On Food and Government

At times, I find myself incredibly torn between wanting smaller government and realizing that it seems that we can't trust individuals/corporations/trade associations to police themselves and look out for the public well-being.  Chemical and food safety is perhaps the biggest area where these feelings clash.

The simple fact is that there is a lack of education and a lack of knowledge about the safety of things we expose our bodies to - cancer studies show that lifestyle (diet and exercise) and environmental exposures present the greatest risk.  Why do I separate education and knowledge?  There are a surprising number of substances that we (American industry) put into food and personal care products.  This isn't something that can really be blamed on the consumer - how does one know whether calcium caseinate is safe and proven?

Part of the issue here is that Americans, unlike Europeans, take a "safe unless proven otherwise" approach to additives.    It is only recently that there's been any agreement (and acknowledgement) that BPA is dangerous, for example.  I don't think it was ever added to products maliciously; we simply didn't know better.  Now that we do, there is still an education/knowledge gap - where might you be exposed to BPA and is there a safe level of exposure?  A common source is canned food liners - in nearly every canned good.  Eating only organic food won't protect you here; most of those manufacturers use the substance to line cans and prevent rust and other side effects of food being directly in contact with metal for an extended time (years).  (By the way, you'll also be exposed be handling thermal paper receipts, drinking canned soda, and possibly even recycled paper products due to those pesky receipts.)

Then we have the issue of education and access.  Now, this is a tricky one to overcome.  We know that obesity tends to be higher in poorer populations in the U.S. and that this is largely driven by diet.  There is an impression that foods that are not nutritionally-dense (soda, candy, chips) or are processed are cheaper than real, whole, healthy foods.  To some extent, there appears to be truth to this.  Even more of a problem is that many of the people in the poorer urban environments (and, indeed, those upper-middle suburbs, too) aren't sitting down to a home-cooked family dinner.  They're eating food that's fast and convenient, and these foods tend to be less than healthy.  Unfortunately, they do tend to be tasty and addictive.  This is a complicated issue to solve.  We need to teach people about healthier (yet still tasty) choices, and we need to get the food to them.  I'm in favor of letting the consumers drive the market and have a real push toward "better" foods - but the consumers can't do that if they don't know how to read food labels to identify what those better choices are.  (And they won't do it if there aren't reasonable, affordable choices available to them.)  Is HFCS something to be avoided or "no different than regular sugar" and still something to be avoided? ;-)  Indeed, that last one is a trick question - it's hard to be educated on "facts" when it's not clear what the facts actually are.

All of that commentary is before even getting into the issue of the national food market (as opposed to local food) and farm subsidies.  But I want to point out two food-related issues that you should learn more about and may consider writing your representatives in Washington about:

2012 Farm Bill may be decided by the super-committee without any floor debate!  
This is a very important bill that comes up for renewal/revision every five years that really shapes the policies that have a direct effect on what food gets to your table.  Whatever you believe about farm subsidies, food stamps, and nutrition programs, how comfortable are you in the idea that this legislation may just be folded into the budget discussions, rather than being addressed on its own, with debate and detail?
http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/11/08/the-secret-farm-bill/
http://www.grist.org/farm-bill/2011-11-15-the-farm-bill-the-view-from-the-grassroots

USDA school lunch proposals
We should all be aware that school lunch is a vital part of a child's diet.  For some kids living in poverty, it's their only meal.  For many kids who buy lunch, it's an opportunity to continue education onto the plate.  the current school lunch guidelines have been in place for 15 years.  In light of epidemic childhood obesity, concerned people have been speaking out about the quality of school lunches.  Yes, it's an "Obama administration proposal."  Frankly, that doesn't affect my opinion of whether or not it's a good proposal; I'm more interested in what it actually is trying to accomplish.  I confess, this one does start ringing that bell of local versus national government.  It's tempered by wanting all students to have access to healthier food, though.
http://www.businessweek.com/ap/financialnews/D9R18F800.htm

Chew on those for a while, friends.