When an article on obesity ends up in the Business section of the New York Times, you may think, now they’re paying attention.  Obesity has received a lot of press in the past year.  However, television shows like Jamie Oliver’s Food Revolution, a high profile initiative by the First Lady, food taxes, and special reports by all the major news outlets, still cannot quell the rising number of overweight Americans.

“Eat less, move more”, “Say no to junk food”, “Calories In/Calories Out”.  These are the mantras of those trying to lose unwanted pounds.   Much of this is easy to understand from the health advocate’s standpoint; but, as this analysis from the New York Times suggests, it’s more than the high calorie food and lack of exercise that’s keeping Americans fat:  it’s the environment of our society. 

“Unfortunately, behavior changes won’t work on their own without seismic societal shifts…because eating too much and exercising too little are merely symptoms of a much larger malady. The real problem is a landscape littered with inexpensive fast-food meals; saturation advertising for fatty, sugary products; inner cities that lack supermarkets; and unhealthy, high-stress workplaces.”

Fast food is cheaper than healthy food.  So, cutting government food subsidies that promote an obesogenic environment is one suggested way to lower those climbing rates of overweight Americans.  Yet another popular method to combat the problem is getting the private sector involved in workplace wellness programs; having healthy employees is advantageous for the employer.  The British are placing restrictions on advertising unhealthy foods during children’s programming and making cooking classes mandatory by 2011 for all school children ages 11-14. 

All great suggestions.   Our work and mission are being acknowledged.  Now it’s time to call for action.  Please submit your comments and suggestions. 

Crack! The egg bursts onto the pan and shines like the sunrise.  A familiar visual for many, eggs are an integral part of the American diet, but many of us don’t think twice about what kind of hens those eggs come from.   In a recent New York Times article, and across the media, the discussion of caged hens has become an important debate.

Farmers with large egg farms (farms that house 4 million hens, yielding 3 million eggs per day) believe that caged chickens are just as functional as hens kept outside of cages.  However, “extreme caging methods” are being banned in California and are up for review in Ohio, calling into question the factory farming methods that are used. 

Many animal rights advocates believe that the lives of these caged chickens are subpar. They can hardly move, let alone roam free as they would in their natural habitat.

The debate is contentious, especially because eggs create a large portion of school lunches and 90% of eggs consumed by the American population come from these large farms.  Is there a way to feed our population while still respecting the animals that provide for us?  What do you think?

Raw milk has become such a hot topic of debate recently; police are even getting involved.   Rawesome Foods, a natural food store in Venice, California, was the target of a police raid that confiscated over $10,000 worth of raw dairy products.  Is raw dairy a do or a don’t?  Check out both sides of the argument and give us your opinion on this dairy dilemma.

Do: Raw food enthusiasts believe that raw milk contains important bacteria that build up the immune system and prevent allergies as well as lactose intolerance. Since raw milk is banned in many states, people will drive for hours to buy raw milk from farms in neighboring states. Those who support raw milk believe that pasteurization kills not only the dangerous bacteria, which may or may not be harmful, but also the important nutrients that are in the milk in its purest form. They consider it a superfood full of nutrients and beneficial enzymes. 

Don’t: Others are happy to stick with the milk that is readily available at grocery stores throughout the country. The dangers are very real, they believe, and it is not worth the risk to drink milk raw. Bacteria found in raw milk such as E. coli, salmonella, and listeria can make people sick or even be lethal.

What do you think? Should pasteurization be legally necessary for all milk products? Should the bans on raw milk in some states be lifted?

You can listen to the story on NPR’s All things Considered here.

Many children in our country start off Saturday morning with their favorite cartoon or television show. This is prime time for advertisers to sell the latest trend in children’s toys and foods. The problem is that the latest trend in food is generally an alarmingly unhealthy choice for children. A debate has sparked between the food industry and the federal government about what qualifies as an appropriate and healthy food to advertise to children. According to a recent New York Times article, the food industry began an initiative in 2007, to fight childhood obesity, and are trying to advertise and sell healthier choices for kids.

Unfortunately, the food industry has an odd conception of what is healthy for a child to eat and what is not; Froot Loops with 12 grams of sugar per serving are deemed healthy by their standard. While that amount of sugar is clearly a less than healthy choice for kids, the battle between the food industry giants and the federal government will continue to rage on. 

Although it is tough to fight such a big industry on a topic like this, we can all take our own steps to raise happy and healthy children.

Since sugar-filled breakfast foods are one of the largest culprits of target advertising, we came up with a few healthier options to feed your children first thing in the morning:

• Avocado on an Ezekiel muffin or whole grain toast sprinkled with sea salt and extra virgin olive oil
• Raw muesli with fresh berries
• Oatmeal with organic raisins and a touch of maple syrup
• Baked apples or pears sprinkled with oats and/or chopped nuts drizzled with honey or maple syrup
• Fresh fruit smoothies
• Almond butter and banana sandwiches on whole grain toast
• Breakfast egg sandwich with a whole grain muffin, turkey bacon and organic cheese
• Red quinoa with berries and/or bananas, warm milk and honey or maple syrup

What do you serve for your kids in the morning?

In a disposable society, we tend to place value on convenience, quick fixes, and fast food.  Yes, fast food is popular because it’s cheap, quick, and can be thrown away.  We toss the wrapping, cutlery, containers and leftover food as easily as we cruise through the drive-in.  The U.S. also has a bad habit of excessive waste as a result of overproducing mass quantities of food. 

The National Institutes of Health (NIH) says, in a new study, that 40 percent of what farmers grow ends up in the garbage.  This article states, “The food we toss consumes 4 percent of all U.S. oil and more than 25 percent of our fresh water. Food rotting in landfills produces methane, a potent climate-changing gas. Not to mention the energy spent first delivering, then hauling away uneaten food.” 

Not only is this overproduction of food in the U.S. bad for our planet, it’s also bad for our health. 

From this complex study, NIH scientists came up with their "push" hypothesis; “excess food pushes its way onto plates, the little bit more that people eat makes them overweight, and the rest goes in the trash or gets wasted along the way”.  The overproduction of food thereby becomes a contributing factor to the obesity epidemic. 

With agricultural subsidy programs that reward overproduction, and a food industry that is profit driven, producing a lot of cheap, high-calorie food items; change needs to come from the source.  What if government subsidies were given to small organic farmers instead of Big Ag and there were more regulations on how the food industry can market their products?  Do you think we would see a shift in this complex issue of food waste and the "push" hypothesis?

How would you change the production model?  What is your solution to the high cost of cheap food?

If you eat conventional strawberries grown in California, you will be ingesting a known cancer causing carcinogen.  Methyl iodide has been approved by the Department of Pesticide Regulation in California for use in growing strawberries.  Well over 80% of the nation's strawberries are grown in California, putting a large amount of this pesticide in our food supply.  That’s pretty disappointing when The President’s Cancer Panel has declared chemicals are bad for our health, and a sure means of prevention is found by eating organic foods.

You can still make your voices heard.  The CDPR is taking comments on this proposed regulation until June 14, 2010.  Write  them now and tell them you do not want strawberries treated with cancer causing carcinogens in your food supply.

Find out more information on how to stay healthy by eating organic foods at the Environmental Working Groups Food News.

Please comment and let us know your thoughts on the CDPR’s decision to use methyl iodide and how we can keep our food supply safe.

A recent analysis by the USDA on what American’s are eating showed that on the whole, we are consuming more meat and grains than the dietary guidelines in MyPyramid suggest, and less vegetables, fruit and dairy.  It doesn’t take a scientist to figure that out that there are problems with the Standard American Diet.  We can see that diet and health are directly correlated, as rates in chronic health issues like obesity, heart disease, diabetes and cancer continue to rise and the food American eat gets worse.

The Integrative Nutrition Food Pyramid, adapted from the USDA Pyramid, emphasizes the importance of high-quality vegetables, fruits, complex carbohydrates, proteins, healthy fats and water.  And to complete the picture, the pyramid is surrounded with lifestyle factors, considered primary food, that create optimal health:  relationship, career, physical activity and spirituality.

Integrative Nutrition’s Food Pyramid encourages people to look at these aspects of life as a form of nutrition a way to feed themselves at a much deeper level than food.  The food you eat plays a critical role in your health and happiness, and discovering the right foods for you is very important.  But the four forms of primary food truly nourish you and make your life extraordinary. 

What changes would you make to the USDA’s dietary guidelines in MYPyramid? 

Recently the New York City Department of Education passed Chancellor Regulation A-812 which prohibits the sale of home baked goods at fundraisers, but approves the sale of Doritos and Pop-Tarts.  The complete list of approved items can be found here.  How ironic that these highly processed, nutritionally void foods are somehow deemed safer than goods baked at home with whole ingredients and love.

NYC Green Schools is organizing a Bake-In rally to protest this new regulation on Thursday March 18th from 4-6pm on the steps of City Hall.   Detailed information about the bake-in regarding posters, banners, slogan ideas, etc. will be posted on their blog nycgreenschools.org.

If you are in New York City, please join the Bake-In and let your voices be heard. 

Will taxing and putting warning labels on soda discourage people from buying it?  Has this method discouraged people from using tobacco?  Should tax revenue from sodas and sugary beverages be used in anti-soda campaigns or put in a fund for healthier school food?  The rise in childhood obesity rates have the attention of lawmakers, but will raising prices on unhealthy foods keep kids from consuming them?

The Obama administration has a commitment to remove junk food, including sodas from schools.  This is a great first step in the fight against childhood obesity.  But, as Mark Bittman of the New York Times writes:  “a growing number of public health advocates are pushing for even more aggressive actions, urging that soda be treated like tobacco: with taxes, warning labels and a massive public health marketing campaign, all to discourage consumption.”

Taxing soda has the potential to raise over a billion dollars annually in New York State alone.  The question remains, where is the best place to apply this money?

Where do you think lawmakers should apply these funds?

The Food and Drug Administration is considering increasing serving size on nutrition labels to match what people are actually consuming as a serving.  This in turn will increase the calorie amount and determine all the other nutritional values.  The hope is that people will think twice before going back for seconds when it may actually be fourths!

Barbara O. Schneeman, director of the F.D.A. office that oversees nutrition labels, said in a New York Times report, “We are actively looking at serving size and evaluating what steps we need to take.  Ultimately, the purpose of nutrition labeling is to help consumers make healthier choices, make improvements in their diet, and we want to make sure we achieve that goal.”

One concern is that by increasing serving size, consumers will think the government is saying it’s ok to eat even more.  Consumers need to be educated.  When shopping for food, read the labels closely.  Consider that packaged processed foods tend to be high in fat and calories.  The best foods are ones without nutrition labels.  Fresh fruits and vegetables are much more nutritionally dense than most processed foods, yet they have no fancy packaging to proclaim their immense health benefits.  When shopping, it is important to shop the perimeter of the grocery store where you’ll find more whole and nutritious foods.

Do you think the FDA’s plan to increase serving size will work to curb the obesity problem among Americans?