I’m sorry. I’m sorry that at the end of the year – when we should all be counting our blessings, putting ourselves in other’s shoes and reflecting on how we can realistically effect positive change in the new year – many privileged food-politics writers have, instead, wagged their fingers at you to shame you.

You have shifted your focus, they say, on physical activity rather than on changing the food industry. This was sparked, as you know, by your speech at the inaugural “Building a Healthier Future” summit with Partnership for a Healthier America in D.C. last month.You made a joke about how instead of forcing our children to eat vegetables, we should get them to go play outside. And, then people attacked you. How dare you demonize vegetables! How dare you proffer physical activity as a viable alternative to eating less! We all know it’s calories in versus calories out and focusing on increasing play isn’t going to do shit for our fat, Twinkie-eating children.

Congratulations, by the way, on putting this together and bringing together 800 leaders from across the nation to discuss childhood obesity alongside those who can actually make change occur at the ground level, such as the non-profits and companies that serve food to our children in schools and childcare centers. Way to freaking go!

I’m sorry. Mrs. Obama, but a lot of these ivory-tower writers think you have strayed from addressing the food industry because it’s too political and because, with an election year coming up, you don’t want to upset the lobbyists who could help your husband regain presidency.”Eat less” is a political statement whereas “move more” is not – they say – so you craftily switched your rhetoric to match what you can actually front as your mission under Let’s Move.

This is where I have to stop writing to Mrs. Obama, and address you, reader.

I’m pissed. I will be the first to tell you – yes, Obama did noticeably switch up her rhetoric recently to show a focus more on physical activity rather than food. I will also agree that this year alone the food industry has done some bullshit things like created alliances with the National Institutes of Health’s Children’s Inn and named its kitchen the “Paula Deen” kitchen. The Foundation for the National Institutes of Health teamed up with DIET COKE in its efforts to fund women’s heart health programs. McDonalds refused to make their happy meals healthier and found a way around San Francisco’s toy ban. I get it. I do. The thing is – yes, Big Food is marketing to children. And yes, Big Food is manipulative. But while our food critics are not buying into these things, plenty of Americans are. Otherwise, they wouldn’t be profitable. And it’s not Big Ag’s job to change Americans’ minds. That is capitalism 101 – the money follows desire. And you can’t force people to stop eating McDonalds – especially by writing a blog post to Michelle Obama or anyone else already “in the know.”

I think that Marion Nestle (whom I do respect and admire greatly!) and Michele Simon need to do us all a favor and proffer a realistic solution rather than criticize Mrs. Obama. I think these writers have forgotten that the solutions we find in academia do not often translate to the real world. In fact, I think these writers are suffering from tunnel vision. I’d hate to speculate, but it seems these writers are all non-minorities who have never lived in the ghetto or been morbidly obese. I have. And the solution Simon posted in her post via ”obesity expert” Dr. Yoni Freedhoff, assistant professor of family medicine at the University of Ottawa, that Let’s Move should focus on “Let’s Cook,” is hilarious. Sure, Yoni, “let’s cook” is freakin’ great and is something Jamie Oliver has already heralded as a solution to the childhood obesity “epidemic,” has had great success, and I truly support it. But “Let’s Cook” isn’t a realistic solution for a majority of children today who are latch-key kids with parents working multiple jobs to stay afloat (and not even) in a fucked up economy. Give me a break! There is no ONE solution.

Simon tells us “data shows that an increase in food intake alone explains the rise in obesity in children.”

Even if I buy this – which I don’t – just because an increase in food intake might be the cause of a problem, it does not inherently mean that the solution is just as black and white: “eat less.” She tells us: “Children’s diets have changed so drastically in the last few decades, with the increase in calories, for example, due to soda and fast food so large, that moderate increases in exercise are not likely to make a difference.” And while she does concede that exercise “does have many health benefits,” she tells us: “it just shouldn’t be used to distract us from over-consumption and marketing of junk food.”

I don’t think Mrs. Obama was trying to distract anyone from the fucked up things the food industry and even Congress have been doing to our children with their ploys. What I do think is that we need to stop demonizing and ostracizing the food industry. What? Did I just write that? Is the Dairy Council holding me hostage in a cell to write this blog?

No.

Whatever utopia Nestle and Simon believe in – I imagine America turned into a nation of communes with equitable distribution of land for fresh fruits and vegetables – it’s not going to happen in the foreseeable future. (and trust me, I like this vision!)

We need to work within our confines to affect positive change and ostracizing the food industry and avoiding that fact that we live in a capitalist society is not doing anyone any favors. Has covering your ears and singing “la la la” ever really solved anything? Exactly.

The fact is that physical activity is INCREDIBLY important to weight loss. It builds self-esteem and, studies have shown that people who want to maintain a weight loss usually have to work out an hour and a half EVERY DAY. The fact is that you can lose 150 pounds in a healthful manner while still eating foods produced by Big Ag (*points at self*). The fact of the matter is that while “eat less” is a political statement and children in America do need to actually eat less to lose weight – telling a kid to “eat less” is the most narrow-minded and detrimental phrase I can imagine.

Do I have a solution? Did I just come on here to bitch about the elitist writers who have bashed the First Lady’s campaign that is near and dear to my heart.

Yes and no. If I had a solution to “childhood obesity” I would be a millionaire. But I do have some ideas.

• “Eat Less,” I agree, is a political statement. I can hear food lobbyists shiver at the thought of all of us fat Americans eating less food. But you know what else “eat less” is? It’s a dangerous, and, frankly, fucked up, statement. By the way, Urban Outfitters already plastered this slogan on t-shirts and created eating disorders in our impressionable youth. Creating a fat-phobic, body-dysmorphic, body-hating tribe of children is NOT A SOLUTION to the childhood obesity challenge.
• “Cook more,” while a viable part of the solution, is not a realistic solution in and of itself for many of our children from households of lower socioeconomic status and in areas – food deserts – where “cooking more” would have to equate to making fancy feasts from fast food, as this blogger humorously does.
• Mrs. Obama’s focus on physical activity is being undervalued. Sure, you’d have to do a ton of jumping jacks to even make a dent in the calories you consumed from a Big Mac, but what we’re not recognizing is that exercise should NOT be seen solely as a method to counter excess calorie consumption. We need to build self-esteem in our children. Do you know what being fat does to a kid’s self-esteem? Do you know that getting kids involved in play teaches negotiating skills, empathy and inclusiveness? (see PlayWorks).
• We need to realize that by trying to counter the obesogenic environment of fast-paced modern American convenience, we have created an additional obesogen. All this fat-phobic talk of our “childhood obesity epidemic,”and all these pictures we use in our presentations of fat children with sad violin music playing in the background, makes me want to go stuff my face with donuts. I can only imagine how it makes children who are actually ostracized for their weight feel. LET’S STOP BEING ASSHOLES. By the way, a recent study by the Cochrane Collaboration found that encouraging “healthy eating, physical activity and positive attitudes to body image are among a range of interventions that can help reduce levels of obesity.”
• Let’s realize that Big Ag can be part of the solution but only if people demand it. Did you know that Kashi is actually a subsidiary of the Kellogg company? Yes, Big Ag can and does offer some healthier options. We have to realize that if you tell a kid to go from eating a junk food diet to go to eating a whole foods diet is the only way to get healthier, they are going to say, “screw you, I’ll starve.” We have to have a ladder approach to health. We have to educate. We have to be patient. Do you think I went from 280-lb fast-food-eating couch potato to 135-lb vegan runner overnight? Hell to the nah.

We’re not going to change that we are a snacking society, that we have a fucked up economy, that our federal agricultural subsidies need to change, etc., etc., overnight. We need practical solutions that are holistic. Stop discounting the psychological aspects of childhood obesity! Why aren’t more people saying “Let’s love” instead of shaming Mrs. Obama for a change of rhetoric. I don’t know about you, but I think placing the onus of the health of America’s children on Mrs. Obama is like making her Atlas and giving her the weight of the world.

Accept our limits, fight to change the limits, work within the system until we can change it, be holistic with your approach (take our kids’ souls into account!), get off your damn high horse, and put yourself in the shoes of an obese kid in the inner city before you proffer “eat less” or “cook more” as viable solutions in and of themselves. They’re not.

<3,

The Cranky One

Posting these “Food Politics Friday” posts on an actual Friday has been a humorous challenge. I’ll consider changing the series name to “Food Politics (on anything but) Friday.” Gotta keep that consonance in the series

I think GMOs are a really important discussion topic in food politics; but, sadly, I’m pretty clueless when it comes to the topic. What I’m not clueless in, however, is research! So, here’s the gist of what GMO even means and some resources to people and books that are clearly more versed on the topic than I am.

So, a little history. GMO stands for genetically modified organism (I almost wrote orgasm – now that would be interesting ). Now from my very basic understanding of science – there is nothing intrinsically wrong with genetic modification. Genetic mutations occur all the time. The difference between genetic mutations and genetic modification is who’s doing the manipulation. One is nature and the other is a scientist. And, as we all know – when you get people involved, especially people working for biotech giants like Monsanto – things get a little…hmmm (how to be politically correct)…

fucked up.

Why do people modify crops at the genetic level in the first place? Well, for a long time people have claimed that we could engineer certain crops to be more efficient (use less resources) and resistant (to weather, bugs, etc.) and have a longer shelf life. One of the biggest arguments of GMO proponents is that GMOs (such as “golden rice“) will help us save the world from hunger (this has not yet proven to be the case; and even in 2003 at a time of crisis, African nations declined to accept GMO food stuffs from the U.S. oy.).

When did the general public start caring (do we care?)

While GMOs were a hot topic amongst scientists in the 70s, the term “GMO” didn’t become part of the lay person’s vocabulary until the 1990s when the term was everywhere, including on the cover of Time Magazine and throughout consumer news when Taco Bell shells, manufactured by Kraft, were found to contain GM corn that had not been approved for human consumption.

Frankentacos!
So what’s the big deal? If we’re eating Taco Bell shit to begin with, should we really care about a little GMO thrown in for good measure? That is a good question (is it okay to compliment myself for a good question? lol); and one worth considering. I think the main issue with GMOs is that no one can agree whether GMOs are really safe for human consumption or not. And, while this is still being determined (though from my basic research, I’m finding more people who say it’s already been proven to be unsafe – such as the CSPI – than those who say it’s still a tenuous case), there is one simple thing that any government agency should do when something is possibly detrimental, and possibly not, right?

Be transparent.

Unfortunately, we rarely know when something we’re eating has been genetically modified or not. Our labeling laws here are super lax. Some organizations are trying to change that, including the NonGMO Project which has formulated a screening process and label to disclose which foods do not have GMOs. But we really should know those that do, right? Unlike the U.S., the EU has the strictest regulations in the world for presence of GMOs in food and feed. They require  labeling food and feed where the level of approved GMO exceeds 0.9% of “unintentional adventitious presence” [source]. This doesn’t mean they’re opposed to GMOs, but that they are clear about where they exist. We’re still fucking around here in the U.S. by letting everyone and their mama label foods with “natural” without many standards. See ConAgra’s GMO cooking oil, for example. Then there’s the fact that Monsanto is introducing GMO sweet corn into the market. Without labels required, of course.

Here’s a better summary of the problems with this ish, as written by one of my fave food politics writes:

“‘Upwards of 70 percent of processed foods on supermarket shelves — from soda to soup, crackers to condiments — contain genetically-engineered ingredients.’ [CSPI] While it’s unclear how many of these products also claim to be natural, given all the greenwashing going on these days, it’s likely to number in the thousands.

Specifically, up to 85 percent of U.S. corn is genetically engineered, as are 91 percent of soybeans, both extremely common ingredients in processed foods. Numerous groups, including the Center for Food Safety, have been calling attention to the potential hazards of GMOs for years” [source]

Should we care?

I think that whenever the EU has stricter guidelines on something as important as what we put into our bodies, and when the U.S. denies transparency in favor of profit and political alliances, then yes, we should care. We should also be pissed and maybe a little worried.

Resources

Good video by Jeffery smith, GMO activist, founder of the Institute of Responsible Technology and author of Seeds of Deception.
The video is a little (non-gmo) corny, but still good info.

Some Cool Books on GMO Food

• Hart, Kathleen. Eating in the Dark: America’s Experiment with Genetically Engineered Food. New York: Pantheon Books, 2002.
• Kneen, Brewster. Farmageddon: Food and the Culture of Biotechnology. Gabriola Island, British Columbia, Canada: New Society Publishers, 1999.
• McHughen, Alan. Pandora’s Picnic Basket: The Potential and Hazards of Genetically Modified Foods. Oxford: Oxford UP, 2000.
• Nelson, Gerald C. (ed.). Genetically Modified Organisms in Agriculture: Economics and Politics. Urbana: U of Illinois P, 2001.
• Pence, Gregory E. Designer Food: Mutant Harvest or Breadbasket of the World. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc., 2002.
• Ruse, Michael and David Castle (eds.). Genetically Modified Foods: Debating Biotechnology. Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books, 2002.
• Smith, Jeffrey M. Seeds of Deception: Exposing Industry and Government Lies About the Safety of the Genetically Engineered Foods You’re Eating. Portland, ME: Yes Books, 2003.
• Thompson, Paul B. Food Biotechnology in Ethical Perspective. London: Blackie Academic and Professional, 1997.
• Weasel, Lisa H. Food Fray: Inside the Controversy over Genetically Modified Food. New York, NY: AMACOM, 2009.

Anyone got info. to share on GMOs? Did you know that when you eat corn or soy you’re pretty much always eating GMOs?

<3,

The Cranky One

Organized alphabetically

•  Agricultural law Agricultural law blog by the Association of American Law Schools.
• Agriculture and public health: connections “The Gateway provides a central place to access information about public health, agriculture, and the links between these two fields.”
• Association for the Study of Food & Society studies on food and society; produces a food journal.
• Atlantic Monthly food food magazine with good (food-based) political contributors.
• Center for Ecoliteracy “The Center is best known for its pioneering work with school gardens, school lunches, and integrating ecological principles and sustainability into school curricula.”
• Center for a Liveable Future blog on how industrialized food production is affecting our future.
• Center for Science in the Public Interest sifts through scientific b.s.; good newsletter to follow.
• Chefs Collaborative nonprofit network of chefs attempting to change the sustainable food landscape “using the power of connections, education and responsible buying decisions.”
• City Fruit Neighborhood by neighborhood guide to help residential tree owners grow healthy fruit, to harvest and use what they can, and to share what they don’t need.
• Civil Eats food politics blog. One of my faves.
• Cornucopia Institute “will engage in educational activities supporting the ecological principles and economic wisdom underlying sustainable and organic agriculture. Through research and investigations on agricultural issues, The Cornucopia Institute will provide needed information to consumers, family farmers, and the media.”
• Corporate Agribusiness Research Project established to monitor corporate agribusiness from a public interest.
• Eating Liberally “A website devoted to nourishing the netroots, literally.”
• Ecological Farming Association education, alliance building and advocacy for sustainable farms.
• Environmental Working Group ” use[s] the power of public information to protect public health and the environment.” Puts out great guides on chemicals/toxins found in all consumer products, including the awesome Dirty Dozen guide to buying organic produce.
• Farmers Markets, U.S. Locates farmers’ markets in communities throughout the U.S.
• Farmland conservation organization dedicated to saving America’s farm and ranch land, promoting environmentally sound farming practices and supporting a sustainable future for farms.
• FDA Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition How the FDA is involved in food.
• Food and Drink Examiner food safety issues.
• Food and Water Watch Advocates for public control of food and water.
• Food Democracy Now food justice issues.
• Food First social justice; works to eliminate hunger.
• Food Politics Marion Nestle’s blog. She’s the author of the book Food Politics (which inspired this series!)
• Fooducate blog dissecting processed foods,  nutrition and food politics.
• Food Times Links to current news articles about anything food-systems-related.
• Food and Water Watch food and water safety watchdog.
• Grist’s food section – environmental news, commentary, policy – this section, clearly, focuses on the food aspect.
• Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy works locally and globally to ensure fair and sustainable food, farm and trade systems.
• Integrity in Science Watch Helps us be discerning of scientists/scientific research; “We scrutinize more than 200 science-based federal advisory committees for undisclosed conflicts of interest, monitor the media and scientific literature for failure to disclose, and encourage the adoption of strong disclosure policies…”
• La Vida Locavore food news and politics.
• Land Stewardship Project non-profit dedicated to fostering an ethic of stewardship for farmland, promoting sustainable agriculture and developing sustainable communities.
• Mark Bittman’s blog NY Times journalist, cook, sustainable food advocate.
• Marler Blog blog on food poisoning outbreaks and litigation.
• Michael Pollan’s site journalist, NY Times best-selling author, my crush
• National Organic Program at the USDA government-run organics certification.
• National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition “an alliance of grassroots organizations that advocates for federal policy reform to advance the sustainability of agriculture, food systems, natural resources, and rural communities.”
• NYU’s Steinhardt Department of Food, Nutrition and Public Health Marion Nestle teachers here
• Obama Foodorama blog relating to the “Obama Foodscape.”
• Organic Consumers Association Subscribe to the newsletter, “Organic Bytes,” for info. on organic foods
• Organic Farming Research Foundation works to move the public and policymakers toward greater investment in organic farming systems.
• Public Health Action on the Farm Bill information and articles on the U.S. Farm Bill.
• Rudd Center for Food Policy and Obesity Yale University’s center on obesity.
• Small Bites blog on nutrition and food politics.
• Slow Food USA national non-profit that believes everyone has the right to good, clean, and fair food. Advocates for policy in the public interest.
• The Center for Agroecology and Sustainable Food Systems UC Santa Cruz sustainable food research.
• The Community Food Security Coalition national organization that works to build just, sustainable community food systems.
• The Edible Schoolyard Alice Waters’ healthy school food program (she’s a well-known chef and organic-foods activist).
• The Ethicurian a site that focuses on sustainable food.
• The Institute of Food Technologists non-profit scientific society.
• The Rodale Institute soil scientists and researchers advocate for organic farming techniques.
• USDA Briefing Rooms information on U.S. agriculture .
• USDA Food Availability Data per capita data on U.S. foods and commodities .
• USDA Tables of Food Composition nutrient composition of foods.
• Weston A. Price Foundation publishes the research of Dr. Weston Price, who advocates for whole foods-based diets.
• Wild Farm Alliance promotes agriculture that helps to protect and restore wildlands.

Happy reading!

<3,

The Cranky One

Hey guys!

It’s week 11 into my weight-loss/fitness challenge. Eleven weeks. That’s 77 days. of torture!

Hehe, I’m kidding! Though it sure hasn’t been easy. Scale says:

Original Starting Weight: 142.6lbs
Last Week’s Starting weight: 133.0lbs
Today’s Weight: 132.40lbs
Week Difference: -0.6
Total Difference: -10.2lbs

Thoughts? Satisfied. I’ve reached my 10-lb goal, which is great, but I know there’s still so much I’d like to achieve. I really want to revisit the goals I had set in the initial Comps 10 post, and also measure myself for good…measure (I crack myself up). I don’t think I’m going to stop weighing in every week, at least not for a while. There are a couple things going on behind the scenes in the Cranky One’s life – the biggest one I can’t talk about until it’s official and until I have permission – but if it goes through, my schedule will change a bit and I want to still hold myself accountable to keeping up with this level fitness. Frankly, it’s doing so much for me mentally to be working out at the intensity that I am and I want to make that a priority. You’ll see, below, that a consistent challenge of mine is eating sufficiently without overeating. I honestly don’t know if that has ever not been a challenge of mine. When I mention that I’m an overeater to my friends, they usually ask – “but what do you (over) eat?” If you raid my fridge and pantry, it’s true, you won’t find processed junk or really anything that your typical pal would see and go “mmm, get in my belly!” But us overeaters know that we can pack on the pounds simply by nervously snacking on Ezekiel and peanut butter and a couple pitas before bed, etc. I think the reason I actually did not gain weight this weigh-in, despite my overeating, is that I’ve been working out so much. Is that balance? Or is that compensation? I’m not sure.

Another challenge I’ve been facing is insomnia. My roomate once texted me, “do you ever sleep?” The truth is that I certainly do not sleep enough. It’s not so much that I lack time to sleep an appropriate amount, it’s that I lack the ability – which is very frustrating. Even now as I’m typing, I feel tired, but I guarantee I won’t be able to actually fall asleep for another couple of hours. And, then, I naturally wake up at 6 a.m. or before, typically regardless of what time I go to sleep. I think this erratic sleeping pattern might also explain my overeating — everything’s a little off kilter and my body does require a bit more fuel to run this way.

I feel I should also explain why on two days I ran a total of 10 miles and did zumba. I wish I could say it was purely out of drive, but it’s more out of practicality. As I’ve mentioned before – the zumba classes get packed and there is a space restriction; so, in order to get into the class I have to arrive an hour early. That leaves me an hour to work out before I zumba. And, sometimes I’ve already ran 6 miles at the beach. Today was one of those days. My eyes are currently drooping, my calves feel mangled, and my level of cranky is in the red zone.

Work Out & Calories Recap
Fri.: 3 mile run (30 minutes); 3000 calories
Sat.: 6 mile run (60 minutes); 3000 calories
Sun.: n/a; 2000 calories
Mon.: zumba (60 minutes), ran 6 miles at the beach (60 minutes), ran 40 minutes at gym, walked 10 minutes; 2000 calories
Tues. 60 minutes bike ride; 3000 calories
Wed.: n/a; 1200 calories
Thurs.: ran 6 miles at the beach (60 minutes), zumba (60 minutes), ran 40 minutes (4 miles), walked 10 minutes; 2000 calories
Summary: Average of 70 mins. intentional exercise / day. Average 2,314 calories / day (yowza!)

Some cool links to share:

• Ellen DeGeneres started a vegan site, here
• Article on The HuffPo ranking the healthiest and unhealthiest kids’ fastfood menus based on caloric averages alone, here. Granted, calories alone are not the best way to rank, but it is super interesting. Subway ranks healthiest and Dairy Queen ranks unhealthiest.
• I enjoyed reading this blog post about whether Pepsico represented capitalism with a conscience, here (a Pepsico PR rep was present at the recent Blogher conference and gave her spiel, which the blogger, Andrew, is responding to). You’ll see my thoughts in the comments section.
• This post on 5 facts about the Farm Bill here is a great tie-in to my last food politics post. The bill is up for vote in 2012 and it will be great for us all to get informed and really fight to ensure that our government is in alignment with the public interest.

Any good reads to share? Any burning questions on food politics to discuss in a future post? Have general gripes, complaints, wishes, etc., that you need to share so that you don’t stress-eat before bedtime?

<3,

The Cranky One

How did the Twinkie get so cheap? I mean it has 39 ingredients, for Christ’s sake!

This is a question addressed in a really interesting video short produced by OSPIRG (Oregon State Public Interest Research Group) regarding our nation’s current agricultural subsidies (priorities?). According to CALPIRG (the CA arm of the group, who alerted me to the video), since 1995, the US has spent $261 billion to subsidize “commodity” crops, “which has the effect of making junk food cheaper, while the prices of veggies and other healthy unsubsidized foods goes up with inflation. Most this money goes to the biggest agribusinesses like Cargill and Monsanto. It makes it harder for small farmers to compete, especially if they want to grow healthy food. It’s also fueling an epidemic of obesity as sodas and Twinkies and other super-processed food chock-full of corn-syrup and other subsidized ingredients end up cheaper and cheaper.” You guys already know how I feel about this.

Here’s the video, followed by a written Q&A with Pedro Morillas, CALPIRG’s Legislative Director, who so kindly took the time to answer some very basic questions for us. I say the questions are “basic” because their answers should be second-hand to us by now (since these political issues have a lot to do with how our tax money is being spent!), but, clearly, most of us don’t even know the basic 1-2-3s of food politics! Let’s change that, shall we?

The Cranky One’s Questions
Answered, kindly, by Pedro Morillas, CALPIRG’s Legislative Director

1. What is a crop subsidy? Who pays it and who decides where it goes?
   Answer: A crop subsidy is a form of payment from the government given to growers of certain kinds of crops. The subsidies come in different forms, but are usually either tax breaks or direct pay outs of tax dollars. The money is tax money so taxpayers are ultimately the ones who pay. Congress decides which crops get the money once every few years in what is known as the Farm Bill. The USDA mostly administers the programs set up in the farm bill so they take applications for the subsidies and/or cut the checks.
2. In the video, Dave Rosenfeld, executive director of OSPIRG, mentions that there are currently five crops that receive 90% of the subsidies. Which crops are these?
   Answer: Corn, Soy, Cotton, Rice, and Wheat
3. What is an “agribusiness”?
   Answer: An agribusiness is a company that grows and sells an agricultural product.
4. Who are the top 4 agribusiness that receive more than 50% of the subsidies?
   Answer: The statistic is 4% of the recipients of subsidies account for 50% of the subsidies. There are more than 1 million recipients so the top 4% is a lot of names. A list of the recipients of these subsidies can be found here.
5. Who is OSPIRG and why did they create this video?
   Answer: OSPIRG is a non-profit nonpartisan public interest group that stands up to powerful interests on behalf of Oregon’s consumers. This video was made to educate the public about the wasteful and unnecessary subsidies that are out there. It is also to compel people to take action on an issue that can have a real impact on the childhood obesity epidemic.
6. What is the Farm Bill and why should the normal consumer care about its reauthorization?
   Answer: The farm bill is legislation that is crafted every 5 years or so that allocates the money congress wants to spend to build and maintain the agricultural sector of the US. Through a combination of direct payments and tax breaks money is allocated to the crops and other agricultural products congress decides to prioritize. Consumers should be aware of the fact that by putting tax money into one crop over another the price of those crops are affected for consumers. For example we have subsidized corn at such a high level for such a long time that we grow more than we can even eat. Only 1% of the corn that we grow is actually eaten by humans in its original kernel form. Instead much of it goes to high fructose corn syrup, which in turn is put into everything from soda to twinkies.
7. In your opinion, should we subsidize other crops, subsidize specific farmers or cut out agricultural subsidies all together? In other words, what’s the alternative we should root for?
   Answer: The first step is to stop giving money to companies that don’t need it. It is wasteful to subsidize otherwise profitable corporations for no net benefit to the taxpayer. In addition to the waste, it has created a system where it is drastically cheaper to eat unhealthy food. Ending the wasteful subsidies will also go a long way toward ending the giveaways that make unhealthy food artificially cheap. The alternative to root for is a system that gives consumers a variety of options to choose from. There is no one crop that should be prioritized over another.

Can I get an “amen”?

You can follow Pedro on Twitter here, and/or visit CALPIRG on Facebook here.

<3,

The Cranky One

I’m currently reading Marion Nestle’s Food Politics. I’ve read excerpts of the book before; I also follow Nestle’s blog, have seen her interviewed in documentaries, I follow her on Twitter, etc., etc., but I actually have never read the entire book *hangs head.* As someone who has grown increasingly interested in food politics, I find it shameful that I can’t produce a copy of the book with dog-eared pages, highlight marks and coffee stains illustrating at least one full read-through. I’m changing that now!

And…you’re coming along for the ride (I hope!)!

I’ve decided that while I’m reading the book, I’ll take notes of the most interesting and important bits (I’ll pull quotes, or a passage, or even just define jargon (like, what’s a “food desert”?)) and share them with you on Fridays until I feel I’ve sufficiently made my case that we should all be invested in the political nature of what we eat (I’m such a nag!). I’ll also point you to specific resources, including blogs centered on food politics. And, if you have any questions, insights, or resources to share, please do!

To get us started?

How is Food “Political”?
Quoted from the book

“Diet is a political issue. Because dietary advice affects food sales, and because companies demand a favorable regulatory environment for their products, dietary practices raise political issues that cut right to the heart of democratic institutions. Nearly all of the situations discussed in this book involves struggles over who decides what people should eat and whether a given food is ‘healthy.’ As a result, they inevitably involve struggles over the way government balances corporate against public interests” (28).

I guess the key thing I realized yesterday as I was ruminating on some of the comments on my junk-food-tax post, and thinking about food politics, is this: the government is and has been, since the Great Depression, intricately tied to what we eat and why we eat it. To argue that we shouldn’t seek government intervention is to falsely suggest that the government hasn’t already intervened. And, because the food industry is an industry – with lobbyists and giant profit margins  – and reliant and bound by governmental regulations that directly affect its bottom line, it’s hard to decipher when, if ever, a food company is acting in the interest of the public or its stockholders. So, I think the reason people like to pull the “nanny state” card when anyone suggests that the government should intervene in food choices is that they are comfortable with, or profit from, the current governmental babysitters. Right now our babysitters are feeding us MyPlate & Let’s Move while simultaneously using our allowances to fund commodity crops (to the tune of 28billion in 2000). Meanwhile, most of us remain in a stagnant infantile stage – still perplexed by what a nutritional label is and means (you’re not alone. Want to change that?).

One word that comes to mind as part of a solution is: an equitable balance between public and corporate interests. At least for now. And education, clearly, but not in a prescriptive let-me-tell-you-what-you-should-eat way; rather, in a this-is-why-you-should-be-critical-about-what-you-eat-way; in other words, instilling the knowledge that food consumption is a political act. As Pollan says, and Nestle, too, we are privileged in this abundant food economy to vote with our forks. These are just my initial thoughts and I should sit back and see where Nestle takes us!

<3,

The Cranky One

The Cranky One, that’s me (yes, I like to talk in 3rd person), has been quite the idiot.
(evidence)
You see, even though the past two years have marked my being the most athletic & fit that I’ve ever been in my adult life, they’ve also marked an unhealthy shift. Somewhere along the line, my goal for optimum health became muddled with the goal for optimum thinness; something I have had a hard time copping up to.

Last summer has become some idealized and romanticized golden age in my mind where I look back at the level of fitness and thinness I achieved and yearn for a pastoral return. The truth is simply: last summer, I spent an unreasonable amount of time working-out and obsessing over working-out. There was no magic involved, just hard work – and the resulting tendinitis in my left knee. The problem was that devoting that level of time and obsession to getting fit was contingent on me having the time and energy – something that only summers free of a master’s program could offer.

When the school year started again last fall, the pounds started creeping up slowly. I noticed, but then decided I’d rather destroy my scale than feel my happiness was contingent on the number it listed.

Destroying the scale was fun. But it was not some cathartic moment that healed all past insecurities and rendered me anew. I think that’s what I had been expecting. But the moment certainly didn’t deliver. So, fast-forward to this summer. The pressure to again get to that phantom zenith of “fitness” awakened from its repressed slumber. But I couldn’t bring myself to begin acting on the obsession to get (more) fit even though I actively felt the obsession. It was like some mind-body gap that I just couldn’t reconcile. So, I pushed. I recently started running a mileage that was intended for weight-loss, not for health and enjoyment. I caved against my best judgment and bought a scale (*gasp*!). I started obsessing again. And where did it leave me? Well, all signs are pointing to tendinitis. Again. This time? In my right knee. I know, I know. Even children’s fables can’t come up with morals as good as this. When you push too hard, and for the wrong reasons, your body will fight back.

I’ve got an appointment with a sport’s medicine doc tomorrow (the same one I saw last year), and we’ll see what he says. Since the pain started creeping in, I’ve been feeling like a child in a time-out — bitter and ready to go outside and run.

Have you ever felt you were pushing yourself to achieve an unrealistic level of fitness or some phantom ideal of thinness that was unhealthy?

Some news & info. too good not to share:

• Doctor’s prescribing fruits & veggies? Hallelujah! Doctors at three health centers in Massachusetts have been doling out $1/day vouchers for produce at the local farmer’s markets to their patients in the effort to encourage healthier eating habits and to combat obesity.  It’s a pilot program and it obviously can’t be a panacea, but even as a symbolic act — I think it’s wonderful [here]
• If it’s got added vitamins, it’s a good food choice, right? Not really. Did you read my post on those bastards defending VitaminWater’s bogus claims? [here] In a recent post, blogger Fooducate writes about a commentary published in the Journal of the American Medical Association discussing the trajectory from “nutritionism” and food science to our abundance of processed foods with added “nutrition” (you have to subscribe to the journal to read the commentary, so Fooducate does a great job re-capping for those of us who can’t access the piece). Fooducate writes, “The problem today is that food is stripped of its foodness to become an amalgamation of cheapest possible ingredients PLUS artificially added nutrients. These foodlike substances may rate well by nutrition metrics, but they are not proving effective in reducing the obesity epidemic.” [here]
• The Hidden Costs of Cheap Food. Check out this piece titled, “Why Quick, Cheap Food, is Actually More Expensive”  by Mark Hyman, MD, in The Huffington Post [here]
• Want some cholesterol meds with your fries? Some researchers are suggesting that cholesterol-regulating statins be provided with the condiments at fast-food chains. Yes, I’m serious. Soon big brother will be dishing out the soma and we’ll be set for life! [here]
• Good news for Senate’s Food Safety Bill! As Marion Nestle writes in The Atlantic — the bill’s got bipartisan support! Read the provisions as delineated by Nestle and heed her call to action: “The current version of the Senate bill (PDF) is available for scrutiny. If passed, it still needs to go to the House for reconciliation of the two versions. So it is still interim and worth reading carefully. Read it and decide for yourself what it says and is likely to mean.”
• Want free pizza tomorrow? If you live in Los Angeles — Tomorrow at Hancock Park, from 4-7 PM, join Z Pizza for free pizza samples, contests and chances to win prizes, including a year of free pizza. I recommend trying the Berkeley vegan pizza made with Gardein sausage and Daiya cheese. I wasn’t a big fan of the way the “cheese” tasted on the pizza, but I am in love with the idea of getting vegan pizza from big pizza chains! Also, gotta love Z Pizza for using organic ingredients and for offering several pizza options that are 100 or less calories and 2-5g fat per slice (see all the “Rustica” pizza options here) [more info on event here]
• Easy pot-pie recipe? Yes, please! Check out one of my fave vegan bloggers, Happy Herbivore, on The Huffington Post — she gives her recipe for vegetable pot pie on the video and it looks simple and scrumptious! [here]

<3,

The Cranky One

When this past Saturday night rolled around, my girlfriends and I had plans to go out to dinner and dancing to celebrate a friend’s birthday. When the hosts of the restaurant asked us assertively if we had reservations, and then reprimanded us for not having them, we weighed the options — walk back to the car & find another place to eat when we’re already hungry and it’s late? Or, put up with douchebaggery and wait for a table? We decided to wait for a table. When the table never came and the automaton-like bartender finally paid attention to us, we weighed the options — let this night have us, or have the night? We ordered plenty o’ drinks, decided the stone-faced waiter must have just been broken-up with by his cheating girlfriend Sabrina (can you tell we’re three liberal-arts-majors using our “critical thinking skills” to craft fictitious stories? lol), and grooved to the live flamenco guitar music capturing our ears and hips.

When I faced the choice to run at the beach today or wallow in my discontent over a certain situation, I chose to run. Every day that I choose to learn more about where my food comes from, is a day that I’ve reconsidered what I had considered natural the majority of my life. Alright, enough self-aggrandizement, jeez!

I guess the point I’m not-so-eloquently making is that every choice we make involves a scale — a measurement of worth and priorities. Sure, things aren’t always so simple — there are often financial and physical constraints involved in the measure, but no matter the constraints, there’s always a scale and a choice. The more conscious we become of these choices — this power — the more apt we are to affect change.

After watching Earthlings recently, I’m even more convinced that when it comes to the pursuit of knowledge against the stagnation of ignorance, the pursuit will always, always prove more worthy — even if it can be, at times, overwhelming.

What do your choices say about what you value? Where is your health landing on the scale of  your life?

Food News

• The journal Food Policy published a study in which researchers found a rising disparity between nutrient-dense foods and their junky counterparts during the time frame of 2004-2008. Read here. Interesting to note in comparison to this article discussing the more insidious costs of “cheap” foods.
• Compare the above to this article today in The Huffington Post on cheap meatless protein and the quoted author of The Flexitarian Diet who showed an immediate-cost comparison between meat protein and plant-based protein and said, “‘Consider in June 2010, according to the most recent government figures from the U.S. Department of Labor, that one pound of beans was $1.34 versus spending 2.5 times more money for boneless chicken breast ($3.32/pound) and lean ground beef ($3.51/pound) and 4.5 times more money for sirloin steak ($6.00/pound). That’s real savings you can bank on! Every week. Every month. Every year.’”
• Free dessert at Native Foods tomorrow. Native Food is celebrating “Native Days” the 1st Tuesday & Wednesday of each month. So, tomorrow being the first Tuesday: you will get a free dessert with the purchase of an entree, side and Native signature drink. There will also be a lot of cool things to win.

Cool Stuff

• The polls are now open for VegNews magazine’s 2010 Veggie Awards! Vote for your favorite vegetarian/vegan people, places, blogs, websites and products. If you fill out the survey, you will be entered to win some awesome prizes.  I took the survey to vote for some of my favorite vegan finds and bloggers, and also to scour who VegNews included in the survey — a great way to learn about vegan products I’ve never heard of!
• I found the best sticker…

[available here]

Think I should change the name of my blog to the above?

<3,

The Cranky One

If you’re interested in food politics, you’ve got to check out Michael Pollan’s book review in The New York Review of Books titled, “The Food Movement, Rising” and linked here.

The books under review:

1. Everything I Want To Do Is Illegal: War Stories From the Local Food Front
2. All You Can Eat: How Hungry is America?
3. Eating Animals
4. Terra Madre: Forging a New Global Network of Sustainable Food Communities
5. The Taste for Civilization: Food, Politics, and Civil Society

Pollan’s prose weaves in reviews of the books with a natural discussion of the food movement’s history and evolution and how, at this very moment in time, food politics is at the center of national debate (which is AWESOME). I’ve culled some of the quotes I found most interesting and what I found to be his key points:

• How did the Food Movement Get Here? In the 70′s, at a time of questionable agricultural practices and food cost inflation, key books like Diet for a Small Planet, and others, threatened to bring food politics to the center of national debate. The government was able, at the prompting of Nixon, to bring food prices down, to make food issues “disappear” in the sheer ubiquity of food: the govt. shifted focus from “supporting prices for farmers” to focus on high yield crops, which created cheap and ever-present food.
• Why this had hidden costs: “…although cheap food is good politics, it turns out there are significant costs—to the environment, to public health, to the public purse, even to the culture—and as these became impossible to ignore in recent years, food has come back into view.”
• What happened next. The 80s and 90s contained many highly publicized examples of these costs — e.coli break-outs, mad cow disease and a general bewilderment at the thought of seeing what was indeed behind the metaphorical curtain of our food production.
• How multinationals hijacked the ability to afford healthful food. “…companies like Wal-Mart and McDonald’s pay their workers so poorly that they can afford only the cheap, low-quality food these companies sell, creating a kind of nonvirtuous circle driving down both wages and the quality of food. The advent of fast food (and cheap food in general) has, in effect, subsidized the decline of family incomes in America.” (My note: See books like Fast Food Nation, Nickel and Dimed, Food Politics: How the Food Industry Influences Nutrition, and Health, Revised and Expanded Edition (California Studies in Food and Culture))
• Defining the food movements. “Cheap food has become an indispensable pillar of the modern economy. But it is no longer an invisible or uncontested one. One of the most interesting social movements to emerge in the last few years is the ‘food movement,’ or perhaps I should say ‘movements,’ since it is unified as yet by little more than the recognition that industrial food production is in need of reform because its social/environmental/public health/animal welfare/gastronomic costs are too high. As that list suggests, the critics are coming at the issue from a great many different directions. Where many social movements tend to splinter as time goes on, breaking into various factions representing divergent concerns or tactics, the food movement starts out splintered. Among the many threads of advocacy that can be lumped together under that rubric we can include school lunch reform; the campaign for animal rights and welfare; the campaign against genetically modified crops; the rise of organic and locally produced food; efforts to combat obesity and type 2 diabetes; ‘food sovereignty’ (the principle that nations should be allowed to decide their agricultural policies rather than submit to free trade regimes); farm bill reform; food safety regulation; farmland preservation; student organizing around food issues on campus; efforts to promote urban agriculture and ensure that communities have access to healthy food; initiatives to create gardens and cooking classes in schools; farm worker rights; nutrition labeling; feedlot pollution; and the various efforts to regulate food ingredients and marketing, especially to kids.”
• We’re at our Breaking Point. “Viewed from a middle distance, then, the food movement coalesces around the recognition that today’s food and farming economy is ‘unsustainable’—that it can’t go on in its current form much longer without courting a breakdown of some kind, whether environmental, economic, or both.”
• Feeling the Food Movement in your Gut. “But perhaps the food movement’s strongest claim on public attention today is the fact that the American diet of highly processed food laced with added fats and sugars is responsible for the epidemic of chronic diseases that threatens to bankrupt the health care system.”
• Politics under President Obama and Michelle Obama might be paving the way to better health. “The political ground is shifting [my note: see Michelle Obama here], and the passage of health care reform may accelerate that movement. The bill itself contains a few provisions long promoted by the food movement (like calorie labeling on fast food menus), but more important could be the new political tendencies it sets in motion. If health insurers can no longer keep people with chronic diseases out of their patient pools, it stands to reason that the companies will develop a keener interest in preventing those diseases. They will then discover that they have a large stake in things like soda taxes and in precisely which kinds of calories the farm bill is subsidizing. As the insurance industry and the government take on more responsibility for the cost of treating expensive and largely preventable problems like obesity and type 2 diabetes, pressure for reform of the food system, and the American diet, can be expected to increase.”
• Monopolization of our Food is something to Fear. “Speaking in March at an Iowa ‘listening session’ about agribusiness concentration, Holder said, ‘long periods of reckless deregulation have restricted competition’ in agriculture. Indeed: four companies (JBS/Swift, Tyson, Cargill, and National Beef Packers) slaughter 85 percent of US beef cattle; two companies (Monsanto and DuPont) sell more than 50 percent of US corn seed; one company (Dean Foods) controls 40 percent of the US milk supply.’”
• When Food is More than Food. “The modern marketplace would have us decide what to buy strictly on the basis of price and self-interest; the food movement implicitly proposes that we enlarge our understanding of both those terms, suggesting that not just ‘good value’ but ethical and political values should inform our buying decisions, and that we’ll get more satisfaction from our eating when they do. That satisfaction helps to explain why many in the movement don’t greet the spectacle of large corporations adopting its goals, as some of them have begun to do, with unalloyed enthusiasm.”
• Where the Food Movement Hits Home. “Part of the movement’s critique of industrial food is that, with the rise of fast food and the collapse of everyday cooking, it has damaged family life and community by undermining the institution of the shared meal. Sad as it may be to bowl alone, eating alone can be sadder still, not least because it is eroding the civility on which our political culture depends.”

Is that not some amazing food for thought?   And, since I forgot to congratulate him earlier, I’d like to link to the Time Magazine spread that featured Mr. Pollan himself as one of the thinkers who most affect our world (linked here).

<3,

The Cranky One

p.s. Have you entered by $60.00 give-away to CSN Online stores? Click here to enter.

I’ve read a few blogs recently that seemed to center on a question I often ask myself and feel flustered trying to answer: Where is the middle-ground between apathy and self-righteousness? Especially with regards to a stranger who seems to be involved in unhealthy behaviors?

On Fit to the Finish’s blog post (here), the scene is set: an overweight mother unloads groceries with her overweight daughter; they both stop midway to enjoy soda and a candy bar, the mother advising her daughter, “You can’t go wrong with a soda and a candy bar on a hot day.” Blogger Diane who watched the scene, asked her readers if it’s anyone’s place to say anything.

Big Fat Deal (here) recently brought up a woman who received an anonymous Post-It note that read “Please do not take this the wrong way, I am just concerned for your health. Have you considered Weight Watchers?”

Comments on both blog posts unanimously say: butt out. Comments on the mother-daughter story agree that saying nothing is the best choice. Commenters on the Post-It note story focused on the harm such a move could make to the recipient.

Look, I feel ya. That whole Post-It note thing is such a passive-aggressive cop-out. And I abhor whenever anyone precedes a statement or question with “don’t take this the wrong way” or “no offense” — both which indicate the speaker is already well aware of his/her forthcoming douchebaggery, so why bother even speak? Boggles my mind. In both cases, the assumption is that overweight people must be involved in unhealthy eating patterns that would require intervention. Is that so far-fetched?

Here’s where I start to feel like an enabling wuss — if we can agree, and many of us do, that unhealthy processed foods are addictive (see here); that many people show (neurologically) the same signs of addiction to fast food that alcoholics do with alcohol; when are we simply acting as spectators to a show of self-destruction? Granted, many of us still probably wouldn’t approach a raging alcoholic stranger on the street and be like, “yo, put the bottle down, don’t you know that stuff’s bad for you?” so why would we approach someone, anyone, scarfing down a double double, milkshake and fries? Here are some of the predominant reasons:

• Where’s the line between someone who simply doesn’t fit the Western-propagation of “thinness” and someone who is truly at an unhealthy weight? Can anyone “know” this by observance alone?
• We don’t know back-story. We don’t know whether this is perennial behavior or a once-in-a-while thing; we don’t know the cause of obesity for sure (and, hey, thin people eat like crap, too); we don’t want to say something and offend the person (potentially perpetuating cycles of shame that lead to the self-destructive behavior).
• We fear for our own safety (seriously).
• We can admit that unlike other substances that can be abused, food is truly necessary to survive and if that’s what a person can afford, or what a person is accustomed to, it’s better than nothing (eating nothing = quicker death).
• We don’t want to encourage eating disorders, including orthorexia, by denying people’s rights to indulge as they see fit.
• Freedom — we’ve got choices, they made their own, so they’ll live with ‘em.
• You can lead a horse to water…yadda yadda yadda.
• We’ve all got problems/issues/therapy bills, etc. — the thing with “fatness” is that it’s like a Scarlett Letter telling the world “hey world, I’ve got issues!” Why should we so self-righteously presume we’ve got the answer; got it all figured out?

Some commenters wrote about the precarious position of us “used to be fat” people. That we can truly feel compassion for overweight people and that our leading by example is akin to activism. Feeling myself very much in a precarious spot — a spot where I can say, “hey, look at me, I did it, so can you!” (and sound presumptuous and self-righteous) and a spot where I know what it’s like to be 280 pounds and think if one more person assumes they know what’s it like, I’m going to wear a sandwich board that says, “silence is golden.”

I’m torn because the issue is even more complicated when it’s a loved one we’re talking about and not simply a stranger.

One of my most pervasive memories is of a trip to Hermosa Beach with my father and twin brother. This was early on in my parents’ divorce and my dad was house-sitting and brought us along over the weekend to enjoy some time with him. One day during the trip, my dad handed my twin and me our own weight-loss charts — mine with a picture of a woman staring fanatically at her scale, my twin’s with a dude doing the same. We later ordered pizza and diet soda for lunch. This is one scene of many in which attempts at instilling in us the “weight loss can-do” simply floundered. I can recall the hundreds my father spent monthly on Udo’s vitamins and fish oils that were blended lovingly by my mom with fresh fruits each morning for a couple months straight. My twin and I plugged our noses with each sip and couldn’t wait to come home after school, when our parents were at work, to gorge on the boxes of cookies and crackers waiting patiently for our return.

I’m torn because I know first-hand that watching someone “lead by example” can actually make you feel more hopeless. Sometimes I’d see people eating salads for lunch and dinner and tell myself, “gosh, I can never just eat salad! No way!” We can’t step outside of ourselves to see when we’re misrepresenting reality, misinterpreting the circumstances, justifying bad behavior, not giving ourselves a chance. Sometimes we simply see it as “this is me” and everyone/everything else is simply antithetical to me.

Alternately, I’m torn because I know first-hand that watching my twin brother succeed at turning his life around gave me the impetus to do the same.

I’m torn because I would also stay silent watching the overweight candy-eating woman instill in her daughter an unhealthy emotional relationship with food that could have life-long negative consequences.

Somehow amidst all of this frayed thought, I think there’s a thin line between apathy and self-righteousness where we find social responsibility.

A comment on Diane’s blog really echoed the core of where my feelings of “leading by example isn’t enough” reside. Don wrote: “…when it comes to making healthy food choices we all are swimming upstream against some mighty strong currents!…if cauliflower and broccoli had the same advertising campaign with bazillions of dollars dreaming up jingles about ‘deserving a break today’ etc. instead of salivating and gorging on high-fat, high-sugar, highly processed NON-food items we would all be running around stuffing our faces with broccoli and cauliflower!  These multi-national corporations don’t throw all their zillions of dollars into advertising because it’s just *play* money! They are looking for a HEFTY return on their dollar. At OUR COST! They are looking to wage powerful influence on our so-called ‘freedom of choice!’ Can we still exercise freedom of choice? Sure! But it takes extreme vigilance, awareness of the forces which are out to decieve [sic] and mislead us. How many average citizens out there can do this…?”

This where my frustration lies, and it is a contentious position — I don’t think people’s unhealthy eating habits are simply dictated by “choice,” especially when we’re talking about children.

I am highly cognizant of my privileged in being able to afford and access healthy foods — and most importantly, being educated on how to live as healthfully as possibly. Others live in food deserts, are bombarded with commercials to eat and drink crap, can only afford the dollar-menu, literally do not have reasonable access to fresh fruits and vegetables, get subsidized lunches of crap with more crap, etc.

The good news is that these issues are becoming more and more prominent publicly. Michelle Obama’s Let’s Move campaign along with the Obesity Task Force (full report released; see here) are great examples of this. I know that within these two models of improvement there are issues (using the word ‘OH!!!-besity!!!” instead of ‘health’ being just one of them) — but this is huge, people! My biggest concern with the Obesity Task Force is that its board of advisors consists of governmental agencies that propagate some of the very barriers standing in people’s way to accessing health – for instance, the government subsidizes on grain crops instead of produce crops, which makes it easier for people to afford a BigMac rather than a salad (see here). Also, these governmental agencies are lobbied by industries like the Dairy Farmer’s Association, etc — the very associations with big dollars going into misleading advertising campaigns (see here).

So, I’ve totally gone on a super-long rant. I guess my long-winded psuedo-point is: we can all lead by example and tastefully and rightfully stay silent. But there does come a time when that’s not enough. Where does “enough” reside? I’m still finding my footing on that nebulous cloud of  thought, but I know that calling out food manufacturers is one way (like Michelle Obama did assertively here).

<3,

The Cranky One