Money Talks and Bull.... Walks
Perhaps the most influential
and interesting shortcoming of these food guides is the government’s failure to
follow through with the policies it recommends. The intended purpose of these
guidelines is to provide the public with information on how to eat better. How
is the government persuading consumers and food producers to implement its
advice?
Has it restricted the amount of salt or sugar permitted in certain
foods or reduced advertising of junk foods to young children? Does it support
farmers who grow predominantly vegetables and whole grains? The government does
not support its advice economically.
Clearly, America’s actual
food consumption is nowhere near what the USDA is recommending. Part of the problem
might come from the fact that the federal government, with an annual budget of
about $3.8 trillion, spends exactly zero dollars promoting the food guides. Think
about it: when was the last time you saw a government sponsored commercial,
magazine ad or billboard promoting whole grains, vegetables or exercise?
The government simply
develops the guidelines and leaves the advertising and education in the hands
of the corporations who make money from product sales. Why would a wealthy country in
the middle of an obesity epidemic not allocate resources to help its citizens
with diet and nutrition? It’s a bit odd that the government has no
budget for advertising their own health advice yet still finds a way to
contribute resources to other food campaigns.
Perhaps you’ve seen the
slogans: “Got Milk?” “Beef, It’s what’s for Dinner” and “Pork. The Other White
Meat.” These campaigns, aimed at increasing Americans’ consumption of dairy,
beef and pork products, are part of the federal government’s commodity
promotion programs called “check off” programs. Check off
programs demonstrate that what the government tells us to eat is contradictory
to where it focuses its time and money.
No comments:
Post a Comment