Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.
How Big Food keeps us eating through a combination of science and marketing
person
Don't believe everything you thinkThe liminal space Veteran
This is a report by the CBC on how food companies use rigorous science to maximize the amount of food we'll eat.
There is an article and a video report. The video report covers most of what's in the article.
There is an article and a video report. The video report covers most of what's in the article.
"I was totally surprised," he said. "I spent time with the top scientists at the largest companies in this country and it's amazing how much math and science and regression analysis and energy they put into finding the very perfect amount of salt, sugar and fat in their products that will send us over the moon, and will send their products flying off the shelves and have us buy more, eat more and …make more money for them."
http://www.cbc.ca/news/health/story/2013/03/05/f-vp-crowe-food-addiction.html
3
Comments
I usually stay far, far away from processed foods. I learned from years of eating just potato chips and diet soda all day that it is not the way to feel or look good. Nowadays I mostly eat only clean, pure fresh fruits, veggies, nuts, seeds, grains, and anything else vegan and "whole". I also went raw vegan for a while, but it just was too hard and I was worried about B12 and K2 deficiencies. But honestly? Eating natural, wholesome foods are the best. And if you have the money and access to organic non-GMO foods, even better.
But I do notice now after eating my Vegan General Tso's Chicken and Vegan Oatmeal Raisin Cookie Sandwich today, that I am sluggish, in a fog, and craving more! It's said that now I have to wait about 2 weeks for my "cravings" to go away and not want anything so high in fat/salt/sugar again. Two weeks of jonsin' for bad food... ugh... why did I give into temptation? I didn't even want it, really.
I also remember when I used to eat fast food (including pizza and the sort) as well. I would constantly crave it. Having just "one" treat day during the month would eventually turn into 2 days... then 3... then eventually I was pretty much eating out every other day. My weight would sky rocket and I would feel horrible.
So yeah... I totally believe the article. I remember watching a Penn and Teller's Bulls**t! episode where they were making fun of this woman who claimed that these marketers "conspired" to get us hooked... (Note: The show is quite biased in favor of eating fast food, FYI...
Good thing-- the 2nd half of the episode starts with the woman talking about it right away. But if you want to see the whole episode from start to finish, just search on YouTube for "Penn and Teller fast food" and it'll pop up.
Are you saying you don't think we're biologically wired to crave some foods over others and that those cravings can be manipulated?
Or are you saying that it is helpful to know how we are biologically wired to crave some food over others and that there are foods that are designed to manipulate that, so that we can make better choices about the foods we eat?
Or do you imagine that everyone has a will of iron and can simply make any choice they want with ease?
Sorry for the leading questions, I have to admit it pushes my buttons when its implied that addiction is due primarily to a weakness of character. I'm basing that take on other posts of yours as well.
2. Three years ago I started having a major problem with sodium leading to severe bouts with blood pressure (I think it was also related to moving to an area of relatively high elevation). It was a challenge modifying my diet to decrease sodium to a level that I could handle. Is there too much sodium in prepared foods? Yes. And once you've reduced your sodium intake, you really begin tasting that overdoing of sodium in prepared foods. Should companies reduce the sodium in prepared foods? Absolutely. But the consumer still has choices. For example, I eat tortilla chips with open face tacos at least once a week. I can buy Tostidos, or I can buy On The Border brand, which has 1/3 of the sodium. When I make a homemade pizza, I avoid the saltiest part of a pizza. Not the pepperoni or sausage or sauce or cheese. The crust. I use 2 flour torillas for crust, and I buy a brand of tortilla that has one-third the amount of sodium that most brands have. I buy no-salt ketchup, no-salt added tomato sauce, etc.
3. If you choose to shovel into your mouth too much sodium, that's your fault. If you want to shovel into your mouth too much sugar. That's your fault. If you want to drink big gulps4-55 times a day (and I have a friend who does that), that's your fault. And that's actually a very good example. She actually does drink 4-5 big gulps per day for the caffeine. Gave it up for lent with no problem. Then chose to start up again after lent.
And if you let my viewpoints press your buttons, that's your problem.
This is not about your post:
I find it odd that on a forum where the Buddhists often complain that Christians put heaven and hell in Gods hands to avoid personal responsibility, that we also have people who are trying to put our worldly fate in the hands of Kraft and Nabisco.
95% of the packages of food I pick up (with the exception, for example, of some packages in the deli department or meat department, have fairly detailed labels that give you a pretty good idea about calories, saturated fats, cholesterol, sodium, carbohydrates, as well as the ingredients used in the food item. I now usually read those labels and do comparison shopping. Do I always find an ideal product? No. But often I can make better choices as I shop. There is no question that I have reduced my sodium and cholesterol intake significantly over the past 3 years. I have that power.
For example, in addition to the nutritional info already on most food labels, it wouldn't bother me a bit -- and would actually force companies to modify recipes -- if the government labels that said "high sodium" or "mid-sodium" or "low sodium" right on the front of food product labels (you could do the same with cholesterol and saturated fats).
Where I take issue is with what Bloomberg is doing in NYC. I can't buy a big gulp if I want one????? (BTW, I don't drink much soda at all -- a glassful a day...now).
But how many parents really understand that most juice and fruit snacks, are junk food just the same as candy is? People are vastly undereducated about food, and part of that is the fault of our government for telling us to trust them on what we should and shouldn't eat. Except their advice is, again, quickly being proven wrong by many studies. Something like 85% of food in the average grocery store is owned by 3 companies. That's crazy. And they know exactly how to make it, to keep us not just wanting to eat more, but to make us eat in a way that is unnatural. Food is for chewing. We are supposed to have to work at chewing it, chewing is what starts to send the signal to the body that we are eating and to watch for the "full" signal. The food the way it is made, is made purposely so it does not have to be chewed, it's why when you eat that crap, it's so easy to overeat, because you skip 75% of the first step of digestion.
Also, as another part of the poor nutrition education, omg, look at what we feed children in school. That is one area parents have far less choice. A huge % of the kids in our district qualify for free or reduced lunch, and many of them, the parents can't even afford to feed the family year round, and they'll send kids to school sick just so they can eat a meal. And then at school, the food they get is french toast sticks soaked in syrup and a juice box, and then Smuckers Uncrustables with chocolate milk and a syrup fruit cup for lunch.
So, yes, it is an individual choice and as adults most of us know better. But not until after 20 years of living in a household where many of us had parents who were uneducated about nutrition and once you spend 20+ years in that habit, it's pretty darn hard to break. Knowing how to eat should be so easy. But we've created foods that bypass our natural systems and make the habits very, very hard to break, and the companies do it on purpose. It's disturbing. Some of the foods out there, in many studies, are shown to be as high on the addiction scale as some drugs are. That's pretty tough stuff to break, especially when your drug of addiction is available on every corner.
When we eat, it changes our cell structure, and on a base level, even changes our DNA. It changes how our entire body functions, and getting away from that after many decades and even generations at this point, is really hard. It ends up engrained in our actual genetics, which when then pass down to our children. We don't just suddenly end up predisposed to heart disease. It happened over generations where we changed our bodies due to poor eating and poor lifestyle. And the corporations and pharmaceutical companies are happy to keep it that way.
I actually liked the idea (which was recently struck down BTW). I didn't really feel like it was encroaching on anyone's rights as you could simply buy 2 16oz sodas if you wanted. What the ban in effect did was make the default choice for anyone buying soda meaning a consumer had to make a deliberate choice to get more instead of making a deliberate choice to get less.
The idea of fat, sugar and salt being really bad for you is not very popular in the general public. But once upon a time smoking and seatbelt wearing were seen in the same light.
Obesity is a large and growing (no pun intended) epidemic in the west and increasingly in any developing part of the world (India and China). It has a huge public health impact on the health system and the economy in terms of lost productivity, so it does have a public impact and IMO government can take a light role in guiding behavior.
On one hand, I don't think the government should be telling people what not to eat, especially when they do such a horrible job of telling us how to eat well and allowing us to be informed consumers. But on the other hand, we have to pay for the HUGE amount of money that goes into paying for diet-related diseases somehow. If people don't want what they eat controlled, they don't want it taxed or anything else, well, then the people who want to choose to live unhealthy should have to pay more for insurance. Yes, I realize there is no way to quantify that, I'm just sayin'. If you want the right to live a horribly unhealthy life, then why should the rest of us have to pay for it? But then on my non-existing third hand, again, it comes back to education. If the schools are going to tell kids that uncrustables and chocolate milk equals a "healthy" lunch then they'll never learn any different and we'll all have to shoulder the burden of the costs of teenagers and young adults with diet-related disease and a population where quickly more of us will be sick than are healthy.
Don't worry about it though, cuz we can just take a fiber pill, yay! http://www.skinny-fiber-diet-pills.com
I'm exaggerating of course.
Seriously, who let this degeneration happen? :rant: