More obesity big-picture stuff. 14 October 2009 3:08 pm
Posted by Tracy in : consumerism,convenience,food snobbery,health,health at every size,history,politics,responsibility,writing , trackbackSo here’s a few thoughts I cut from last Wednesday’s post since it was running too long. I am tempted to make my health-at-every-size ranting a regularly-scheduled feature, but “Weighty Wednesdays” is just too cutesy and besides, I haven’t exactly been rocking the regularly-scheduled posts these past few months anyway.
So. Here I go. Despite its persistent reporting by both government and mass media sources, I am extremely skeptical about the oft-trumpeted assertion that we are in the midst of an obesity epidemic. I should probably spend some time analyzing the hell out of the use of the term “epidemic” when I think “crisis” or “panic” are more appropriate, but for now I’m trying to get on with this post (also, chances are somebody smarter or at least speedier than me has already written something awesome on the subject, and I should research it a bit and quote wiser words instead of making readers suffer through mine).

My belly thinks maybe the whole idea of “obesity epidemic” is not even wrong.
What I will write is something I tried to express in my food sociology class last Monday: I think a lot of the sound and fury about obesity is people freaking out about the relatively recent development that for the first time in human history there’s so much food that a majority of our species isn’t starving (I’m guessing hunger was a pressing prehistorical problem, but there’s less evidence to go on in that department). We’re evolving away from “Are we eating?” past “Are we eating enough?” and I think the next question is “Are we eating well enough?” but that question is really, really hard, and so people are trying to ask “Are we eating too much?” instead. Now it turns out that “Are we eating too much?” is actually not a super-easy question, either, and it’s extra-fascinating if we look past individuals to consider the continued existence of famine and chronic malnutrition in the face of historically unprecedented food abundance. But there I go with the big picture again, and so maybe now you’re starting to get an idea of things I might have to illustrate as well as rant about.
Now. I do believe that some people are trying to ask “Are we eating too much crap?” and that the answer to that question is far too often “Yes.” (Note: the definition of crap is extremely debatable, and I’m still working on my definition thereof. More on that in a bit.) Unfortunately, people aren’t placing as much emphasis on the last word of that question as I’d like, and so I much prefer “Are we eating well enough?” even though it’s hard. I think that fixating on quantity instead of quality is a mistake because if the past few decades of food trends have shown us anything, it’s ever-increasing quantities of diet (or otherwise “healthified”) junk food — and now I’m having a hard time coming up with any food specifically marketed for weight loss that isn’t junk.
Anyway. I must run to school now, but in the wake of last Wednesday’s food policy class discussion, I have been thinking a lot about what kind of mass-produced foods I consider not-junk, in light of the fact that food companies are not stupid and will no doubt be trying to cash in on efforts to be seen as not contributing to poor public health “the obesity epidemic.” I do not think it’s a coincidence that big food companies looking to improve their image focus on obesity, which is easily quantified (albeit in ways that are reductive to the point of near-meaninglessness), rather than health, which really is not. Easily quantified, that is. Anyway. Where was I? Oh yes. What kind of products could big industrial food companies make to convince me that they aren’t entirely out to produce the cheapest, most profitable crap they can get away with putting on the market? Umm… well, it’s something to ponder, anyway.
-
Marcy
-
Jen/Mili
-
Janelle





