In the past, people chose foods because they were available,
tasted good, or were “good” for them - meaning they contained specific
nutrients or vitamins known to be beneficial for good health. Orange juice
supplies vitamin C, milk has calcium and meats and beans provide protein. But
sometime in the last century we in the rich world began making food choices in
a new way - we started buying foods for what is NOT in them. It started with
sugarless “diet” drinks and then moved into foods that were “cholesterol-free”
or “low fat,” “non-fat” or “low in saturated fat.” Walk through a grocery store some time and notice how many
items are now being promoted with labels about what isn’t in them. What
a symptom of a rich world problem.
For many people throughout history, and for still too many
today, having enough food has been the challenge. From that perspective, to seek out foods lacking specific
common nutrients would not only be a totally foreign concept, it would be
scandalous. Historically, when
humanity has been privileged to enjoy a sufficient and diverse food supply,
there has been an epicurean tradition that celebrates foods for what they are! How far we have come from either hunger
or simple food enjoyment.
How did we get here?
This trend goes back to the 70s when were told that fats not only made
us fatter, they gave us heart disease. There was a particularly negative focus
on cholesterol and “saturated fats.”
Some of these messages came to us through pronouncements by health
authorities, but the message was mostly transmitted through a proliferation of
food items marketed based on having “no-cholesterol,” being “low in saturated
fat,” or foods that were “non-fat,” “fat-free,” or “low fat.” Food companies marketed against
saturated fats like butter by promoting margarine and other foods made with
“partially hydrogenated vegetable oil.’
“Lean pork” and “skinless chicken” were marketed as alternatives to the high
saturated fat content of “red meat.”
Since the 1970s, “fat” has been a perennial “food demon.”
Over time, those anti-fat efforts are looking less and less
wise from a public health point of view (more on that below). Unfortunately,
the marketing side of that campaign embedded a problematic trend in our collective
psyche. Consumers jump on the bandwagon of each new, non-existence item that is
being sold. Multi-billion dollar
markets develop rapidly even in cases where consumers are not even clear about the
identity of the “offending” component (e.g. “Gluten-free,” “Non-GMO”). “No-High
Fructose Corn Syrup” labels have proliferated even though it is the rare person
who understands the difference between various sugars, or the reality that too
much of any kind of sugar is equally unwise. Consumers tend to assume that any new absence claim means
something important and that it is something for which a price premium is due. Whole Foods Market has honed this kind
of up-sell marketing to an art form.
They are so good at it that I think it would be more honest for them to
modify their logo as shown below.
Some of these No-/Non/Free- products are at least
theoretically about a health issue, but much of the non-existence marketing has
been linked to our rich world obsession with being thin – a quest that has been
remarkably unsuccessful. It turns out that those decades of anti-fat marketing,
manufacturing and messaging hasn’t done a thing for our collective waistlines. Instead, it has taken us down some
unfortunate paths – something that should give us pause when we see every next,
non-existence marketing campaign.
So, How Did That Low Fat Thing Turn Out For Us?
In seeking to avoid the demonized “saturated fats,” food
manufacturers and restaurants shifted us towards those “partially hydrogenated
vegetable oils.” That gave us
trans-fats that turned out to be truly problematic from a health point of view.
Meanwhile, saturated fats are looking to be largely vindicated, particularly if
eaten in moderation (which isn’t such a bad idea for anything – it just won’t
sell diet books). Packaged foods
promoted as low fat or no fat often needed added sugar to make them
palatable. More sugar was not a
good idea from a health perspective.
Also, fats are important to give us the sensation of being full so you
know when it makes sense to stop eating.
Recently, the FDA suggested that it is backing
off on the warnings about dietary cholesterol. This is part of a broader trend in nutrition and public
health that has been steadily chipping away at the long-running story that fats
are something to avoid. There is a
new book by Nine Teicholz titled The Big Fat Surprise that is gaining traction in the nutrition
community. I don’t expect a full,
Gilda Radner, “Never mind” moment, but the message is changing.
Whether these things will ever translate into less marketing
of no-fat/low-fat I don’t know.
What I do wish is that the people who have the good fortune to have
access to the amazing, modern food supply would begin to question most, if not
all of the “non-existence” marketing messages. I wish that more people would simply find the freedom to
enjoy a diverse, moderate diet filled with foods we buy for what they are!
Existence is cool.
You are welcome to comment here and/or to write me at savage.sd@gmail.com
No comments:
Post a Comment
Please send comments if you wish. Sorry about the word verification, but I'm getting tons of spam comments