To celebrate a birthday, I recently ate dinner at a restaurant known as one of the best in town. I looked forward to the meal, confident that it would be delicious.

However, the lamb that I ordered turned out to be loaded with salt, lots of it. Although lamb is my favorite meat, I sent the dish back. I could not continue to eat it without driving my blood pressure skyward.

The server found no problem in my refusal of the ordered dish. However, the manager came to our table to find out just why I was dissatisfied.

I was then allowed to choose a replacement meal. Unfortunately, this meal did not meet my taste expectations either, but I was not about to make an issue of it.

This marked only the second time in my life that I have ever rejected a restaurant meal. The previous time was many years ago when I sent back a lobster that just did not taste right.

Usually, I am prepared to accept anything that looks good enough to order, though, like everybody else, I not infrequently find the food not nearly so appetizing as the menu made it look.

With the passage of age, I have found some of my tastes changing. My biggest gripe with restaurants, in general, has become large portions. I object to them, not just because of waste, but because they look so unappetizing to me. Only a lion or a tiger should be served that much.

I relish small helpings that look appetizing on your plate and never leave you overfed. Few restaurants will conform to my desires, however: instead they cater to our American habit of eating too much. Restaurants presumably fear protest or loss of profit margin if they serve smaller portions.

I also find many restaurant meals overpriced. Others may accuse me of having a pre-inflationary mentality. If so, they are correct, but I still cannot bring myself to spend a lot of money on what may well prove an unsatisfactory meal.

The French, the Italians, the Chinese and others have taught at least some of us Americans their secrets of healthful eating. They know how not to eat too much of any single food but to balance quantities among various foods.

They also practice using meat as a garnish, a small portion of the overall meal rather than its dominant element. Most of the rest of the world would be overwhelmed by steak houses or all-you-can-eat other buffets.

However, I reject attempts, however loving, to restrict favorite foods of mine that may not be judged favorably by nutritionists. Nitpicking in favor of approved foods does not sit well with me.

I believe in a statute of limitations whereby at age 80 I should not have to scruple. If I have lasted this long, my eating habits cannot be all that bad. After all, in my childhood I survived many a meal of Spam and Chef Boyardee spaghetti.

And I cooked for myself during at least one year of bachelorhood. That’s when I employed culinary skills impressive to me, despite the domestic disapproval that they provoke on those rare occasions when I cook dinner nowadays.

Are any foods likely to shorten my life now? Or to lengthen it appreciably?  I doubt it.

Fortunately, I eat well, even without placing priority on extending longevity. Living with someone who rates as an excellent cook takes care of these concerns. We don’t eat expensively but, thanks to her careful planning and food preparation, we do eat well.

Would that all of my age peers could eat well. Altogether too many of them must settle for meals that will hardly ever delight their taste buds.

Especially, I feel for men who live alone in later life, either because they have never married or because their spouse has died. Too many of these men do not know how to cook. And this poses a serious threat to their health.

The writer Michael Pollan, perhaps today’s ranking guru on the subject of eating, inspires me with his approach. As a handy guide, he offers a seven-word mantra: “Eat food. Not too much. Mostly plants.”

As to his own practice, he summarizes his approach in three pithy sentences. “I don’t eat alone. I eat slowly. I eat at a table.”

These practices sound simple but they get at much of what’s wrong with contemporary eating. Adopting these three would go far to improve our well- being.

Pollan’s case, by the way, can be found in his new book “In Defense of Food: an Eater’s Manifesto.” If you can stomach opinions that go against convention, I recommend this author’s strongly held views.

But I warn you: a writer who holds that most of what we eat is not food, and most of the way we do it is not eating, can cause more than intestinal discomfort.

Richard Griffin