Food fights
The government tries to improve the nation’s eating habits
Consumer labelling
Jun 16th 2011 | NEW YORK
Jun 16th 2011 | NEW YORK
Advertisement
Over the past five days
Over the past seven days
Advertisement
Subscribe to The Economist's free e-mail newsletters and alerts.
Subscribe to The Economist's latest article postings on Twitter
See a selection of The Economist's articles, events, topical videos and debates on Facebook.
Readers' comments
Sort:
No government can substitute for proper parenting.
Also, as well intentioned as a government nutrition initiative may be, is it really the business of the government to influence our habits like this?
@Shubrook
I will not fault the government for taking initiative in efforts to curb one of America's biggest health problems. But I will stand by your side forever faulting parenting efforts that truly created the problem and refuse to solve it.
Sorry to offend. The article almost took me to conclude that the American is a dumb when coming to food.
They would choose some foods when a "smart choice" label shows up, even it's on a jar of peanut butter.
They need their government to spend huge amount of public money (again and again) to tell them........WTF? Vegetables and fruits are important. Oh thanks, that's really an important message.
No wonder a jar of peanut butter has a warning that says "WARNING: IT MAY CONTAIN PEANUTS."
People no how to eat healthy, they just don't want to (or our not able too).
Speaking from personal experience, it was easier for me not to do coke or speed than to not eat WAY to much sugar (the other white devil).
And this is made worse by our sedentary lifesytles as we type away.
@Shubrook
I completely agree, the government may be able to make suggestions in situations like this, but the last thing we need is government mandating what can be put on tv because a kid might like it. We've already banned nudity, violence, smoking, and most alcohol, now junk food, then maybe clothing, who knows what's next....come on guys, we're not China.
shubrook: "is it really the business of the government to influence our habits like this?"
yes, if then you become obese and suck a huge amount of resources of the health system
A caption for Michelle's photo: "Let them eat... THIS!"
@Kroneborge
And why don't you want to eat healthy? Advertising probably has something to do with it, especially for kids. When was the last time you saw an add for chickpeas?
Personally, I have the opposite habit: I am irrationally disgusted by overtly unhealthy food. Thus I know I will never be fat. This is mostly thanks to my mother, but perhaps more targeted advertising could achieve a similar effect.
America needs a good slogan, like "This is your brain on drugs." I nominate, "Obesity disables. Kill the clown!"
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19165165
http://adage.com/article/adages/claim-ronald-mcdonald-kill-children/143103/
The other half of the fight is food supply, you can have the best habits in the world but it is of no use if you dont have choice and good supply, which brings me to America's huge problem of corn prevalence in the food supply system and the monopoly of corn seed held by Monsanto. The food pyramid is much narrower than believed.
@ Heshler,
Actually growing up we didn't eat much sweets. It was whole wheat bread etc. And for breakfast I normally still eat plain ol shredded wheat with oatmeal.
And lately I've been trying to do a lot more grilled chiken salads etc. But whenever I have a little sugar I have a lot. It's not 1 cookie, it's 10.
It's not that I don't like many healthy foods. It's that the cravings are for SUGAR!
The idea of government having to slap people's hands from making the wrong decisions is really just a testament to human irresponsibility and lack of self control. I welcome labeling; the more information the better. But the issue isn't information. Everyone knows fast food isn't healthy. People simply do not particularly care.
I think perhaps a little economic incentive can improve lifestyle habits. I recall reading about one state who implemented such an incentive that resulted in drastic weight loss (including that of the Governor's). Not sure what the incentive was though, but such things as lower insurance premiums would probably do it.
Also, the twin message should be get active. Once kids are doing sports, their coach/trainers etc could further the message of eating healthy.
The woman can't control her own husband, now she wants to control the rest of us?
http://i1.squidoocdn.com/resize/squidoo_images/590/draft_lens13521281mod...
Until I see the man eating nothing but cabbage and squash, I suggest that she leave the rest of us alone.
American food and drink portions are way, way too large. The supply of oversized food is creating oversized humans.
It is explicitly a goal of the US Constitution to "promote the general welfare." The US Department of Agriculture has a $24bn budget. The Office of the Undersecretary for Food, Nutrition, and Consumer Services within the USDA has less than a $1m share of the budget. This program is a small part of that. The government's contribution to this is a pittance. It is up to the people to implement the recommendations (or not). This is well within the charter of the federal government, and not a significant expense, yet is the sort of thing some anti-government types like to complain about.
The first lady, by the way, receives no compensation for her contribution to this. She volunteers her time, which is traditional, at least since Eleanor Roosevelt.
The "Smart Choice" and other such labels are and always will be mere advertising for "food" that comes from a factory and not from a farm. It doesn't matter if there are no trans-fats or cholesterol or whatever the latest popular evil substance is; if it comes from a bag or box, it ought to be automatically suspect. The labels belong on bananas, carrots, whole-grain rice, etc.
But there's no "added value" on those items, just nutritional value.
Sorry, conservatives, but the truth remains that many parents are not great at their jobs and/or buck stupid. Children deserve protection in every way, and if this needs to come from the state, so be it. Get those junk food ads directed at children off tv. They are obscene.
Mr. dumazz, will you please climb down from your high horse ?
Not all Americans are dumb when it comes to food.
Please remember that farmer's markets are proliferating across the USA and Organic Food is more popular than ever - just look at the stock price for Whole Foods Market ! Also, the idea of having a small vegetable garden in your backyard is fast gaining popularity and Community Supported Agriculture (CSA) projects are on the rise.
And let us not forget that the American Govt. is at least trying to educate the rest of the people who are not as educated about nutrition.
Actually, Mr. dumazz, can you tell us what country YOU are from ? Perhaps we can do a proper comparative study.
- sunsparc (American and damn proud of it)
sunsparc, you're basically saying that people in the US aren't that bad because some ideas and products are getting more popular? ever heard of a catch-up effect?
I'm from Germany btw, in case you want to do a "proper comparative study" with my country as well.