7
Junking junk food regulations
Mark Bittman
To view this content, Javascript must be enabled and Adobe Flash Player must be installed.
Kai Ryssdal: This is kind of a generalization, but most of us try to eat healthy when we can. And those of us who are parents want our kids to do the same.
Commentator Mark Bittman says it'd sure be great if the government played along.
Mark Bittman: Let's play pretend, shall we? Pretend your child's teacher is distributing snacks twice a day, morning and afternoon -- Snickers, Pop-Tarts, Mountain Dew, some fries, maybe a few nachos. Pretend you complain to the principal. The principal says to the teacher, "Could you please stop doing that? You have until, let's say, five years from Tuesday."
Crazy, right? Yet that's pretty much what the Federal Trade Commission did recently with its food marketing guidelines. The agency would like Big Food to market healthier food to kids, and refrain from marketing junk food altogether. But they're asking, not telling. The guidelines won't take effect for five years, and when they do, they're voluntary.
Tell me: What good are voluntary guidelines five years from now? Five years from now, your 5-year-old is 10, and your newborn is 5. Their eating patterns are set. Five more years -- at least -- of America bulking up? Who will pay for all that diabetes?
Requesting voluntary compliance from a blame-the-victim industry that pushes ultra-processed junk is like requesting that a cigarette smoker quit -- in five years.
Junk food is the poster child for what's wrong with American food and, in turn, our diet. Obesity comes from excess calories and causes diabetes, and excess calories come from junk food.
No one in industry is interested in regulation. They may gripe about the voluntary guidelines, but I'll bet there's a collective sigh of relief at what appears to be a brokered deal that gives the industry a five-year, break-in period before... before what? Before nothing. In the meantime, keep feeding the kids those Snickers.
Ryssdal: Mark Bittman is a columnist for the New York Times and the author of the book, "How to Cook Everything." Send us your comments -- click on this contact link.
Mr Bittman isn't proposing to ban food; he is simply saying that regulations in a distant future that voluntary are the equivalent of no regulation.
There is no such thing as a free lunch, so junk food manufacturers should have to pay for the cost of their product.
The problem with junk food is that it is dirt cheap and more accessible to lower and middle income individuals than quality food products. However, this price does not reflect the externalities of the product, which are diabetes and other ailments associated with obesity. Since the Federal Government, through programs like Medicare and Medicaid, end up paying for diabetes treatments that stem from over-consumption of junk food, perhaps the better approach (one I've heard proposed in NY) is to actually tax junk food like we tax cigarettes. Of course, simultaneously, which Wal-Mart and Michelle Obama seem to be taking the lead on, the price of quality foods like fresh vegetables must come down so that lower income families can replace the junk in their diet with some good nutrition. Otherwise, we're just going to face a famine epidemic instead of obesity.
Do we *really* want a government with the power to say, "You can't say that in public"? If the government can ban "junk food" ads, as Bittman proposes, it can just as easily ban this commentary. But, fortunately, in this country the Constitution forbids the government from doing any such thing.
He got the processed junk food right, but he whiffed on which part of the processed junk actually causes diabetes. The ever obfuscating metric of heat, calories, causes diabetes? Does Mr. Bittman even know what diabetes is? I became irreversibly dumber hearing that statement. Marketplace, you can do better. Maybe he should read the writings of NY Times contributer Gary Taubes who seems far less confused about obesity and diabetes than Mr. Bittman.
Gosh, it has to be the "evil big food" that makes what people buy. Last I checked, you can get good food at every store and farmers market. People choose to be obese.
Having the gov protect me from using my liberty is not wanted. If I can't be allowed to make a choice in what I put my body, how can I be trusted to vote or drive a car or make medical decisions?
How can I be free if I am not allowed to make mistakes?
