Rudd Sound Bites

Walmart: A little less bad?

by Christopher Wharton

I recently attended a talk by Leslie Dach, Executive Vice President of Corporate Affairs and Government Relations for Walmart Stores, Inc.  During his presentation, this former advocate for environmental issues talked about everything Walmart is doing to minimize its “environmental footprint.”  The company has committed, he said, to becoming more environmentally friendly.  The talk raised the interesting issue of corporate responsibility in my mind, and I’m curious to know what you think...

Nutrition Symbology

by Christopher Wharton

Recently, food companies have taken to printing all sorts of nutrition-related symbols on their food packages in attempt to “educate” consumers and boost sales.  You’ve probably seen a number of them: Kraft’s “Sensible Solutions” flag, Kellogg’s “Nutrition at a Glance” banner, Pepsico’s “Smart Spot” symbol.  These symbols either provide similar information as can be found in the Nutrition Facts panel, or they are meant to suggest the product meets some set of nutrition criteria the company deemed appropriate.  This would be a nice educational gesture, except that it’s ridiculous and confusing.

What’s the deal with high-fructose corn syrup?

by Christopher Wharton

On the Scale of Food Ingredients We Now Consider to be Pure Evil, it seems that high-fructose corn syrup (HFCS) is a solid 9.8.  It makes some sense, I suppose.  You find the stuff (nearly without fail) in sodas and sweets; it contributes calories, but not nutrients, to the foods and beverages it’s in; and it’s the perfect representative of our Processed Food Culture, the antithesis of a diet based on fruits, vegetables, and whole grains.

The lesson in ‘sociobesity’

by Christopher Wharton

Opinions abound regarding the methods and results of the recent study suggesting that being friends with obese persons increases one’s chances of becoming obese over time (see this Time Magazine article and blog entries below for more explanation).   As I see it, there is one main lesson here: eating is as much a social behavior as it is a personal necessity.  Clearly, one’s chances of success at maintaining or losing weight rest not only in one’s resolve, but also (and perhaps more significantly) within one’s social network.  Maintaining a healthy diet means sharing that diet with friends and family.  In doing so, one develops something of a shared food culture that strongly supports a particular pattern of eating, because it is reinforced socially and continuously.

Nutrition Fact Labels: A Debate without an Audience

by Christopher Wharton

Believe it or not, large groups of scientists and government officials get together (a lot more often than you might realize) to debate, rather hotly, what nutrition information should be put on packages and how it should look.  I’ve witnessed these debates, and they get to be pretty silly.  Even so, I think an important point emerges from the inanity.  Consider this current example:

At a recent major scientific conference, a room full of around 300 people argued about the presentation of Daily Values on Nutrition Facts Labels.  Daily Values, or “%DVs,” show you how much of your various nutrient needs are met with a single serving of a given food.  People’s needs differ, however, so this number can be presented in different ways.  As such, some at the conference argued for a weighted Estimated Average Requirement (EAR) value while others pushed for using the highest Recommended Dietary Allowance (RDA) set for any age group.  If that last sentence didn’t make much sense to you, then my point is nearly made.

A bitter butter battle?

by Christopher Wharton

If you thought the only important debate around chocolate was milk vs. dark vs. white, think again. 

Last year, the Grocery Manufacturers Association (an organization that represents the food and beverage industries) submitted a petition to the Food and Drug Administration asking for more flexibility in food manufacturing.  Specifically, the GMA asked for a broad amendment to allow for substitution of key ingredients in many standardized foods – those foods defined by the inclusion of particular ingredients – without requiring that the substitution be made obvious on food packaging.  For example, and at the heart of this debate, GMA has requested that FDA allow the substitution of cocoa butter with vegetable oil in chocolate products.  Currently, the standard definition of chocolate requires the inclusion of cocoa butter as an ingredient.  The proposed amendment to the rule would mean that chocolate could still be called chocolate even if it contained no cocoa butter at all.

Potato chips are healthy again

by Christopher Wharton

Soon, Frito-Lay will be labeling many of its snack products with a new health claim suggesting the products’ fat profile could help lower risk for heart disease. If it strikes you more than a little funny that a bag of potato chips could bear a health claim in the near future, you’re not the only one.

I put the question to you

by Christopher Wharton

I’ve been going through an evolution of thought on food and obesity in recent months.  In doing so, I’ve resolved some serious food-related conflicts that were stirring in my head regarding good foods/bad foods, why we eat the way we do, and regulation of the food environment.  But, I still have some questions for which I need answers.  And since better ideas always emerge from a group of people with diverse opinions rather than from an individual, I’d like to put these questions to you and get your thoughts.

With a grain of salt

by Christopher Wharton

Recently, the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) issued a petition to the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) requesting action on limiting the amount of sodium used in meat and poultry products. Citing the government’s own recommendations regarding how much salt Americans ought to be consuming, CSPI suggested that chronic overconsumption is an ongoing issue contributing to poor health in the US. Other groups, such as the American Medical Association, are in strong agreement.

Coca Cola wants to make you beautiful

by Christopher Wharton

Soon to hit the shelves: a skin care beverage called Lumae, produced by Coca Cola and L’Oreal.  The product is meant to aid women in caring for their skin by acting as a vehicle for delivering nutrients important for skin health.

The product is still in development, so the companies haven’t said yet what the drink will contain.  One could make some reasonable guesses though, and I bet you’ll find B vitamins, vitamin C, and perhaps vitamins E or A (as beta-carotene) in there.  You might find some minerals and purported antioxidants among the ingredients as well.

What works for you?

by Christopher Wharton

For a number of years now, researchers in Colorado have maintained the National Weight Control Registry (NWCR).  The registry tracks individuals who’ve successfully lost weight and maintained that weight loss over time.  A number of publications have come out of the project, which focus on what techniques lead to the greatest success in weight loss and maintenance.  Interestingly, there are few commonalities among those in the registry.  In other words, lots of people use lots of different techniques to control their weight.  Among the few commonalities that have been noted, many people report consistently eating breakfast, consistently monitoring their weight and/or food intake, and consistently exercising.

I thought it might be interesting to hear from readers of this blog on weight loss.  If you have lost weight, what was successful for you?  If you were able to maintain that weight loss, to what do you attribute your success?

Now this is just silly

by Christopher Wharton

Criminy.  Just when I thought there were no foods or beverages left to fortify with vitamins and minerals, Coca-Cola went and proved me wrong.  In April, the company will launch Diet Coke Plus, a soft drink "fortified" with vitamins B3 (niacin), B6, and B12, along with the minerals magnesium and zinc.

‘Refining’ one’s approach to processed foods

by Christopher Wharton

With the publication of Michael Pollan’s recent book, The Omnivore’s Dilemma, there’s been a lot of focus on the dominance of processed foods in the American diet (see his New York Times article and my recent blog entry as examples).  It struck me only recently, however, that the term, ‘processed food,’ despite its wide usage, is pretty vague. So, I looked around, and I found very quickly that a definition exists in the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic act.  In this act, ‘processed food’ is “any food other than a raw agricultural commodity and includes any raw agricultural commodity that has been subject to processing, such as canning, cooking, freezing, dehydration, or milling.” (As an aside, the term ‘food’ is also defined in the act: it includes “articles used for food or drink for man or other animals,” and…“chewing gum.”  No joke.)

$135 per pound

by Christopher Wharton

Just how much would you pay for weight loss?

Nestle and Coca-Cola, in a novel marketing move, have recently teamed up to produce Enviga, an artificially-sweetened, “net-negative energy” green tea beverage.  Each can of Enviga contains 100 mg caffeine (as much as a cup of coffee) and 90 mg epigallocatechin gallate (EGCG, an antioxidant compound found in green tea).  Both caffeine and EGCG might contribute to increased energy expenditure (or calorie-burning) by “enhancing” one’s metabolism. 

“Eat food. Not too much. Mostly plants.”

by Christopher Wharton

Take this simple test: how much of your food requires you to peel and/or wash, and how much of your food requires you to open a box or a cellophane wrapper? 

If you wash and peel more than you unwrap, you’re probably doing well nutritionally.  If it’s the reverse, then you might be missing food in your food.

A(d)version

by Christopher Wharton

If you have some time to kill, here’s a quick little game to play. Open this document (Download logo_letters.doc) and take a look at the letters.  Can you identify, just by looking at each single letter, the food or beverage company represented?  How many can you get right? 

Now, can you name the five food groups?  OK, how about how many servings (in cups) of fruits you need a day based on MyPyramid recommendations?  If you know this much, you’re doing better than most.  Now, can you tell me what amount of 100% fruit juice constitutes 1 serving from the fruit group?  Finally, do you know what amount of dried fruit (such as raisins) equals one serving?

Picket Fences

by Christopher Wharton

So here’s a question: do we know that our ideas for obesity prevention will work?

I generally operate under the blanket philosophy that at the population level, treatment for obesity is a resounding failure (*sad sigh of resignation*).  As such, it seems natural to me that our primary focus be on preventive efforts, especially those that deal with what we presume to be systemic contributors to obesity (generally, factors affecting the food and physical activity environments).  I repeat the mantra to myself: “we have to change the environment,” as has been said many times, “to make ‘healthy’ the default.”

Pills for profit

by Christopher Wharton

Friends of this blog might recall my lambasting of lambaste-worthy weight-loss pills and products that promise drastic results without proof of efficacy. (For my opinion on one such product, click here).

Now, a recent article reports that the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has stepped up and challenged a number of companies that produce popular ‘weight-loss’ pills and other products.  In reviewing claims made by the companies regarding the effects of their products, the FTC concluded that the claims were unsubstantiated and therefore tantamount to deceptive advertising.  As a result, the FTC levied $25 million in fines collectively against the companies.

In the face of consensus

by Christopher Wharton

As a follow-up to a posting by Dr. Brownell, consider the consensus now built around the need for regulation of advertisements, especially those related to foods and beverages, to children. Reports and policy statements calling for regulation of child-targeted marketing have now come from the following:

• The World Health Organization 
• The American Academy of Pediatrics
• The American Psychological Association
• The Institute of Medicine

Despite widespread agreement among doctors, researchers, and public health experts across the US and around the world, the US food industry still pushes for self-regulation. And, it still advertises extensively to children. As Dr. Brownell pointed out, the research is clear, and major associations and organizations support regulations where the industry fails to police itself. What more information could we possibly need to make the case??

Calorie confessions

by Christopher Wharton

New York City, in a bold move to better public health, has required some of its restaurants to post calorie information for all food and beverage items on menus and menu boards.  This mandate applies to restaurants that have standardized menus and that already provide this information publicly, such as in pamphlets or on Web sites. 

Dietary guidance without bias

by Christopher Wharton

A report published in 2003 by the Economic Research Service of the United States Department of Agriculture suggested that, were the average American to adopt the recommendations of the old Food Guide Pyramid, significant changes in US agriculture would be required. For instance, both domestic production of sugar as well as sugar imports would have to fall by millions of tons, with concomitant increases in production and imports of fruits and vegetables. Similarly, fat and oil production would need to decrease, specifically that from soybean crops for which 12 million fewer acres would be required.

Guidance where the FDA provides none

by Christopher Wharton

A New England grocery store chain called Hannaford Brothers recently developed a star-rating system for all the products it sells in its stores to help consumers understand which foods are healthiest.  Products may receive from zero to three stars, with three being the ‘healthiest.’ The criteria by which the store chooses how many stars each product gets seem to be based primarily on sugar, fat, and sodium content.  By their criteria, 77% of products received zero stars, and this included many products labeled as “healthy” – a term that can only be used if products meet certain standards set by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA).

Quantity vs. quality

by Christopher Wharton

At the recent Obesity Society conference in Boston, MA, Kelly Brownell gave a keynote address focusing on scientists’ collective attempts to impact rates of obesity.  He noted that over the past several decades, despite volumes of money and monumental efforts directed at the problem, we in fact have had no success in slowing rising rates of obesity. 

He posed a simple question and framed it in terms of quantity and quality.  In light of our continued failure to adequately address the problem, we must make a decision: do we simply increase the quantity of what’s being done currently (e.g., would we have an effect if, say, we doubled our investments of time and money and continued to do what we already do), or must we consider a qualitatively different direction (e.g., might we admit that our current strategies fail on a population level and thus new strategies must be devised)?

A quick poll: Diet or exercise?

by Christopher Wharton

A funny thing happens at obesity-related conferences: a fair number of scientists literally take sides in deciding which factor is more important in the cause of, as well as the solution to, obesity.  Some say the issue rests entirely in diet, while others say in fact, our plummeting rates of activity have led to a majority of Americans suffering from overweight or obesity.  So, I pose the question to you:

If you had to choose only one, which do you feel is the most important factor in the obesity epidemic: physical activity or diet (and why)?

Unpalatable politics: Is there a need for separation of science and state?

by Christopher Wharton

A recent article regarding the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) highlights some of the issues that come about when science directly impacts policy development of nations.  In the article, EFSA executive director Herman Koeter suggests that pressures exist not only in reporting risk assessment information to European Union authorities, but also to the public.  Such pressures might result, for instance, from reporting of food-borne illness risk associated with particular foods, information that could hurt economies of various European countries depending on the food in question.  An upcoming analysis of health claims for foods might stir up similar political pressures.

I am man: hear me gorge

by Christopher Wharton

A recent spate of commercials relating ‘hearty’ eating (to put it gently) to manliness has hit television.  Burger King recently began an “I am Man” campaign focusing on the need for men to avoid eating “chick food” and beef up with meaty Texas Double Whoppers.  TGI Friday’s recently ran an ad in which four men sit around a table celebrating their big meals.  Each refers to the particular meat on his plate with a celebratory growling of the name.  Except for the last man, who screams “broccoli” with the same fervor, only to receive derisive looks from his buddies.

Kraft and the food fight

by Christopher Wharton

A couple of weeks ago, NBC aired a Dateline special report with Stone Phillips called “Food Fight.”  The show included panelists describing their individual issues with food and food advertisements, experts who argue for regulation or full bans on advertisement to children, and industry honchos (from both Kraft and McDonalds) describing their own roles in fighting obesity.

The food industry and your children's health

by Christopher Wharton

The Grocery Manufacturer’s Association (GMA) is a representative association for major food and beverage companies.  As such, it often acts as the voice of the food industry, which is usually heard saying it is working to be part of the solution to the obesity epidemic, especially in relation to kids. 

Here’s a small experiment you can run for yourself to test the validity of this claim: go to the GMA website and type “schools” into the search box just below the GMA logo.  You’ll quickly see where the food industry lies (in more ways than one) regarding kids’ health and school nutrition.

The envy of none

by Christopher Wharton

A new weight-loss product is hitting the market.  It’s called NV™, and its website suggests it will help you to a slimmer body, provide you with thick and shiny hair, and make your nails strong and your skin glow.  The miracle supplement has a tagline: “Be desired.”  The spokesperson, NV™ is proud to proclaim, is none other than Carmen Electra, whose own struggles with weight gain have come in deciding which size of implant would be most disproportionate to her figure.

Is obesity an epidemic?

by Christopher Wharton

A debate is raging at the moment. Many researchers, including those at the Rudd Center, contend that the growing numbers of overweight and obese individuals in this country constitute an epidemic (or even a pandemic, if one considers similar increases in other countries). They worry about the associations between obesity and health outcomes, notably type 2 diabetes. Others, such as Paul Campos, contend that no such epidemic exists. Sure, they say, people are getting heavier, but the average increase in weight is small and its health effects are poorly described.

Sticks and stones

by Christopher Wharton

Food police, food nannies, food scolds, food Nazis.  Quite an array of creative name-calling, to be sure, and the suggested terms for all those folks interested fighting excess weight and weight gain through food policy.  Do these terms make sense?  Do they paint an adequate picture of those scientists focused on changing the American diet by first considering the food environment?

Just the facts...or not

by Christopher Wharton

In a recent poll regarding food labeling, 44% of consumers said they read Nutrition Facts labels on food packages, but admitted that the information they read did not affect purchasing decisions (click here to read the article).  In light of these results, one expert suggested it might be better to list total calories per package rather than calories per serving, as this would require less math on the part of the consumer, thereby making the label more understandable.

The Myth of the Irreducible Complexity of Obesity

by Christopher Wharton

I believe it’s time to consider obesity for what it is (not): a very complex problem, though not an irreducibly complex one. Irreducible complexity is the idea that the mechanism of a thing absolutely requires all of its “parts” to work. If even a singe “part” were to be altered, the thing would cease to work. Obesity occurs due to a complex composition of problems (or “parts”), all working synergistically to promote weight gain. Even so, we sometimes fail to recognize just how big and complex the problem is. When changes are made in an effort to fight obesity and its causes, we therefore want and expect to see a real and significant impact on the rates of this ever-present problem.

Soft paternalism for soft drinks?

by Christopher Wharton

A recent article in _The Economist_ described something of a new development in policy making: “soft paternalism,” or the intentional nudging of the state, through law or regulation, to point its citizens in the direction of personal betterment (a synopsis of this article can be found online).  Soft paternalism, as opposed to its “harder” ilk, still allows for an individual to make a choice; it’s just that the choice is stacked a bit in one direction or the other, a sort of built in boon to discipline.

Among the variety of examples, the author of the article refers to healthy diets and obesity as areas where the state might take the tack of soft paternalism. Presumably, this might include ideas regarding changes in the physical, social, and food environments currently batted around among health professionals. One such idea, ostensibly soft paternalism in action, is that of taxes on particular foods or beverages. The American Medical Association (AMA) brought attention to this concept with its recent resolution, now passed, to support federal taxes on sugar-sweetened soft drinks (see the attached report from the AMA’s Board of Trustees). Were such a tax to become reality, individuals would retain the right to purchase sugary beverages of their choice so long as they were willing to forego the frugality of choosing cheaper non-soft drink options.

The suggestion that this sort of change in the food environment bespeaks soft paternalism first assumes that outcomes affected by over-consumption of sugary soft drinks, such as poorer dietary quality and obesity, are the “private failings” of “gluttons,” as the author of the article cited above termed them. In fact, we know that obesity and dietary quality have at least as much to do with the environment in which people live as they do with people’s choices. It’s not simply a matter of (a lack of) discipline. As such, manipulation of the food environment, in this case, has more to do with leveling the playing field than providing a paternalistic push where one’s will to make a healthful choice is weak. In a society where beverage companies spend millions in an attempt to “refresh the world” (this, sadly, is the stated mission of the Coca-Cola company), such changes to the food environment would be useful and welcome.

For the full AMA report, please click here:  Download ama_resolution.pdf

Responsibility for Health

by Christopher Wharton

The ideals of individuality and hard work closely relate with what we often envision as the spirit of America. The American Dream, after all, can only be accomplished if we work independently to achieve our goals, for we have only ourselves to rely on, and only ourselves to blame if we do not succeed.

How do these ideals translate in the world of health and weight control?