Skip to main content

The food fight is on between the multinational food corporations who are responsible for promoting unhealthy products and those fighting for a healthy food system with minimal negative impacts to our health and environment.

It's no secret that our children are paying the highest costs for our dysfunctional food system. A report from the Institute of Medicine this year found that one-third of American children and youths are either obese or at risk for obesity. Over the past 30 years, the obesity rate has nearly tripled for children 2-5 years old (from 5 percent to 14 percent) and youths 12-19 years old (5 percent to 17 percent), and it has nearly quadrupled for children 6-11 years old! We now know that infants are at greater risk for obesity if their moms gain excessive weight during pregnancy. The number of overweight infants younger than 6 months has increased by 74 percent between 1980 and 2001. And overweight infants are not likely to outgrow their "baby fat." They are more likely to become overweight children and adults. And all of this excess weight puts our infants, children, and adolescents at hugely greater risk for a multitude of conditions, including high blood pressure, heart and blood vessel diseases, and type 2 diabetes which is now the leading type of diabetes in childhood.

In 2012, Food and Water Watch published a new study: It Pays to Advertise: Junk Food Marketing to Children, which focused on television's impact on children’s preferences for particular categories and brands of food. The study found that food marketing to children and youth increases their requests to parents for the advertised foods and leads to increased consumption of unhealthy foods. In one study, children ate more snacks while watching shows with food advertisements, whether or not they reported feeling hungry.

Research on media literacy indicates that it takes repeated mental effort to resist advertisements for tempting foods. Because youth are exposed to so many marketing messages and because even older children need prompting to think critically about advertisements, it is hard to argue that youth can consistently fight off these messages on their own.

The federal government in 2011 issued preliminary, voluntary Principles to recommend a consistent nutrition standard for industry self-regulation. The food industry heavily criticized the Principles as too strict and burdensome, even though, if enacted, they would have been entirely voluntary. Some of the very companies participating in the self-regulatory efforts lobbied to weaken the Principles, and ultimately Congress blocked the proposal, leaving no significant federal regulation or even guidance on food marketing to children.
Voluntary principles which would reduce profit. What are they thinking?

So now there is pushback against these multinational food corporations who are weakening our youth and burdening them and our society with a future which will be less than it could be. Since minority youth are experiencing the most profound negative health impacts from junk food, including obesity and its related diseases of diabetes, high blood pressure and heart disease, community engagement is being rallied to communicate directly to the youth most vulnerable.

The video above invites youth to question their relationships to food, food access, global food sovereignty, ecological justice, stereotypes, drug use, racism, and more. This film asks them to question their relationships to the systems around them and join a movement. The best chance we have of the long battle to point our food system toward sanity is to reach the youth.

Originally posted to Daily Kos on Sun Dec 22, 2013 at 03:15 PM PST.

Also republished by Hunger in America and KosAbility.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  If we called this a matter of national security (13+ / 0-)

    Maybe we could convince some people to spend tax dollars on this instead of on weapons to blow people away on the other side of the world?

    •  You're still talking about a couple of generations (4+ / 0-)

      of kids who think McDonald's is the ultimate treat and cereal should be 50% sugar. How do you change that?

      Ed FitzGerald for governor Of Ohio. Women's lives depend on it.

      by anastasia p on Sun Dec 22, 2013 at 03:34:20 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  You talk to them about nutrition, (9+ / 0-)

        you make them aware that what they put into their bodies changes how they feel and how they function. You make them partners in their own health outcomes.

        My grandkids were here this weekend, and the 6 year old and 10 year old were talking about sugar highs and sugar crashes, with some illustrative examples from their own experiences and their friends' experiences. Kids are smart. They want to be healthy and strong.

        Give them the best food you can afford, make it as tasty as you can. And make them aware of the seductive nature of advertising to kids- from crappy toys to crappy food.

      •  One kid at a time, one parent at a time (5+ / 0-)

        Education.  Sharing information.  And, in my view, it's not just about diet; it's about the control the mega-corporations have on our media, our government, and our culture.  So, in addition to teaching each other about food and nutrition, we also teach each other about community, about buying local food, supporting local farmers and businesses; we teach about permaculture, about organic farming, about sharing, about caring for each other.

        You are right to draw attention to the size of the problem.  There isn't an easy answer; but we must start now.  Diaries posted to Daily Kos, and comments made to those diaries, are a start.  We read, learn, share.  We change the choices that we make; others learn from us and do the same.

        Most of our representatives in Congress are not great leaders; we can not wait for Congress to act.  It is up to us to lead, to learn, to share, to teach; and we have to start now.

        Love one another

        by davehouck on Sun Dec 22, 2013 at 04:51:23 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  the military did a study several years ago (5+ / 0-)

      They found that not only are a significant percentage of 18 year olds too fat and out of shape for military service, they're also functionally illiterate and innumerate and wouldn't meet the minimum educational requirements ... and we're talking boot camp, not West Point.

      Got me thinking about an angle to use to defend public education and basic health and nutrition from the conservatives: get the military on board with it.  Then I realized it wouldn't work because it would break the military's "warrior elite" image to mass produce people who can fulfill their requirements.

      Domestic politics is the continuation of civil war by other means.

      by Visceral on Sun Dec 22, 2013 at 03:52:59 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  If most young people are healthy and fit enough (0+ / 0-)

        for military service -- and literate and functionally educated -- that wo8ld not at all threaten the military's "Warrior Elite."  It takes a lot more than not being obese to threaten that.

        The thing that appalls me most in this comment is that a significant percentage of our 18 year olds are "functionally illiterate and innumerate."  THis bodes very ill for the future of a high-tech economy, not to mention a democracy.

        --------------------- “These are troubling times. Corporation are treated like people. People are treated like things. …And if we ever needed to vote, we sure do need to vote now.” -- Rev. Dr. William J. Barber

        by Fiona West on Mon Dec 23, 2013 at 12:48:49 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  As far as I know (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      smartdemmg, VL Baker

      The last three Surgeon Generals have actually said that. Anyway, Dr. Robert Lustig, the anti-fructose guy says we need a strong government intervention using methods similar to the way alcohol is regulated. I've got a relevant portion of one of his speeches on my screen right now.

      "Societies strain harder and harder to sustain the decadent opulence of the ruling class, even as it destroys the foundations of productivity and wealth." — Chris Hedges

      by Crider on Sun Dec 22, 2013 at 09:21:29 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  This is so difficult (7+ / 0-)

    I look at all the money Big Ag has successfully poured into opposing GMO labeling — which should be a no-brainer to pass in a landslide — and it feels like there's nothing we can do. It feels like every effort is feeble. For instance, I am a member of the core team at an urban farm that raises organic produce to feed hungry people here. We raise about 3,000 pounds a year. Then I hear the Food Bank distributes two million pounds a year. Why do we bother? I know there are whole inner areas of grocery stores I never go to that are full of "buy me! buy me! buy me!" products like sugar cereals that are unhealthy. How do you tell a brainwashed kid no? So I'm sitting here eating my vegetable stirfry with locally grown veggies and locally produced organic non-GMO tofu, and I have no clue what to do for anyone else. McDonald's doesn't seem tasty to me — I've never eaten at one — but they sure make it sound alluring to kids.

    Ed FitzGerald for governor Of Ohio. Women's lives depend on it.

    by anastasia p on Sun Dec 22, 2013 at 03:33:07 PM PST

  •  Yup and let's not forget to put (7+ / 0-)

    more exercise back into their lives.

    According to CDC’s August 2013 Vital Signs report, after decades of rising obesity rates among low-income preschoolers aged 2–4 years, many states are now showing small declines in childhood obesity rates. Among older children, a recent CDC survey shows that school districts nationwide are making improvements by putting into action school nutrition policies and requiring physical education. Improvements in childhood obesity rates have also been noted at the local level. For example, a study conducted in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, and published in CDC’s Preventing Chronic Disease(PCD) reported that childhood obesity has declined in Philadelphia. A waning in the consumption of sugary beverages, which contribute to childhood obesity, has also been noted by researchers, as seen in “Declines in Sugar-Sweetened Beverage Consumption Among Children in Los Angeles County, 2007 and 2011.” However, childhood obesity numbers are still too high. Although advances are being made in addressing the epidemic, researchers note that much work remains before childhood obesity rates begin to show a dramatic decline.

    I'm not liberal. I'm actually just anti-evil, OK? - Elon James White

    by Satya1 on Sun Dec 22, 2013 at 03:40:56 PM PST

  •  Heard on NPR that there was an experiment (4+ / 0-)

    ..where paying children in the cafeteria to eat their veggies resulted in more vegetables consumed but when the payment went away so did the consumption.

    But it was the current version of NPR. Alas.

    Trying to eat nutritious meals and not poison yourself is almost a full-time job for a couple of middle-aged people I know. I think they'll live a decade longer than I will.

    But children? We shouldn't have nutritionally deficient children.

    We should be moving forward. The best times should be yet to come.

    Please support The War on Christmas. Do it for the Reindeer Troops.

    by Anthony Page aka SecondComing on Sun Dec 22, 2013 at 04:19:31 PM PST

    •  The school district I work for (4+ / 0-)

      a few years ago got a new superintendent who made a huge commitment to child nutrition and health. Like many districts, ours used to sell "extras" at lunch like Cheetos and cookies... there's a long story behind this, but many districts did this as a desperate effort to simply break even on their meal budget. Anyway, he did away with all that junk and introduced salad bars in all schools... it's included with any meal purchased. There were not many takers at first, but now that it is familiar, you see thousands of kids choosing fresh veggies and fruits. The school meals, too, are also a lot healthier, and to my surprise, quite tasty. I used to panic when I forgot my lunch, but now if I need to I know I can just buy lunch at school. There are lots of food and cooking education events for kids and their families. And at the schools with the highest obesity rates, PE was increased to every day, even though it cut down instructional time.

      Anyway, I guess my point is that you have to "normalize" something and then wait for results, which means you might have to wait a while. I believe the food culture in my district has changed, and this is of unequivocal benefit to the kids.

      But of course, we shouldn't have to do this. The problem is that we have let junk food and processed food purveyors redefine what is normal, and it's not an upstream battle for schools and for parents to re-educate kids about what is healthy. This strikes me as not very fair. Companies that only care about profit should not be allowed to move the bar anywhere they want to, and then cry, "Oh, we just need more personal responsibility from parents!"

  •  not that hard (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    VL Baker, davehouck, mettle fatigue

    You know how you get good food on your table?  Fry up some vegetables?  You know how you get some exercise?  Fry up some vegetables.  You know how you eat good food cheap? Fry up some vegetables.  You know how else to get some exercise?  Grow some vegetables.

    Now, I know that not every has a cooktop.  Some barely have a hot plate.  I know, because I was one of them growing up, that for some it is hard to get fresh food.  Fortunately we had a car.  I also know that many if not most people do not have a yard, and if they do there are stupid laws restricting what they can do in their yard.  But food is about empowerment and making the food itself valuable.

    Bieng able to go to walmart and buying a kid lunchables is not empowerment.  Lunchables were created by The Man to increase the dollars parents would spend on junkfood.  Empowerment is a 12 year old kid being able to get home after school and prepare a mea.  Oh you say that is too much responsibility, too demeaning, that a kid should play outside?  It wasn't for me.  It was empowering.  It made me feel useful, like I could be something.  Like I was an important part of the family.  So was being told if i wanted a snack, to go and pick some fruit.  It wasnt the country, it was the city.  I still get fruit from the trees in the inner city house where I grew up.  I can go outside now and get bay leaves and rosemary to make my vegetables more appetizing.

    Kids are raised to believe the processed food flavors are the flavors of food.  When food is handeld and packed, it loses all flavors, and must be bought from factories in new jersey and put back in.  Most of us will admit that there is something about a fast food dinner that is on some level more satisfying that a yucca stew cooked at home.  That the taco we buy from the truck is nicer than the one we can make just as easily at home.

    Yes, there are limitations to what some have available.  Yet we plan all our food choices assuming those limitations apply to everyone.  That we are not, and somehow should not, be in control of our food supply.

  •  They snack, you pay (3+ / 0-)

    Here's just one more place where the alleged GOP principle of personal responsibility falls apart. Type 2 diabetes is the second most expensive problem for medicare. So as they say everyone should be allowed to eat what they want, ask who should pay for the consequences of their actions?

  •  I just watched Food Inc. on Netflix (6+ / 0-)

    I highly recommend it;

    Essentially, a few greedy corporations have transformed the food supply chain into a nightmare.

    I'm considering becoming a vegan locavore.  I should have listened to OrangeClouds.

    The film also suggests to join their movement.

    Daily Kos an oasis of truth. Truth that leads to action.

    by Shockwave on Sun Dec 22, 2013 at 04:46:18 PM PST

  •  The advertising wends it's way into (4+ / 0-)

    social life as well. For instance, we were determined that our son would never ingest a Big Mac while we were feeding him. But among his peers, that made him an oddball. Actually, a bit of an outcast. So finally we had to give in (though we kept it from being a usual thing) just so the kid wouldn't feel like a weirdo.

    Actual Democrats: the surest, quickest, route to More Democrats. And actually addressing our various emergencies.

    by Jim P on Sun Dec 22, 2013 at 04:47:34 PM PST

  •  Promoting a food fight right here: (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    davehouck, VL Baker, mettle fatigue

    We should not pay for junk food with SNAP.

    OK. I got into it with some nice Kossacks (likely nicer people than I am) a few weeks ago on this very topic. I'm going to take kids' birthday cakes away. Yes. The fat and sugar consumed on your birthday (or at your friend's birthday party) is precisely as harmful as if it were consumed on Arbor Day, instead.

    SNAP should be expanded, and cover what some people refer to disparagingly as ingredients. Whole foods, mostly plants. It should cover wholesome prepared foods, with special attention given to those people who cannot prepare their own foods. Schools should have the same zero tolerance for sodas as for cigarettes, and should serve full breakfasts and lunch--again, whole foods, mostly plants. Maybe dinner, too, for some neighborhoods and individuals.

    We actually know (pretty much) what good nutrition is, and what good exercise is, and we ought to be paying for those things--it's an investment.

    We ought to tax the hell out of junk "foods", at the source: the manufacturers and bottlers. The tax revenue ought to equal the harm done, plus the cost of collecting the tax, at a minimum. And we need to stop subsidizing Big Ag, especially King Corn.

    But, to re-iterate my first, inflammatory point: no SNAP support that actively harms people's health--no junk foods. No potato chips, but fresh potatoes, fresh sweet potatoes, brown rice, fresh veggies, and so on--all that you need.

    "There is just one way to save yourself, and that's to get together and work and fight for everybody." ---Woody Guthrie (quoted by Jim Hightower in The Progressive Populist April 1, 2012, p3)

    by CitizenJoe on Sun Dec 22, 2013 at 04:48:59 PM PST

    •  I think it's ok to eat cake sometimes (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Crider, VL Baker

      You wouldn't want to do it everyday.  The real problem is people are eating junk food everyday.

      I hope you really wouldn't take a kid's birthday cake away.  I think you're just saying that.

      Republicans: Taking the country back ... to the 19th century

      by yet another liberal on Sun Dec 22, 2013 at 08:30:52 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  No cake police, really. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        VL Baker

        No, I'm not going to take away anybody's cake. I don't think, though, that SNAP should cover Twinkies, boxed cakes, canned icing, or store-bought white cake with lard. Surely a reasonable standard could be found.
        I do think SNAP should cover real chocolate, raw sugar (perhaps with quantity limits), honey, eggs, butter, and milk--even though those items can be harmful in excess (and I'd define excess at a very low limit). So, sure, I don't want to be a huge bully about nutrition. I just don't think we ought to spend taxpayer money promoting disease.
        And your point regarding every day vs celebrations is valid. thanks

        "There is just one way to save yourself, and that's to get together and work and fight for everybody." ---Woody Guthrie (quoted by Jim Hightower in The Progressive Populist April 1, 2012, p3)

        by CitizenJoe on Mon Dec 23, 2013 at 07:00:36 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  When you get SNAP expanded in ways you're (0+ / 0-)

          suggesting, or just get it expanded to where it covers the actual cost of a reasonable amount of food for a month, then maybe we can talk -- though I'd much rather see an educational effort and incentives than prohibitions.  People resent prohibitions.  People resent being deprived of any level of choice because they're poor and being told in a thousand ways that they are inadequate. This would just be one more way.

          I've seen programs about school systems really promoting good eating and fitness, getting the kids engaged, getting them educated and excited.  That kind of change doesn't produce a resentful backlash -- it produces enthusiastic, changed people, who will then affect other people.

          I'm afraid the kind of changes to SNAP that you're advocating would just come as another burden to parents, and would NOT produce any lasting change, because it seems so punitive. ANd if the detail were worked out by the current Congress or any Congress we're likely to have soon, it would in fact be punitive.

          THe "educate and involve people" route may go slower but it's much more likely to make lasting positive change.

          --------------------- “These are troubling times. Corporation are treated like people. People are treated like things. …And if we ever needed to vote, we sure do need to vote now.” -- Rev. Dr. William J. Barber

          by Fiona West on Mon Dec 23, 2013 at 01:15:44 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  I'd be happy to see the expansion first, too, (0+ / 0-)

            but I don't look upon non-coverage of a product as punitive, any more than non-coverage of cigarettes, say; I started to add, or soap or toothpaste and floss, but I kinda think those ought to be covered.

            "There is just one way to save yourself, and that's to get together and work and fight for everybody." ---Woody Guthrie (quoted by Jim Hightower in The Progressive Populist April 1, 2012, p3)

            by CitizenJoe on Mon Dec 23, 2013 at 04:18:53 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

  •  It isn't just the deleterious effects of obesity (4+ / 0-)

    on the table.

    According to a number of studies conducted by the Mayo Clinic, American Diabetes Association and the National Institutes of Health, autoimmune diseases are being diagnosed at rapid rates.
    "It has been reported that autoimmune disease is on the rise. There has been an unexplainable increase in incidents of celiac disease, lupus and Type 1 diabetes," said Virginia T. Ladd, president and executive director of the American Autoimmune Related Diseases Association.
    Ladd said with the rapid increase in autoimmune diseases, it clearly suggests that environmental factors are at play due to the significant increase in these diseases. Genes do not change in such a short period of time, she said, adding the current state of autoimmune disease is an epidemic that should be of great concern to both the government and health officials.
    The incidence of lupus has tripled over the last 50 years. In parts of Europe, MS diagnoses have quadrupled.

    The whole conversation about food, our lifestyles and our environment is going to be changing RAPIDLY over the next few years as more and more people fall victim to these life altering realities.

    •  great links Thanks! ExpatGirl n/t (3+ / 0-)

      Macca's Meatless Monday

      by VL Baker on Sun Dec 22, 2013 at 05:06:17 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Thanks. Grim but important information. (0+ / 0-)

        We really have TWO massive, world-wide crises going on in our time:  gLobal warming, and toxicity.  We're just beginning to perceive the outlines of how serious the toxicity crisis is.

        --------------------- “These are troubling times. Corporation are treated like people. People are treated like things. …And if we ever needed to vote, we sure do need to vote now.” -- Rev. Dr. William J. Barber

        by Fiona West on Mon Dec 23, 2013 at 01:29:04 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  the small discussion of neuroendocrine disruptors (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      VL Baker, gramofsam1, ExpatGirl

      in the healthcare field literature often touches on the impact to gut-neurology (a.k.a. 2nd brain as its sometimes called) hence metabolism & absorption of alien chemicals with medical impacts.  the extremely wide spread of previously rare diseases leads me to a pre-hypothesis that air pollution is also extensively involved, respiration bringing pollutants into the body that we're not evolved to handle effectively.

      there's been some research on the health impact of living next to heavily-travelled traffic routes, but most air pollution discussion focuses on greenhouse gases and other popular chemisty, and on breathing problems.  the extent to which weedkillers, bugkillers, and other noxious and toxic chemicals of the 'advanced' west get into the air as well as water (and food, but aren't looked for therefore not "seen") is probably far bigger than we realize.

  •  Excellent diary VL; thank you! (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    VL Baker, ExpatGirl, mettle fatigue

    And an interesting video!

    Love one another

    by davehouck on Sun Dec 22, 2013 at 04:55:48 PM PST

  •  Model it on the fight against tobacco (4+ / 0-)

    It is socially acceptable to market junk food to children. It shouldn't be.

    An eye for an eye and the whole world will be blind.

    by rini6 on Sun Dec 22, 2013 at 05:26:30 PM PST

  •  Yep! "WE" should . . . live everyone else's life, (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    for them, since we actually don't have much of a life of our own.  Do we?  isn't that the fundamental basis of good "christian" judgment?  

    What do "WE" want others to do?  What do "WE" think is "best for them"?  What do"WE" prefer everyone else to think, believe, do?

    I'll just lightly touch on the old joke:  Who's the "WE"?

    Out here in Injun' fightin' country we've got ourselves a cult, known as "Focus on the Family".  And, they surely do!  Focus real hard on everyone else's family, to make sure and certain those less able others know how things "ought to be", according to the best judgment of their betters.  The cult was started by a fellow named "Doctor" Dobson; and, for a while anyway, it was a big hit down in Hate City - Cowlorado Springs, Cowlorado.  I was driving down I-25 a while back; and I saw a little bumper sticker on the car ahead.  I'll pass it on, since it fits so well:


    •  Sometimes liberals lean too far in the diection (0+ / 0-)

      of setting rules or prohibing harmeful behavior; I'll give you that.  But surely you've noticed that the kind of harmful foods we're talking about don't get so common because people are just sitting around making their own free spontaneous choices.  ON the contrary.  Very very rich corporations have decided what we should eat -- food that damages our health and also the health of our children.  They've gotten government complicity -- subsidies from our tax money that make Cheetos cheap, while fresh fruit stays expensive.  Children are subjected to endless barrages of advertisement, skillfully created using psychological techniques that children's minds are just not equipped to analyze and avoid, and that even adults find hard to deal with.  

      So we should shut up and let the corporations have their say?  We should do nothing to protect our children and our communities from corporations that care nothing at all about our welfare?  No.  We should get rid of junk food in school cafeterias, put warnings on drinks with high fructose corn syrup, outlaw the advertising of high-sugar cereal to children, etc.  That will still leave people with plenty lf room to make their own choices.  And no, it doesn't make us even vaguely equivalent to Focus on the Family, though if you were looking for a really vile insult, you certainly came up with one.

      --------------------- “These are troubling times. Corporation are treated like people. People are treated like things. …And if we ever needed to vote, we sure do need to vote now.” -- Rev. Dr. William J. Barber

      by Fiona West on Mon Dec 23, 2013 at 01:42:57 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  something stays with me- (5+ / 0-)

    I live in a working class neighborhood.

    a few years back my grocery made a mistake. they stocked way too many fresh fruit trays- the ones that are usually priced $29.99.

    To sell them before they spoiled, they marked them all$4.99. I grabbed a bunch, and I told everyone near me in the checkout line. They all ran to grab them.

    If we just made fruit affordable, people would buy more of it.

    For my daughter's class xmas party, i sent in two boxes of clememtines. She said the kids loved it. Some kids had four clementines.

    Kids want fresh fruit- their parents just can't afford it.

    "...i also also want a legally binding apology." -George Rockwell

    by thankgodforairamerica on Sun Dec 22, 2013 at 06:13:39 PM PST

  •  The Major Disconnect (6+ / 0-)

    The Purpose of Eating food is NUTRITION.

    The purpose of the Corporations that produce the
    Food that we eat is PROFIT.

    You can eat Nutritious Food, But you're going to have
    to buy RAW ingredients and COOK them Yourself.

    We subsidize Corn, soybeans and Wheat.

    The Three biggest GM products from Monsanto.

    We should subsidize Fresh fruits and Vegetables.

    That would bring money back to family farms AND
    make NUTRITION a lot more affordable.

    On Giving Advice: Smart People Don't Need It and Stupid People Don't Listen

    by Brian76239 on Sun Dec 22, 2013 at 06:34:27 PM PST

  •  those are some refreshing comments for Xmas (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    VL Baker

    season & then New Year, when so many americans are so focused on food experiences as thrill and celebration and recreation.

    eating as recreation.  kind of as odd as buying as recreation.

    interesting how did the westrn world get to this...?

    •  It IS recreation! (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      gramofsam1, mettle fatigue, VL Baker

      Having lived in France, I can tell you that eating is about friendship, conviviality, history, and pleasure of the senses.  If it were a simple case of mechanical, physical need of refueling, then the problem we have with "la mal bouffe" (junk food) would be very easily solved.  

      It's the Supreme Court, stupid!

      by Radiowalla on Sun Dec 22, 2013 at 07:16:33 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  have you ever grilled before? (0+ / 0-)

      it is fun to hangout in the backyard all day with some cold brews, meats, veggies, and fruits roasting and smoking on the grill.  great way to spend the day with a delicious reward at the end.  how about cooking with family or kids?  cooked with an SO or a a gf/bf?  spend time eating as a family?

      what about just enjoying good food because it is good?  because someone you love made it for you?

      this isn't isolated to the western world, people have been enjoying life around the table all over the world ever since it was discovered you could do this.

  •  Easy Solution (0+ / 0-)

    Juice fast for 100 days and proceed onto eating REAL food.

    Processed foods, including allegedly "healthy" vegetable drinks and tofu, are garbage. Most of what our bodies identify as food and utilize to keep us healthy has been killed or removed. Our body actually responds as if it encountered a toxic substance to much of what we are sold as food. Canola oil being healthy is the result of a marketing campaign. Canola oil is a trans-fat nightmare in the frying pan. Look at the sodium amounts in our foods. We're awash in more "healthy" choices and "diet" alternatives than at any other time, yet obesity remains a problem. The problem is the processed garbage people believe is food. The purpose of the alleged food is profit, not nutrition.

    Eat meats from grass-fed animals (yeah, I know not exactly meatless). Eat leafy greens. Drink warm lemon juice and water first thing in the morning (1/2 lemon for 8 oz. water) because it is all about the liver. Read "The Science of Skinny" and watch "Fat, Sick, and Nearly Dead." We have been lied to and played with respect to what is called food.

    A comment can not do this topic justice. Suffice it to say, eating as close as possible to the natural state of natural ingredients is what is best for our bodies. It's what our bodies recognize as food versus the immune response inducing garbage we are sold as food. If our bodies are healthy, then the occasional indulgence, some would say well-earned, is not a problem.

    •  You are recommending a 100-day juice fast (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      gramofsam1, BrentBT

      to solve the junk food crisis that afflicts American children?

      I'm sure every school child will thank you.  

      It's the Supreme Court, stupid!

      by Radiowalla on Sun Dec 22, 2013 at 07:38:24 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  I'm Recommending an Awakening (0+ / 0-)

        100 days is arbitrary and the video was included for inspiration. If it takes 100 days for a transformation to a lifetime of optimal nutrition for the masses, so be it. A rational person would conclude it is a fair trade. The people who are already there will welcome the company too.

        People such as yourself are part of the problem until you change your thinking. Rather than solving the problems, you look for excuses to fail or apply slippery slope to arrive at a comfortable level of futility. You'll regurgitate the common fraud, satisfied that you are one among many, satisfied with powerlessness.

        Have you tried a juice fast for even 10 days? Then you have no basis for a counter-argument, yet you offer one. You even do so for children you have not met or concern yourself with. Funny thing is, being an adult means you have the responsibility of teaching the children. What's clear is you're not up to the task because you approach from a perspective of pleasing them. You'll always look for an excuse to fail versus finding hope to improve when your purpose is to appease.

        Time for some kind of indignation rant and much hand-wringing to serve as a misdirection.

        •  Huh? (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          "People such as yourself are part of the problem until you change your thinking…."

          Sorry, but I'm not at all interested in your evangelism for unscientific, crank diets.   A 100-day juice fast is an extreme, untested diet and not to be recommended to children.  

          It's the Supreme Court, stupid!

          by Radiowalla on Sun Dec 22, 2013 at 08:59:38 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

            •  Deceptive Misprepresentation or Complete (0+ / 0-)


              At least try to make it like you attempted to understand. The lemon water in the morning is not the diet. It's about the liver. Richard Simmons promoted, backed by science, the same thing. Google it.

              The Joe guy from "Fat, Sick, and Nearly Dead" succinctly explained it. Everything his body nutritionally needs, actually more, is in the juice. The energy his body needs is in his waist. Losing weight is not just about losing fat. There are toxins bound to the fat which need to be safely eliminated from the body. The body must be given the supplies it needs to safely eliminate the toxins. This process is the "fast." Some refer to it as "cleansing" which I find a little queasy.

              I don't want people to take me at my word. Get a grip. I'm an unknown on the Internet. Try it. 10 days on a juice "fast." I say "fast" because I drank whenever I felt hungry and it's not the diet for one's lifetime. It's a diet to get into a better perspective to control what we put into our bodies. A person addicted to sugar is not in a position to determine his or her best diet, nor is he or she in a position to succeed without exception willpower.

              It amazes me that people think drinking fresh vegetable juice is unhealthy or unsafe whereas scoffing down the latest low-fat, sodium and sugar laden franken-food out of the chem lab is considered healthy. Granted there are pesticide and bacterial concerns which can be reduced by choosing organic produce and thorough washing. If consuming vegetables is bad, what are the alternatives other than hand wringing? Then go away and do some research. Come back with what you find. I'm going to stop before I go into well deserved ad-homs for absolutely poor, being generous, advice on nutrition.

              •  I watched that documentary (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:

                Fat, Sick and Nearly Dead and I enjoyed it quite a bit.  But there are other methods of dieting.  I noticed in the video both of those guys were consulting with a doctor.

                And I remember also, when the one guy's brother had a heart attack, the doctors told him NOT to do the juice fast, but drink some juice was good, but not only the juice.

                Did you really do a 100 day juice fast?

                Republicans: Taking the country back ... to the 19th century

                by yet another liberal on Sun Dec 22, 2013 at 10:36:52 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  Hmm...Good Questions (0+ / 0-)

                  As always, the correct answer is do what works for the best of all, including the individual. Or your own personal answer.

                  My initial post was facetious to some degree. 100 days is arbitrary from my perspective. I have no basis for choosing that time frame other than it is what one individual claims to have experienced. For some it may be less, for others it may be more. Everyone matters, not my inability to identify everyone or their needs. Although identifying the latter would be a good thing.

                  The juice "fast" is about getting into a position where healthy life choices are easier than poor choices. It's not about purity. Maintaining a juice "fast" is not the desired outcome. As you have pointed out, there is more to food.

                  I'm preparing to do a 60 day, that is gathering recipes for green juices. I've done 10 days to see if the idea was bunk. I drank what I call "bloody" mean green juice. I added red beets and upped the kale. In those 10 days, my energy levels and attention most definitely rose. Would this have happened if I had just fasted? I don't know since I didn't do a control. Just as the DFH were onto something 50 years ago, I'm leaning towards these Dietary F'ing H's are onto something as well. Yes, some are charlatans.

                  All I can say is don't be afraid to experiment and learn what works for you.

          •  And that's just 10 days of (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:


            •  It's Actually 3 to 4 Days of Overcoming Addiction (0+ / 0-)

              So, you're drinking kale, cucumber, lemon, apple, ginger, and celery juice (I like to add carrots, red beets, and parsley) any time you want and you're starving?!?! I never felt like I was starving. The vegetables actually moderated the addiction to unhealthy, alleged food. It made me triple my efforts to understand what was actually going into my body.

              Don't take my word. DO IT. Drink Mean Green Juice or a variant for 10 days. Those who have a good diet won't notice a difference. Those who have a poor diet, 99.9%, will notice a difference. Whether or not they choose to stay with it is their choice, but it is an informed choice which is all I care about. We're being fed processed, garbage alleged food.

          •  The "Fast" and "Diet" Amounts to Eating Your (0+ / 0-)

            Veggies in Liquid Form because the Popular Concept of Food Sucks. So, according to you, eating vegetables within a limited time period without most of the insoluble fiber, is a radical, crank diet. What is a radical crank diet is thinking anything in the interior of a supermarket is something the body recognizes as food. What you fail to realize is corporations and medical hacks are selling us a crank diet of processed food. Our bodies respond to our processed food as if it was exposed to a toxin, not food.

            There is plenty of science behind this. Or does one believe the "science" behind canola oil? All right, that was unfair. The science is correct. The marketing and failure to inform  is another story.

            While you wish to employ cognitive short-circuits, very Republican of you, there is sound science behind eating veggies and doing so in as raw a state as possible. Insoluble fiber is not either or, and anyone claiming otherwise is either ignorant or a tool. Insoluble fiber can be included by simply eating a salad.

        •  Footnote (0+ / 0-)

          I am an asshole in real life. But I dearly care about people including those whom I've never met, who would be considered numbers I consider individuals. I argue for them or my perception of them. We all do. I see that.

  •  Soul Food Junkies (5+ / 0-)

    A documentary by Byron Hurt, really good coverage of all the reasons we crave comfort food, and how devastating the effects of a high-fat, junk diet.

  •  This is it! (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    coldwynn, Radiowalla, VL Baker

    Great entry, thanks. I do believe that this message is one of the most important to disseminate. Mobilizing our population to say no to junk food most of the time will not only improve our health dramatically, it is also the best way to change what the food industry offers. In a market economy, consumers have great power to make change. I'm so tired of hearing about how big Ag forces people to eat junk food. Farmers grow stuff that the food industry will buy and the food industry makes what we as consumers will go out and buy to stick in our mouths. Taking control is about making good choices, not blaming the system.

    "If you desire peace, cultivate justice, but at the same time cultivate the fields to produce more bread; otherwise there will be no peace." Norman Borlaug

    by BrentBT on Sun Dec 22, 2013 at 10:10:17 PM PST

  •  Right of subsistence (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    VL Baker, Radiowalla

    is something activists could get behind.

    You can't force people to eat what they don't like, but you can take on legal barriers to self reliance, including landlord restrictions on home gardening.  Make a slum landlord have to explain in court why he or she expects his or her tenants to do without home grown produce.

    No one should have to do without homegrown veges and small fruits if they are paying rent on a property that includes a yard.  Just as no one should be fired from their job for wearing home sewn clothing, unless the job is acting or modeling.  Not everyone wants to garden, but likely enough would to keep their neighborhood in fresh lettuce and tomatoes.

    Let farmers make good livings selling their produce to those who can afford it.  Let the rest of us grow some of our own without having to fear that the local health dept. or other agency is going to come up tear up our gardens.  

  •  I'm signed up for an online course (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    VL Baker

    given by Johns Hopkins called

    “An Introduction to U.S. Food Systems:  Perspectives from Public Health”.

    If you go to Coursera you will find the course description.  It's free. Starts Jan 27.  And I read about it right here in one of VL Baker's diaries!

    I imagine that much of the content will be pertinent to today's topic.  

    It's the Supreme Court, stupid!

    by Radiowalla on Mon Dec 23, 2013 at 08:34:56 AM PST

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site