Obesity and the 2008 Presidential Race

by Carly Keidel

Does the need for obesity treatment and prevention have the momentum to become a reigning political issue in the 2008 presidential election? What are the sponsorship records of Senators Clinton, McCain and Obama on bills related to nutrition, healthy food access, and community wellness? Answers to these questions and more can be found in a comprehensive report by Corporations and Health Watch, a non-profit organization that tracks the effects of corporate practices on public health. The report examines the extent to which food and beverage companies serve as top political donors, and the positions taken by the 2008 presidential candidates about junk food marketing, nutrition education, family farms, and personal responsibility for diet and exercise.

Comments

[steve]

With a mismanaged war, illegal immigration, a failing economy including the cost just to put gas in my car, I don't think obesity is going to hit the political radar. It just ain't that important right now.

[Alex Lewin]

Hi Carly,
Thanks for writing this blog post - I hope your readers enjoy the article!
Alex

[Mara]

I am interested in a candidate who, if elected, will make real inroads with the problems, issues and anguish of this world. Obesity is one, visible symptom of how this world is out of balance. Obesity is extremely important to understand. People need better treatments for it (and for the underlying depression, which I suspect so often is the foundation for obesity). But it's Not the entire issue. Don't (stigmatize) the "messenger". Obesity, (and other eating disorders) is like climate change: a signal that our world is becoming badly askew. Positive Change *is* possible, although hardly easy or assured. Compassion (for self, others & our beleaguered world) is also vital for survival.

[Deirdre Pizzoferrato]

The answer to the question: “Does the need for obesity treatment and prevention have the momentum to become a reigning political issue in the 2008 presidential election?” is no. As misguided as this may sound, the epidemic of obesity in our society and its crippling effects on our economy, healthcare and workforce will never top hot issues such as oil prices, home foreclosures and unemployment. We live in a knee-jerk society that tends to addresses a problem or crisis ‘at hand’ – typically after some cataclysmic or catastrophic event. We have a pretty consistent track record – 911, New Orleans, Global Warming (well, thanks to Al Gore’s An Inconvenient Truth) and now - oil prices.
Should obesity treatment and prevention become a reigning political issue in 2008 presidential election? Absolutely. The politics of obesity is staggering. I personally am holding out faith that ‘the powers that be’ really do have our best interests at heart. That the ‘dumbing-down’ of the American diet and fattening-up of its consumers were the result of nothing more than the naiveté of the average American – missing a fundamental knowledgebase on the science of eating right. But I will admit, I do find it at times a bit challenging to uphold this faith in the midst of the political shenanigans that go on behind the scenes – more specifically, the powers that big companies within massive industries have on our political structure.
I really wish Barrack Obama would explain in layman terms exactly what special interest groups and lobbyists have done to the ‘common man.’ Explain the fact that PAC groups have basically paid off Washington to keep legislation intended to protect the average citizen off the table in order to uphold financial gains (Don’t you think the diner at Outback would appreciate knowing up front that the Bloomin’ onion appetizer they just ordered has 2310 calories, 135 gms of fat and over 240 grams of carbohydrates? All before the main entry is even ordered?!). He could use the very recent example of BPA exposure in countless amounts of everyday products. That in the early ‘90s, the FDA gave the ‘stamp of approval’ on the safety of human exposure to Bisphenol A based on 2 industry funded studies – which were recently re-examined and deemed ‘inconclusive’ due to flawed experimental practices. The FDA even admits to their erroneous position on the website for The House Energy & Commerce Committee posted the week of March 15th of this year. We know a lot more about the dangers of BPA exposure and its hormone and endocrine disrupting conditions and diseases. The most recent findings in animal studies have identified the genetic mutations caused by prenatal and postnatal exposure of BPA in mice, which lead to the increased prevalence of obesity and diabetes in their offspring. Yet BPA remains on our shelves – in our products and most disturbing… in our infant bottles, pacifiers and even the lining of liquid infant formulas. This is because the American Chemistry Council has a very influential political action committee and a lot of money that affords good spin and the ability to keep crucial information like this off the front pages. Meanwhile, we have a decade of children now coming down the pike, reared on toxicity, and quite possibly genetically prone to obesity… despite any efforts of prevention.
I really wish the obesity epidemic were sexier, gorier, more scandalous… perhaps it would trigger the attention needed to fill hours of cable news programming and the necessary action in Washington. But my hopes are on Obama – and so far the only candidate who is brave enough to even mention the needed change to get Washington back to its roots.
Deirdre Pizzoferrato
President, Beanstalk Express
www.beanstalkexpress.com