11 Step Guide for Healthier Nations

That sounds like “mission impossible 11”.

That list is good and fine for the United States. if you want to make a list for "Westernized cultures," you better familiarize yourself with the way things work in other countries.

1. "Kindergarten" in Norway/Scandinavia is daycare, and we don't have a "grade 12."
3. We don't have HFCS either.
8. Norway has the highest rate of breastfeeding in the (Western) world. What would be the point of this?
9. Pharmaceutical advertising is so heavily reglated and restricted here that this isn't relevant at all.
10. It's already illegal here.

A lot of the "forced labelling" of calories, nutritional info etc. would kill a lot of small businesses, independent meat/fishmongers, green grocers etc. But that's just the American thing to do, I guess.

You would loved the old Soviet Union.

Amen, Isabella.

Gee, we may not be free, but at least we ain't fat.

What's the point of being westernized if you're subject to such centralized authoritarianism?

Stick to nutrition, leave the public policy to non-facists.

#8 seems irrelevant...they've already 'disproved' that breastfeeding has any effect on most of the 'ailments' that it claimed to prevent, including obesity.

It's also interesting that people supporting breastfeeding get all wound-up about formula manufacturers NOT discouraging breastfeeding, but they have no problem whatsoever discouraging FORMULA!? People should mind their business on this point and make a decision for themselves and no one else.

No mention of widely available educational programs relating to nutrition for PARENTS? It's amazing how little adults know about making smart food choices. Forcing kids to take PE and a nutrition class in school is a nice idea, but it won't work if they're eating pizza and sitting around watching TV with their parents once they get home...

powerpuffin said:
That list is good and fine for the United States. if you want to make a list for "Westernized cultures," you better familiarize yourself with the way things work in other countries. [...]

Thanks for the insight powerpuffin. I should have narrowed it donw to north america... but then I was thinking about the UK and Oceana where these types of problems also rampant. I think we can learn a lot from the way things work in Norway.

Though it's a touchy subject, I think the US needs to have a major overhaul of its farm subsidies. Because of the subsidies (especailly for corn, soy, and canola), highly processed high calorie foods are way cheaper than healthy unprocessed foods. For more info about this, see some of things Michael Pollan has written for the NYT, or his book The Omnivore's Dilemma.

Speaking of Norway, #5 was working its way through the Norwegian parliament (the "moms" tax proposal). Powerpuffin, do you know if it passed?

#6 could be softened to the proposal of New York - apply it only to restaurants that make the information available on a corporate Internet site. #7 is already sorting itself out in the U.S., awkwardly, and is perhaps less important since people who cook their own meals using fresh meats are probably a bit more health conscious than average.

#9 is crazy... the pharmaceutical industry has enough problems as it is. You can rightly criticize which drugs they persue, but their business model makes being a professional gambler seem like a conservative career.

1) nutrition information is changing all the time via new research. The gov't attempting to sort through it all is just wishful thinking (it will turn political quick)when the scientists can not do it themselves.

2)At what age does childhood end? l8? 21? 13? How does one determine if an ad targeting 20somethings appeals to 17 year-olds? Oh wait, the gov't comes to save the people once again....

3) Warning/info labels are ok although one wonders how much suger would get a product the "icky" label (again would turn political quickly). Banning trans fat completly is as stupid as banning all sugar/salt.

4)God forbid that anyone working on the boards should have any practical knowledge of the industry. That's it, no doctors on any health advisory boards. Heh, I wonder if nutritionist who worked with an organic farm operation somehow would be considered acceptable....

5) A Stupid Wealth Transfer and would create yet more gov't to make sure all the (politically correct) food industries got money while the bad ones were taxed more. Plus what is healthy changes from journal to journal and year to year; what a mess. Examples: Eggs, red wine, tuna fish, chocolate, etc.

6) Forcing a cal count of each food item would certainly hurt all the small mon-&-pop restaurants more than the big ones but hey, that is alright I suppose. Forcing price controls on food items (veggies cheaper than other items) is bad economics via central control of prices (yay USSR) and forcing sizing of foods is stupid (yay the burger police are here). What happens if the cost of veggies shoots up due to some disaster....the restaurants just eat the cost? I suppose if one just wants the big fast food chains to make it then this is a good idea.

7) Alright although it creates more govt control and hurts the smaller farmers (as they have less cash to pay for such analysis). But your best idea yet!

8)As long as none of these people have ever been employed in the food industry....as point number 4! Where do these people come from? Straight from college? Of course this point has more regulation of the medical field (making birthing even more expensive).

9) Great. Raise the price of drugs even more while getting the double-good bonus of forcing an "evil" industry to act in a (currenty) politically correct manner. Why don't we just mandate that Wal-mart was to do this? They are evil right?

10) To vauge to be meaningful. The US does have laws that are enforced about making false medical claims.

11) Acceptable although it would cost a little. Probably as effective as the anti-drug efforts of the govt.

All in all a horrible list.

Try personal responsiblity instead of mandating the size of my steak because you assume that I can not act in my own interest.

"Because of the subsidies (especailly for corn, soy, and canola), highly processed high calorie foods are way cheaper than healthy unprocessed foods."

Good grief. The reason those foods are made at all is because there's a market for them, which has nothing to do with any farm subsidies. (For the record, I think subsidies should be eliminated altogether.)

I'll pass on these recommendations. It sounds like the former Soviet Union. People need to take individual responsibility for their actions and their weight. It's not the government's job to mandate food choices.

Hi Mike!
Once a friend of mine who was taking an art 'appreciation' class in college suggested I bring in some of the art that I have done and the class could criticize it. HaHa!! Oh yeah, I was eager to do that all right!

Quito said:
Speaking of Norway, #5 was working its way through the Norwegian parliament (the "moms" tax proposal). Powerpuffin, do you know if it passed?[...]

A lot of kindergartens are going "sugar-free" and that's controversial in itself. Cutting out the junk is fine; not even being allowed a fruit-flavored yoghurt is kind of stupid.

Dr.J said:

...

I hope this list was done just to be sensational becuase it is a little ridiculous and impractical.

Jesus Christ...why not end that list with "Armed jackboot troops to enforce my edicts?" NO. THANK. YOU.

The validity of the list as a whole aside, I wish lactation consultants were a part of regular natal health care. A lot of women switch to formula, which is often a needless expense, because they find breastfeeding troublesome. It just doesn't come naturally to some people, but that doesn't mean these people are incapable. A lactation consultant can coach a new mom through the learning process that is a natural element of first-time breastfeeding.

Dr.J said:
Hi Mike!
Once a friend of mine who was taking an art 'appreciation' class in college suggested I bring in some of the art that I have done and the class could criticize it. HaHa!! Oh yeah, I was eager to do that all right! [...]

Hilarious! Thanks for the levity to break up the assault Dr. J. Now watch as I tiptoe through the minefield...

Hi Everyone...

First off I want to thank everybody for their input. I have learned a lot from reading the very well-though out posts by the authors and the contributors to the discussions. I think I should clarify a few things as when I read the entry I can see where people are coming from when it comes to certain items - here are my thoughts...

1. In retrospect, my wording may be have contributed to people misconstuing the core message. I used words such as "mandate", "force", "legislate" etc. with reckless abandon. I think this lead to the "communist" references. I'm not suggesting a nanny state by any means, in fact I am extremely PRO individual responsibility. I stand behind my belief though that big food and restaurant are culpable in this crisis that we face. We didn't all of the sudden become irresponsible in the past 15 years. I think action has to be taken against food companies who are attempting desperately to find sneaky ways to keep us eating more of their food. Yes we have the ultimate choice, but they have an obligation to disclose what they are selling to us. As far as big food and restaurant are concerned, it is none of our business. I belive in enterprise and profit but how much profit and at who's expense? Not one of my suggestions is intended to absolve anyone of personal responsibility. But personal responsibility needn't be an all-or-nothing entity in every circumstance.

2. About the core message: What I am advocating is introducing and continuing to deliver the message of healthy eating and exercise. I belive in sending the message that exercise can be fun, exciting and that it should be akin to sleeping and brushing one's teeth when it comes to overall importance. What I'm trying to get across here is that reversing our health trends is going to take a collaborative effort. We need to fire on all cylinders here to get people to buy into fitness and healthy eating. We need to give them options, education and support.

3. I realize that some of these suggestions will never happen for a variety of reasons. What I'm doing is throwing ideas out there. Realize too that there are limitations on how much writing we are alloted. It would take pages and pages to explain how and why some of my suggestions can work but there are time constraints.

Again, I'm glad people have differing opinions. What a boring world it would be if everyone agreed with me! (not to mention totalitarian)

randomperson said:
1) nutrition information is changing all the time via new research. The gov't attempting to sort through it all is just wishful thinking (it will turn political quick)when the scientists can not do it themselves.[...]

Yes it is... there are, however some basic and fundamental health-enhancing behavious that everyone agrees on. I don't recommend people battle over the minutiae anyways. Start with exercise, plenty of vegegies and fruits, lean meats, whole grains and minimally processed foods and go from there...

randomperson said:
At what age does childhood end? l8? 21? 13? How does one determine if an ad targeting 20somethings appeals to 17 year-olds? Oh wait, the gov't comes to save the people once again....

Again, you are splitting hairs on this one... it's about using cartoon characters and child actors to pimp sugary and fatty/salty foods to kids. In terms of what precise age? Not overly important. This needs to be regulated - are you suggesting that the organizations police themselves? We've all seen how that turned out.

randomperson said:
Warning/info labels are ok although one wonders how much suger would get a product the "icky" label (again would turn political quickly). Banning trans fat completly is as stupid as banning all sugar/salt.[...]

I see your point on the sugar issue. I don't think, however that it would be that difficult to come up with a number per cup/1/2 cup, oz/ml etc.

On the trans fat thing, please elucidate as to why you think banning the most insidious by-product in our food supply is "stupid". There are small amounts naturally found in meat - I'm not suggesting banning meat, I'm suggesting eliminating the man-made stuff in which there is no safe lower limit like there is with sugar and salt.

randomperson said:
God forbid that anyone working on the boards should have any practical knowledge of the industry. That's it, no doctors on any health advisory boards. Heh, I wonder if nutritionist who worked with an organic farm operation somehow would be considered acceptable....[...]

If by "practical knowledge of the industry" you mean lobbyists or those with special interest than I stand firm - they have no business influencing policy. Your doctor reference is irrelevant. There is a difference between groups having opinions and trying to sway decision makers and those who actually wield the power themselves.

randomperson said:
A Stupid Wealth Transfer and would create yet more gov't to make sure all the (politically correct) food industries got money while the bad ones were taxed more. Plus what is healthy changes from journal to journal and year to year; what a mess. Examples: Eggs, red wine, tuna fish, chocolate, etc.[...]

I do see your point here about how this type of decision is made. The subsidies could go to sustainable farming for produce. Agree?

randomperson said:
Alright although it creates more govt control and hurts the smaller farmers (as they have less cash to pay for such analysis). But your best idea yet![...]

Thanks!

randomperson said:
As long as none of these people have ever been employed in the food industry....as point number 4! Where do these people come from? Straight from college? Of course this point has more regulation of the medical field (making birthing even more expensive).[...]

Don't understand your rational here, please explain.

randomperson said:
Great. Raise the price of drugs even more while getting the double-good bonus of forcing an "evil" industry to act in a (currenty) politically correct manner. Why don't we just mandate that Wal-mart was to do this? They are evil right?[...]

I don't think the big pharma is "evil". I think they play a role in health care and disease management. I would just like to see a preventitive approach shine through in their advertising.

randomperson said:
To vauge to be meaningful. The US does have laws that are enforced about making false medical claims.[...]

There are sneaky loopholes around this. DSHEA made sure of that.

randomperson said:
Try personal responsiblity instead of mandating the size of my steak because you assume that I can not act in my own interest.[...]

Read my previous post for my thoughts on this. I appreciate your opinions.

Bri said:
highly processed high calorie foods are way cheaper than healthy unprocessed foods.[...highly processed high calorie foods are way cheaper than healthy unprocessed foods.]

This is one of my personal biggest complaints. There was the other article about zip code determining size which is really about poverty level. The thing is that if you and your kids are hungry and you have a small amount of money everyone gets a lot fuller on a bag of Doritos than the same amount of fruit for that money. I have often thought that perhaps making healthy food more affordable would go a long way to solving obesity issues. I spend an awful lot of money every week on produce, but it's necessary.

We should not be punished by no longer having treats available because some people can't behave. I think that education is truly the key here. Nothing is truly harmful (food wise) in moderation. The people on this list are all quite well educated on food and nutrition, but we are truly the minority. MANY people don't understand the simplest things we do such as what's in a bag of movie popcorn or a giant carmel Starbucks drink - they have no idea. I think that if they were edcuated they would make better choices.

Mike... thanks for initiating a lively debate on how to change a nation...

Hey nobody says it was going to be easy.

5. Implement a junk food tax on foods....
Just what I want. The government getting more of my money.

Our health is not declining. Why do you think Social Security is in trouble? People are living longer. Do you really think the government wants us to live longer?

Great article http://www.townhall.com/columnists/WalterEWilliams/2007/01/10/trans_fat_ban

Mike if there is anything you need to learn in life:Socialism=Poverty

I think people like you (in my warped pollyanna world)should be forced immediately to review American History for 50 years of your long healthy socialist life. I noticed in your blog the word "force","forbid", "immediately".

I think there needs to be a bit of a balance between the government basically telling us what we can and cannot eat and free choice. I am an athlete and I quite honestly don't need a tax on "junk food". If I run 12 miles today and I want an ice cream cone tonight, you better believe I will be pissed off if I have to pay extra for it because of some fatass that wants ice cream to eat while sitting in front of the TV.

Your list is not terrible, but I think some of those recommendations might be a little over the top. I think that providing people with correct nutritional information, making exercise more accessible, and making fruits and vegetables more affordable would do a lot of good.

Paul,

I noticed in the great article to which your link posted contained words like "anti-smoking zealots" and "food zealots". Hum.

There never was a large groundswell of people demanding transfats to be added to our diet. Transfats were introduced because, at the time, they were seen as a low cost, healthier alternative to saturated fat. As it turns out, it was cheaper, but it wasn't healthier.

I respect Professor Williams, but for the life of me I don't know why people want to frame this issue into one of individual liberty. There is no pleasure in eating transfat. Transfat is not addictive. Your great-grandparents didn't grow up strong enough to tame the frontier by eating a diet full of transfats. Teenagers don't have sexual fantasies stirred while watching a movie star reject butter in favor of margarine.

Introducing transfat it into our diet was a huge mistake. It was, arguably, an honest mistake. And, it will not be an easy mistake to remedy. So was prescribing Thalidomide for morning sickness. Was it an abridgement of civil liberties to stop prescribing Thalidomide for morning sickness?

An diatribe against mandatory seat-belt laws would be more rational than this article.

Dear government;
Please stay the hell out of my life whenever possible.
Yours,
Heather

That said, I like the physical education and nutrition classes in schools, and -to a lesser degree- the nutrition labeling for large companies (let's say, defined as over 50 locations nationwide.)

Really dig #9. I'd go even further and suggest that all Pharmaceutical commercials should include a statement at the beginning of each commercial on the benefits of exercise, diet etc.

lactation consultants...hmmmm. i'm all for breast feeding, but not all women are able to breast feed, whether do to physical reasons or lifestyle reasons (they work full time, single mothers, day care issues).

I agree with the list, especially with the tv adds. Kids will most likely be influenced by those adds.

I totally agree with prohibiting advertisements that are directed to children. It's a sad that some are using this kind of strategy to increase their sales.

Mike, Thank you for recommending Registered Dieitians. Many people tend to confuse a "Registered Dietitian" (RD) and a "nutritionist". A RD has at least a BS in Nutrition or Dietetics, has done an internship of 9 mo -1 year and has passed an exam. RD's also need to complete 15 hours of continuing education yearly. Most do much more than that to keep up with the latest nutrition information. There is no legal definition on who can call themselves a "nutritionist". No education is required.

Some people remarked that breastfeeding is not as good as formula feeding and that mothers who work full time cannot breastfeed. Breastfeedidng has been proven over and over again to protect against illness later in life. This does not mean the person will never get sick or become obese as other factors are also involved. I work with breastfeeding women. Most women are physically capable of breastfeeding and can do it while taking care of younger children and working. It just takes some planning.

I think one of the issues of physical education today is not only having it, but teaching kids real life skills that they can take with them into the world once physical education is no longer mandatory. I remember all through grade school we used to play dodgeball, and then once a year we had to take the presidential physical fitness test. The only kids who did well on it were the ones who were naturally fit, or played sports outside of school. It got worse once I was in high school - in Indiana you only need two years of gym classes, and one semester of that is Health and Safety, which entailed sitting in a classroom!

How about teaching the kids how to work exercise into their lives? How about teaching kids how running outside is fun and centering? How about teaching kids exercise that they don't need a gym or 20 other kids to perform, just a mat and maybe some hand weights?

Please tell me number 4 is a joke. People can't honestly be that stupid.

Mike, You bring up a lot of good points. I stumbled on your site because I remember hearing something about 10yrs ago about a Scandinavian country that had higher priced unhealthy foods and lower priced. I was trying to find out which country it was...

I am your Canadian neighbour to the north. We see the obesity problems in Canada too. I love all the crapy food out there, but if I had to pay $7.00 for a bag of chips...uh, I might just buy .75 cent apple instead!! I feel the Corporations that make all the 'no nutritional value whatsoever food' should pay our Gov't a hefty tax, after all it's our government who picks up the bill for my heart attack. Sorry for the rant, but I just watched the documentary 'The Corporation'.

I can only speak for myself & the mothers I know, but giving birth a few years ago, we were encouraged to breast feed, and given literature on reaching out to a group that could help - I personally didn't find it easy, & switched to formula 3 mos later. I think in the late 60's & 70's the formula companies pushed the formula. (at the hospital, my Mom was actually discouraged from breastfeeding). So hopefully that pendulum is swinging back!