Our National Eating Disorder

In his article "Our National Eating Disorder," Michael Pollen discusses our national eating disorder as being a confusion in regards to what we as Americans should eat. He mentions the fact that a Koala bear doesn't need to think about what it should eat; if it smells like something it can eat, that is what the bear will eat. With so many options for meals, we get lost in the idea of calories, taste, and/or "healthy" diets. We see so many scientific studies on what we should eat that we have lost the instinctive power  to choose what we want to eat. He talks about the causes of this being scientific studies as well as such a mixture of culinary cultures. For example, we have French cuisine, Chinese food, and Southern food all very easily accessible at any point of the day. This makes it so easy to get confused when we are choosing what to eat. This a troubling situation, and it is coupled with the fact that Americans are so caught up in what is "healthy" at that point in time. One of the most interesting point Pollen makes in his article is that we are so easily swayed in our eating habits to make them more healthy, however, that is possibly our downfall to being healthy. He mentions how the French have drastically lower obesity rates and heart disease rates than Americans and they regularly drink wine and eat cheeses. This diet isn't necessarily unhealthy, but if they are consumed on a regular basis, you would think it is an unhealthy lifestyle, right? No. Because they are consistent with their meals, it isn't confusing to chose what to eat. As a result, they can settle into what they want and not be confused with any scientific studies that suggest otherwise.
I really enjoyed what Pollen had to say about how Americans live in such a way that we can be swayed in our eating patterns by studies, scientists, or other findings that will promote optimal health to those who follow. This is such an easy decision to make because people want to be as healthy as possible. I know I am guilty of doing this at times. If I see something in a magazine, on the internet, or another article, it is tempting to make a drastic lifestyle change in hopes that it will help you become more healthy in the long-run. I chose my meals by what is most healthy for me. I try to keep meals as consistent as possible, but it can be hard with such solid scientific evidence being thrown around.

In class writing exercise

I like to eat things that task good and align with what I am craving at that time. It is interesting to consider, however, the larger subconscious implications with what I eat. This stems from the way I was raised. I enjoy eating things that are healthy as a result of how you feel after the meal. Finding the balance between indulging into things that aren't good for you and the things that are solid meals for a healthy life is essentially how I make my meal choices. My values and concerns for eating lie in the health implications for the rest of my life. If you eat healthy while you are young, you will create a foundation for a healthy lifestyle when you are older. This allows for a longer life where you are able to do more things.

Extend Essay 1: Mindless Eating in America

Conor Hoolihan

WRIT 1133

Professor Leake

4-22-13

Mindless Eating In America

As I sat at Panera Bread last week, my views toward American societal eating habits changed drastically. Our society condones and promotes an eating style that takes away from the enjoyment and relaxation that food once brought to people. Because efficiency and productivity are staples of American lifestyle, we are forced to eat fast, unhealthy, and most importantly mindlessly. What I mean by this is that we are more focused on the “chore” of eating as fast as we can as opposed to eating for enjoyment. This is exactly what I saw at Panera that day. A family sat down for lunch and proceeded to remain silent for the whole meal, which lasted for approximately 20 minutes. Mindless eating is not so much the way we eat, but the idea of how we eat as a society. It encompasses the fact that we eat way to fast and don’t realize what we are eating because we are in a hurry. We are moving away the enjoyment and pleasure of eating. This can be linked to the unhealthy society in which we live as influenced by the marketing around us. With the help of doctors, dieticians, and government statistics, it is easy to see that the mindless eating habits that we, and large businesses, promote in our society are the source of the increasing obesity rates in our country.

To start off, it should be clarified that mindless eating is the societal habit of eating on the sole basis that there is food in front of you and it ALL needs to be eaten before you have to get back to work, family, or other obligations. The problem with how we are dealing with it is that businesses market to the fact that people will eat everything you give them, hence larger portions is perceived as good. Dr. Wansink, a Cornell nutrition research leader, has done extensive studies on the areas of people eating more than is necessary because of what they are served. He states that "Most of us don't overeat because we're hungry. We overeat because of family and friends, packages and plates, names and numbers, labels and lights, colors and candles, and other environmental factors (Wansink).” This is a result of the way eating in portrayed by businesses and society. For example, the trends in company’s marketing has moved to on-the-go friendly packaging, like Go-Gurt and Gripz snacks. Studies by Dr. Wansink have concluded that people will eat more if there is more to eat in front of them. The most interesting part of his study was when he explained to his students who sat through a 90 minute class that if they were presented with a one-gallon bowl of cereal, they would eat more cereal during the class than if they were presented two half-gallon bowls. Despite this lesson, the students who served themselves from the one–gallon bowl served 53% more and ate 59% more and did not believe the size of the serving bowls influenced their behavior. The second myth was busted in a similar fashion. A study of 150 Chicagoans revealed that Americans are more likely to use external, environmental cues to determine when they are done eating, rather than cues of internal satiety. People eat more with their eyes than with their stomachs, and they do not even realize it (Wansink). These studies confirm to large extent that people will mindless eat whatever is in front of them, hence leading to overeating and eventually obesity.

Businesses have a lot of control over the eating style of our society. This can be seen in correlation between the rising obesity rates in our country over the last 20 years (Horwitz). This rate has been steadily rising and so have the target products from top business across the world. A great example of this can be seen by Kellogg’s unveiling of their patented snack call Gripz in July of 2005 (Food Processing). This snack is a pouch of crackers that is to be consumed in large quantities while being eaten on the go. This can be seen from their advertisements that show a young kid eating this snack while skateboarding. Not only does advertisement contribute largely to societal eating norms, it can also affect how our minds perceive food and encourage us to eat more. The problem with this is that we are now be triggered by the advertisement and forced to eat mindlessly. Whatever the marketing team chooses to say, that is what people perceive as right. For example, the director of marketing for Kellogg says that, "Gripz provide kids with the freedom to have a great-tasting, convenient snack anytime, anywhere (Food Processing)." Despite how true the words he says are, this doesn’t promote a sustainable way for kids to eat. By stating this, the director of sales immediately takes the reins for how snacking will be done in children’s lives. You may say, “what is wrong with kids snacking with an easy option that claims to be healthier?” The answer to this lies in the facts provided by us from our government: “childhood obesity has more than doubled in children and tripled in adolescents in the past 30 years (CDC).” As society encourages the production of larger, easier to consume meals and snacks, the obesity rate follows the increase. This justifies how mindless eating generated from the lack of enjoyment is leading to higher obesity rates across the country.

Its easy to get lost in all of these statistics and claims by people across the board. It is good to look at people who study dietetics and nutrition for their careers. Michael Pollan, who has written many books on the sustainability of our eating culture, touched on the topic of obesity in America in regards to our way of eating. Pollan discusses that three of every five Americans are now overweight, and some researchers predict that today’s children will be the first generation of Americans whose life expectancy will be shorter than that of their parents (Pollan). This is a very drastic change in the progression of our society, and it can be attributed to the eating patterns in which we live amongst today. Pollan continues to discuss that these patterns when he says, “Big food companies are pushing supersize portions of unhealthful foods on us and our children. We have devolved into a torpid nation of couch potatoes (Pollan).” Not only does he reaffirm the claims made in this paper, but he also continues to continues to recognize the rationale behind why companies promote their products the way they do. He states that corn is such an integral part of our food as a society and there are copious amounts of corn being produced around the world. When food is inexpensive and plentiful, people will eat more of it and get fat. Since 1977, the average American’s daily intake of calories has jumped by more than 10 percent. This in exceedingly interesting because of the facts provided by the Center for Disease Control and Prevention: from 1985 to 2010 the amount of obese people has grown almost 30% across America. These numbers align perfectly to display the steady increase and correlation between the idea of mindless eating and obesity.

On top of the heavy statistics, it is crucial to acknowledge the real examples of mindless eating within our eating culture. In an paper written by Jamie Horwitz, he explains how food is becoming an additive to situations, similar to cigarettes, instead of how it used to be viewed and consumed as a definitive (Horwitz). This allows for the idea of food to be associated with cigarettes. Not only does this remove the necessity aspect of food, it opens a new perspective of how we as a society are moving away from food acting as a definitive and replacing its functionality as an addictive habit that doesn’t benefit the consumer. Horwitz also touches on the idea of how businesses market their products toward a convenient snacking concept as opposed to having a sit-down meal where you are indulged and conscious of what you are consuming. He uses the example of how Campbell’s soup was once only sold in cans where it had to cooked and served, however, now they sell their product in a microwaveable and drinkable cup (Horwitz). The idea of mindless eating can be seen so vividly through the trends and examples he discusses. As the times move forward, so does the convenient, fast style of eating; the same goes for the obesity rates.

On top of the health affects and societal affects that mindless eating causes the American people in the long run, the financial problems are becoming apparent as well. According to the Center for Disease Control and Prevention, medical costs associated with obesity were estimated at $147 billion in 2008; the medical costs for people who are obese were $1,429 higher than those of normal weight (CDC). This is a very high number considering that 35.7% of American adults are obese. This percentage appears to be increasing as well. This shows that something needs to be done to control how people eat in our society in order to strive for a healthier eating style that is less influenced by the subconscious demands exhibited by large food businesses. The health effects of being obese also include heart disease, stroke, type 2 diabetes and certain types of cancer, some of the leading causes of preventable death.

Even if our society needs to choose between indulging in a meal or feeling restricted from what they want to eat, something needs to be done to establish a stronger sense of enjoyment had by Americans during meals to combat mindless eating. Mindless eating habits clearly have a direct correlation to the increasing obesity rates over the past 20 or 30 years. This can be seen by the trends in the marketing of large food chains as well as rushed lifestyles we all live. The studies and knowledge put into this topic by very influential nutritionists justifies the fact that increasing obesity rates can be linked to mindless eating habits help by our society.

References

"Cornell University Food & Brand Lab." Cornell University Food & Brand Lab. N.p., n.d. Web. 22 Apr. 2013. <http://foodpsychology.cornell.edu/research/beating-mindless-eating.html>.

Horwitz, Jamie . "Eating at the Edge." Blackboard DU. University of California Press, n.d. Web. 22 Apr. 2013. <https://blackboard.du.edu/webapps/portal/frameset.jsp?tab_tab_group_id=_2_1&url=%2Fwebapps

"Kellogg's comes to Gripz with new products for 'tweens'." Food Processing. N.p., n.d. Web. 22 Apr. 2013. <www.foodprocessing.com/industrynews/2005/448.html>.

Magazine, Michael PollanThe New York Times. "The Way We Live Now: The (Agri)Cultural Contradictions of Obesity | Michael Pollan." Michael Pollan. N.p., n.d. Web. 22 Apr. 2013. <http://michaelpollan.com/articles-archive/the-way-we-live-now-the-agricultural-contradictions-of-obesity/>.

"Obesity and Overweight for Professionals: Data and Statistics: Adult Obesity - DNPAO - CDC." Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. N.p., n.d. Web. 23 Apr. 2013. <http://www.cdc.gov/obesity/data/adult.html>.

Eating on the Edge

The idea of eating on the edge from Jamie Horwitz is definitely one of the most pivotal discussion points of our time, and Horwitz develops this point with concrete facts of our culture's eating styles and patterns. He first links food and cigarettes to have an overwhelming correlation in the way they are used and the way they chemically interact with our minds. People smoke cigarettes because they act as an additive to a situation; this doesn't add anything sustainable to the situation it is merely something to do during that time. Over the past twenty years, our society as allowed the principle of eating to encompass a feel of "snacking" instead of just meals, and this shows in the obesity statistics as well. In this way, food has developed to become more of an additive than and definitive, says Horwitz.

This idea of eating on the edge implies that our society is laying the groundworks for accompanying a style of eating that is very quick and unhealthy. Horwitz mentions soup for example. People once had to cook the entire can of soup and serve it in their own bowls while they sit down and enjoy the meal. Now, this same soup is being sold in a personal, microwaveable container that could be consumed on the go. This is why we are seeing a drawback from healthy portions as well as a reasonable obesity rate, which our society doesn't have.

As Horwitz expands on the idea that people's meals are becoming more and more varied in regards to location, I saw a parallel to how my life so far. Just from being apart of this change over the past 15 years there has been a massive difference in eating styles and societal norms in this sense. In elementary school, I used to be lucky if I got a couple cookies from the Oreo package for lunch from my mom. I saw a drastic change in middle school, almost 6 years later, when I received a new package of "Grips" cookies. This package was full of smaller cookies; it had a peel off corner for easy, on-the-go consumption of the cookies. My first thought was, "when am I going to need the functionality of these Grips if I am sitting down eating lunch?" This was when I first saw a change in how marketing is affecting how we eat as a society.

SE3: Lack of Enjoyment in Our Eating Culture

     The collision between the mindless eating habits generated from a lack of enjoyment our society has towards eating and the decision to choose between indulgence and restriction in these meals is the source of many of the problems we as a society are facing today. What I mean by this is that people have lost the pleasure of eating as a result of the concern of spending too much money on a meal or worrying about ordering something that will make them feel worse after finishing it for whatever reason that may be. Things like obesity, diabetes, and unsustainable food production can be linked to this subconscious cultural trait of ours. With the help of Dr. Brian Wansink of Cornell, my lunch at Panera Bread a few days ago became far more interesting. His research provides an answer to these predicaments we as Americans find ourselves in.

    While sitting in a Panera Bread last Friday afternoon, I witnessed the lack of enjoyment of eating first  hand. A family was preparing to have a nice lunch together at a fairly large corporate chain that is upscale in regards to its atmosphere and food quality. This family included a grandmother, grandfather, mom, dad, and three little girls who were all between the ages of 5 and 8 I would guess. I observed this family meal from the very beginning to the very end. As I sat down with my friend to eat our lunch, the father proceeded to put three tables together for his family to eat once they finished ordering. People come to Panera bread because it could potentially solve the struggle between choosing a meal of indulgence while being conscious of the inevitable restrictions of the day: returning to work while not paying an absurd amount of money for lunch with your family. This is why these type of restaurants are   attractive in our society and why they continue to grow. Anyway, as the family was ordering, the atmosphere of the restaurant was relaxed and quiet. Once the family sat down, however, the atmosphere grew loud and stressful as a result of the frantic, hungry kids awaiting the arrival of their meals from the pickup window. As the food arrived, the noise went down. It was quite evident that the family's communication almost completely suspended after the food was being consumed. Despite the large proportions, nearly everyone at the table finished their meals in around twenty minutes without saying no more than a few sentences each.

     Dr. Wansink states that, "Most of us don't overeat because we're hungry. We overeat because of family and friends, packages and plates, names and numbers, labels and lights, colors and candles, and other environmental factors." Panera serves too much food on their platters, but people continue to eat everything on the plate because of the culture of eating. On top of this, people are eating so fast and mindlessly because they are rushed; this makes people eat more than they should without realizing it. Dr. Wansink has uncovered two food myths with his research: people know how much they want to eat and people know when they are full. The most interesting part of Dr. Wansink's study of the two large food myths was the audience in which he tested. He explained to 62 MBA students who sat through a 90 minute class that if they were presented with a one-gallon bowl of cereal, they would eat more cereal during the class than if they were presented two half-gallon bowls. Despite this lesson, the students who served themselves from the one–gallon bowl served 53% more and ate 59% more and did not believe the size of the serving bowls influenced their behavior. The second myth was busted in a similar fashion. A study of 150 Chicagoans revealed that Americans are more likely to use external, environmental cues to determine when they are done eating, rather than cues of internal satiety. People eat more with their eyes than with their stomachs, and they do not even realize it. These both relate into the idea that people are too rushed when they eat. If people were more conscious of how they are eating at Panera Bread, than people would eat slower and enjoy their food. This would, in turn, lower obesity rates across America as well as provide a foundation for a healthier society. Along with that, the worry of restriction would dissipate because of the increased cultural acceptance of a pleasure-orienatied meal.

     The most interesting part of Dr. WanA students who sat through a 90 minute class that if they were presented with a one-gallon bowl of cereal, they would eat more cereal during the class than if they were presented two half-gallon bowls. Despite this lesson, the students who served themselves from the one–gallon bowl served 53% more and ate 59% more and did not believe the size of the serving bowls influenced their behavior. The second myth was busted in a similar fashion. A study of 150 Chicagoans revealed that Americans are more likely to use external, environmental cues to determine when they are done eating, rather than cues of internal satiety. People eat more with their eyes than with their stomachs, and they do not even realize it.

     This eating trait is seen the strongest in America. In other countries around the world, meals are taken very seriously and can last a very long time. This is almost the opposite in the US. Countries like Sweden, Switzerland, and Finland have some of the highest functioning, healthiest societies in the world and they take their time to eat wholesome, enjoyable meals without the worry of restrictions.

Sources for Eating in America: Indulgence vs Restriction

American Food Attitudes: Cooking and being well-fed is important to Americans as well as being healthy and efficient.
http://www.lifeintheusa.com/food/attitudes.htm

Social and Behavioral Determinants of Diet Choice: 6 ideas that make up diet choice
http://www.healthknowledge.org.uk/public-health-textbook/disease-causation-diagnostic/2e-health-social-behaviour/social-behavioural-determinants

Eating for Pleasure: Why nutrition and sustainable eating culture are vital to a healthy life
http://experiencelife.com/article/eating-for-pleasure/

Cate and O'Donnell

Cate and O'Donnell have very distinct areas in which they studied, let alone the food in the respective place. Cate discusses the world of "spread" at jails around the San Francisco area. These people are served a combination of everything for their meals called spread. This is a large part of the lives of the prisoners. Not that jail food should be glamorous, but the ideas Cate talks about in regards to the sustainability of the spread for the prisoners. The idea of spread brings the community together because that is what they have to consistently rely on. 

I think the common denominator in both of these studies is the idea that the food you eat is directly related to what resources are the most efficient for the area in which you live. This is offers a new way to look at what cultures eat what food. 

O'Donnell's study was an analysis of the foods available in a Chinese environment. The main point being made was the idea of what foods are available based on the resources available. Like the jail situation, these people rely on the fish, rice, and beans because it is readily available for the people of the country. I thought it was interesting to see the contrast of what people eat and the pride they have in it. They take pride in the fact that the resources around them make up a large part of their lives. This was interesting to me because it is one of those things you don't realize until you look into what is actually taking place, similar to what is happening in both of these articles.

Food Advertisements in Society

Food advertisements have a large effect on our lives. Whether you see them, hear them, or experience them, these advertisements target you subconscious mindset and it is utterly amazing how much thought companies put into drawing people into their restaurants. Some of the best advertisements come from oligopoly markets. Examples of these types of markets can be seen through Coke vs Pepsi, McDonalds vs Burger King, etc. Large companies battling to be the most well known competitor in the market. Its funny to look at how the companies play off of each other’s marketing strategies. Look at these similar advertisements from Burger King and McDonalds:

http://blog.bellotaestudio.com/sites/default/files/pictures/mcdonalds_hamburger_copia.jpg

http://theinspirationroom.com/daily/print/2010/9/burger_king_burger_typography.jpg

The Burger King advertisement is trying to aim at a more sleek, burger-orientated approach to its strategy. They emphasize a more real view of the burger, which allows this food item to spark hunger in the people who come across this. The most obvious thing that Burger King is doing in this advertisement is the lettering that makes of the ingredients of the burger. This allows the franchise to label their sandwich as opposed to the view being able to associate their own words with what they see if, for example, the advertisement was just a picture of the real burger itself. This advertisement also utilizes ethos and pathos elements to get its point across. The name Burger King is a very credible name internationally so they automatically grasp this by putting their logo in the shadow of the burger. The words used in the advertisement spark emotions of curiosity and hunger at first glance. They are targeting a general audience that is probably under 22 years old.

            Like Burger King, McDonalds is trying to grasp a similar marketing strategy. Their advertisement is more “professional” in a sense because it utilizes the same labeling idea on the ingredients; however, the ingredients are listed and labeled as a more elite status. For example, the words and font encompass a feeling of natural food, healthy, and sleek. This can be seen through the way the lettuce is listed as “the encyclopedia of salad” and the meat has a picture of a steak behind it. This advertisement evokes an ethos and logos feeling to the person viewing it. Obviously McDonalds is a reputable name in the fast food industry so they have that going for them in any marketing situation. The new thing they are aiming at in this is the natural and healthy feeling they exhibit through the pictures and descriptions in the ingredients. This makes the viewer logically think this burger isn’t that unhealthy for them, which is exactly what McDonalds is aiming at.   

            Overall, the McDonalds advertisement is targeting a more mature, wealthier audience as a result of the natural and healthier approach they are taking towards marketing their burger. Burger King is just trying to draw people in to the fact that their burger looks very good in the advertisement from the bubble letter words that make up the burger. Both of these advertisements are trying to move away from the actual item they are selling by building the burger out of words instead of showing what it actually looks like. This is where the idea of the subconscious marketing strategy comes into play. People are aware that eating either of these burgers isn’t a sustainable meal for their health and wellbeing, but if both of the companies were doing it, the only thing there is to compare it to would be the other company who is using the same techniques. The only visual left for people is the fake burger made up of words that doesn’t look anything like what it would if someone were to order it. People make the decision to get one of these items based on how they perceive it from the advertisement. The problem with this is that neither of these products offers any of the ideals portrayed in the advertisements.

            The appeals displayed in these advertisements offer a nice glimpse of food and culture values as a result of the idea that we as consumers don’t necessarily take into account what we are eating. We can be influenced by how the items are presented to us instead of the actual nutritional value or sustainable development of the product. This is why food marketing and advertisement is so influential in our society today.

Socioeconomic Class vs Food

Freedman and Jurafsky made a very interesting study that analyzed the correlation between socioeconomic class and food. The 12 different potato chips that they looked at (six were considered expensive and six were considered inexpensive) were the basis of a comprehensive cultural study. They found many different connections between the socioeconomic class and the type of potato chip that the group of people purchased. Many factors were found from this: there is a correlation between health, chips, literacy, and social class. Generally the people who could afford to buy the expensive chips were looking for more detailed and advanced nutrition information and more words promoting a healthier chip. This follows the trend mentioned in the article that explains the higher-income individuals are more healthy, better educated, and are willing to satisfy these traits with a healthier, more elite bag of chips. The same goes for lower-income individuals. They are looking for the least expensive chips, and it usually happens that the number of words on these chips are less than the expensive kind and are at a lower reading level than the words on the expensive chips.

What I found most interesting about this study was the wording on the chip bags. The inexpensive chips say, "What gives our chips their exceptional great taste? It's no secret. It's the way they're made!" The expensive chips say, "We use totally natural ingredients, hand-rake every batch, and taste chips at every stage of preparation to ensure quality and taste." This gives a nice example of how socioeconomic class directly correlates to what food you eat.

I think another good example of this could be found in the fast-food industry. McDonalds and Taco Bell would be generally be a more inexpensive meal as opposed to like a Subway or a sit-down meal.