An article in The New York Times last month reported on a grocery store chain in Maine, The Hannaford Company, that over a year-long period let consumers know which products were more (or less) healthy by placing “stars” next to them. The healthiest products (those lowest in saturated and trans fats, those that contained whole grains, were low in added sugars, high in fiber, etc.) received up to 3 stars while less healthy products received anywhere between 0 and 2 stars.
You’ve probably already seen the splashy headlines about the Indiana State Fair banning trans fats from the foods sold at their fair this year. In their take on this issue, the New York Times featured a booth that sells deep-fried Twinkies, soda, and candy. From a public health standpoint, it’s great that venues like this are voluntarily removing trans fats from their foods. But I worry that there may be an unintended (negative) consequence of the trans fats bans. Specifically, when it’s clearly advertised that the foods being sold are now “trans fat free,” people may feel like it is okay to eat even more of these foods than would have normally. Call it the Snackwells effect (how when Snackwells first introduced fat-free cookies in the 1990s, people would eat larger quantities of these cookies than regular cookies, not realizing that they were virtually the same calories as the regular cookies and totally filled with sugar).
Why is it so difficult for people to accept that nutrition education isn’t a panacea for obesity? A recent article in the Baltimore Sun reported that a review of scientific studies of 57 nutrition education programs funded by the federal government showed that they don’t work. This shouldn’t be a surprise to anyone. Just telling people what they should eat and then expecting major dietary and behavioral changes (enough to reduce obesity rates or prevent further weight) is simply unrealistic. The diet book industry thrives because this approach doesn’t work for most people and so people keep buying the latest diet book thinking it will be the ‘one.'
A few years back, the UK government and the UK food industry formed a partnership to reduce salt intake in the UK. Specifically, the Food Standards Agency (i.e., government) aimed to reduce adult salt intake to 6g per day by 2019. Industry stepped up to the plate and formed an initiative called “Project Nepture” which ‘set out to reduce salt levels in soups and cooking sauces by 30% over a three-year period.’
Continue reading "Wouldn’t it be nice if US food companies took a cue from the UK?" »
Time magazine online recently posted a very interesting series of articles on the “Science of Appetite.” One of the features is a photo essay called “What makes you eat more food: Seven ways our body tells us we’re hungry—even when we’re not.” To this end, it outlines factors such as alcohol consumption, smell, sight, time of day/routine, need for variety, temperature (feeling cold makes us consume more calories), and eating a meal heavy in refined carbohydrates.
Continue reading "Doesn’t being stressed out also make us overeat?" »
Menu labeling has been a hot legislative topic these days. Last fall, New York City passed a menu labeling ordinance that will go into effect this July and many other states, like Connecticut, have introduced menu labeling legislation for their states.
One thing I’ve noticed in all the discussion about menu labeling has been about how it will (or won’t) affect people’s food choices, but not a lot of discussion about how it will impact the beverages that people order.
Continue reading "Labeling the calories in drinks = Less calorie overall intake? " »
The actor and playwright Harvey Feinstein published an eloquent and insightful Op-Ed in the New York Times today in response to the Don Imus scandal. (If you haven't been keeping up with the news, in short: last week on his popular radio program, Imus made racist and sexist remarks when talking about the Rutgers women's basketball team.)
In his Op-Ed, Feinstein writes about how prejudice is alive and well in America-particularly in the more socially accepted forms, like prejudice against gays and lesbians and prejudice against people who are overweight. He points out how David Letterman constantly makes fat jokes and no one protests.
Continue reading ""Prejudice tolerated is intolerance encouraged"" »
Being snowbound over the last few days, I found myself watching more TV than normal. I was amazed at how many times I saw the commercials for the Hungry Man TV dinners. They are pushing a (relatively) new line of products called “Hungry Man XXL.” Not surprisingly, these pre-packaged meals aren’t exactly healthy: some have well over 1,000 calories and an abundance of sodium and saturated fat.
Continue reading "It’s Manly To Eat Huge Amounts of Unhealthy Food?" »
Americans (me included) are obsessed with weight and size. We may be concerned with our own weight but there’s no doubt that we scrutinize the weight and size of our celebrities and athletes. A New York Times article focused entirely on the issue of whether female athletes should be weighed or not—and how that compares to the treatment that male athletes receive. I think the article ultimately was positive because it ended with the conclusion that currently one of the best female college basketball players out there is a “big” woman and that this is a “good” thing.
Earlier this month, the Food and Drug Administration expanded the use of the term “lean” so that more foods can carry the “lean” label. (Click here for the full article). Previously, the rule excluded foods that weren’t “main dishes” and/or weighed less than 6 ounces. Now, convenience store foods like egg rolls, burritos and pizza rolls can be labeled “lean” if they meet the nutritional criteria: having less than 8 grams of total fat, 3.5 grams of saturated fat and 80 milligrams of cholesterol. Nestle, who also happens to own “Lean Cuisine” foods, petitioned the government for this regulatory change.
The media have recently been talking a lot about the financial burden of being overweight. This time, though, they’re not focusing on how much the obesity epidemic is costing society, but how much one’s own degree of overweight costs individuals themselves. For example, a recent New York Times article in the “Your Money” section reported that overweight people will spend two to four times as much on life insurance premiums, have higher health care and medical costs, and will make less money at their jobs. All told, this adds up to “tens of thousands of dollars over a lifetime.” This same article asks the reader to consider not only how overeating will negatively impact their health, but also how it will hurt their wealth: “As you snatch a couple more Christmas cookies or down another eggnog, you might be thinking about what those extra calories will do to your health. But have you considered what they will do to your wealth?”
Now that Democrats are going to control Congress for the first time in over a decade, what will happen with federal food and nutrition policy? With the Republicans in charge, we have seen little to no change in federal obesity policies while at the same time over the last decade, obesity rates in this country have continued to climb at alarming rates. (I’m not suggesting there’s a direct causal relationship between having a Republican leadership and obesity rates in this country—I’m just noting that the problem of obesity has grown but little has been done about it on a federal level.)
Continue reading "Congress undergoes a major change. Will food policy?" »
Brian Wansink, a professor at Cornell University, conducts fascinating research on the ways that eating behavior is influenced by environmental cues. For example, some of Wansink’s studies have found that we eat more if our food is presented on larger plates or if the lights in a restaurant are dim rather than bright.
This research is extremely interesting but what is perhaps even more interesting is that we all think that we’re immune to these kinds of effects.
If you’re reading this blog, you’re probably already well aware of the magnitude of the obesity epidemic in this country. But you might be less aware of what Congress has been doing to address the problem. Unfortunately, they aren’t doing much. Good legislation, such as Rep. DeLauro’s MEAL Act which would require restaurants with 20 or more branches to provide nutritional information on its menus, has been introduced but not even brought to a floor vote.
We all know kids need to get more physical activity—they’re spending more time than ever in sedentary activities like watching TV and playing videogames and (not coincidentally) gaining weight. They’re also not as physically active in school as they once were: according to the PTA, in the past decade, the percentage of American high school students attending daily gym class dropped from 42 to 29%. So Federal and State lawmakers have introduced legislation to increase the amount of physical activity that kids get in school.
Continue reading "Forget traditional PE; try mandating hip-hop" »
Last week, Prime Minister Tony Blair held a press conference to warn food companies that they need to begin restricting their advertising to children or the British government would impose severe restrictions in 2007, including banning “junk food” advertisements to kids. I think that giving the food companies an opportunity to regulate themselves is a good first step—if they fail to do so, then the government will step in. This policy comes out of the recent Children’s Food Bill that passed in the British Parliament his year.
Continue reading "Who is going to take a leadership role in food advertising to kids?" »
A recent article in the Los Angeles Times described a rising number of (what they termed) “Sausage Casing Girls” in southern California. According to the article, Sausage Casing Girls are those whose “muffin tops [are] hanging over their hip-skimming jeans, clothes shrink-wrapped around fleshy bodies that look as if they've been stuffed — like forcemeat — into teensy tops and skintight pants.” The article goes on to say that the phenomenon isn’t limited to SoCal--you can visit any local mall or neighborhood high school and see these girls.
The successful coffee chain Starbucks has long had a policy of only marketing its products to adults. This isn't surprising given that Starbucks' product base has consisted of coffee and espresso-based drinks that kids usually don't want. But in the last year, Starbucks has launched a line of sweet, kid-friendly drinks that may change that policy, according to an article in the Wall Street Journal.
Most Americans greatly underestimate the number of calories and fat that they consume at restaurants. Given that the typical American consumer eats one out of every four meals at a restaurant, this can lead to people consuming considerably more calories than they intended.
To address this problem, Democratic Congresswoman Rosa DeLauro of the 3rd District of Connecticut introduced the “Menu Education and Labeling Act” (i.e., the MEAL Act for short) on June 8th (H.R.5563). The companion Senate bill (S.3484) was introduced by Tom Harkin of Iowa. This bill would require restaurants that have 20 or more outlets to list the calories, sodium content, and saturated and trans fat, on their menus. When space is limited, such as on fast-food menu boards, restaurants would only have to list calories.
The bill would also require vending machine owners who operate more than twenty machines to put up a “conspicuous” sign nearby the vending machine disclosing the number of calories in the items in the machine.
