As a part of the University of Rhode Island Honors Colloquium on Health, Politics, and Money, Roberta Friedman presented a lecture this Tuesday evening on "Creating Optimal Defaults to Prevent Obesity." Friedman, the Director of Public Policy at the Rudd Center for Food Policy and Obesity at Yale University, stated that 2 in 3 adults are obese in the United States. 1 in 3 children are now obese. She mentions food swamps, areas saturated with fast food establishments, and America's raging portion distortion.
When news hit the public about Mayor Bloomberg's soda ban on large sugary drinks in restaurants, theaters, and stadiums, the response was electric. The NYT reported a whooping 60% opposition from city-goers. People don't want to be told what they cannot do. Like adolescents, if you forbid something, it only makes them want to do it more. In our society, bulk and wholesale triggers our minds to think, "SAVINGS!" The larger the portion, the more for our money.
A slightly similar initiative in the name of public health sparked about two years ago when the FDA started plastering cigarette boxes with graphic images and factoids of diseased lungs, corpses, and all the possible detriments that could result in smoking. The hope was that it would make smokers reconsider their actions. This initiative was quickly banned.
In a country that lives by its free market and freedoms, I don't think we have business placing bans on soda sizes--even if it's for the good of the people. If Mayor Bloomberg's plan were to be enacted nation-wide, eventually I think it would be accepted as background noise. People would complain in casual conversation, like they do for rising gas prices and movie tickets, but it wouldn't deter people from continuing to consume. Would it make people reconsider buying a cup of cola when they buy their buttery popcorn for the new Iron Man 3? Possibly. Would it decrease rates of obesity? Probably not significantly. I applaud the efforts; however, I think our public health initiatives should take form in a different manner.
There are certain things that society inherently knows. This is the result of strategic branding. Recently a Dior mascara ad was banned because a rival company challenged its false advertisement. The actress, they argued, was retouched so that her lashes seemed artificially separated and thickened. A cosmetic company PhotoShops their advertisements... Can anyone really say that they find this shocking? Everything fed to us has already been processed in some manner. Even reality TV isn't quite reality. But we still buy, watch, and wish we had those lashes, that body, that flawless skin. This is all incorporated into our assumptive world. Aggressive and strategic branding has shaped what now exists.
So what if we made public health equally acceptable and even cool? If you really think about it, all health-related adverts are generally dry and fact-driven. When they come up, we change the channel. But when a Doritos commercial appears with a dog being sky-rocketed--which I'm pretty sure has nothing to do with what you get when you buy a bag--we watch. It's funny. Sex and humor sells. Am I saying we should make a healthy lifestyle sexy? Not necessarily. (Although if you think about it, balanced diet and lifestyle does boost confidence and improve holistic health. Who doesn't find this attractive?) I am, however, suggesting a reevaluation of how we market and educate about eating better, active lifestyles, vaccinations, and all things public health. Maybe even stick in a little gallow humor.
...............................................................................................
Holly Tran, Staff Writer
