavily on the "noble savage" myth (i.e. ancient cultures were more peaceful and healthier than modern humans) that I think Steven Pinker debunked quite well in his book "The Blank Slate." In Pollan's book, the myth takes the form of "eating the foods of one hundred years ago is the path to health." Total rubbish in my opinion. Sure, growing your own garden and eating locally raised food guarantees no creepy unpronounceable ingredients. But the author ignores the ugly fact (and trust me, I am no fan of Monsanto) that without factory farming, vast swaths of the world's population would have nothing to eat, and many cases of food poisoning have come from eating organic because of the lack of regulation. Before you think I am some corporate, republican monster, I try to eat organic and I am a vegetarian. But I do not like to see my side, like this author, come across as intellectual elitists. Explain the benefits of eating organic, locally grown food, but also admit it has flaws, darn it!