Hedonist Utilitarianism and Vitalist Utilitarianism

The concept of Utility does not entail a specific End for which something is used.  Thus, accurately reflected in the 'Hedon' as the fundamental unit of the calculus of some contemporary versions, Benthamist-Millist Utilitarianism is, more precisely, Hedonist Utilitarianism.  In contrast, as has been previously discussed, in what can be called Vitalist Utilitarianism, Health, not Pleasure or Happiness, is the End, towards which something can be Healthful or Harmful, with the former subdivided into Essential and Inessential, and with Inconsequential a third main possibility.  Now, Pleasure is an Atomist concept in Hedonist Utilitarianism, while Health is Organicist, a contrast that is reflected in the determinations of Utility in the two doctrines.  In the Hedonist variety, the Utility of something is independent of that of other things, whereas in the Vitalist variety, it is not.  For example, according to HU, a meal is Pleasurable in itself, but according to VU, factors potentially affecting the enjoyment of it include whether or not one exercises later on, whether or not one has company while eating, and whether or not there are high levels of hunger in the society.  These are not far-fetched scenarios, so they indicate that VU has greater fidelity to actuality than does HU, or, in other words, has greater Utility.