The Devil In The Details

I've added a note from a friend of mine to precede this article. I think it's important to note what she has to say. "I have to say, I consider myself to be pretty savvy with food label scrutiny and digging into the details, but I was unaware of a whopper of subtlety as outlined in today’s discussion, from Brian Johnson’s “Optimize” e-zine. I’m continually amazed (and more than a little ticked off…) by the lengths to which corporate entities will go to keep up appearances and basically mislead the public.".

Article by Brian Johnson (from the “Optimizer” e-zine)

I recently read Mark Hyman's new book Food Fix. It's a powerful look at the dysfunction of our food system and "How to Save Our Health, Our Economy, Our Communities, and Our Planet—One Bite at a Time."
As Mark says: "If we were to identify one big lever to pull to improve global health, create economic abundance, reduce social injustice and mental illness, restore environmental health, and reverse climate change, it would be transforming our entire food system. That is the most important work of our time—work that must begin now."

It's a sobering, mind-exploding, more-than-a-little enraging, yet ultimately hopeful look at what's broken and how we can fix it. Today I want to focus on just one super-small aspect of our overall food system: your food label. If you look closely, you'll see that it might be lying to you.

In a chapter called "The FDA Is Not Doing Its Job to Protect Us" in Part II on "The Dirty Politics of Food," Mark tells us: "Companies are required to list ingredients in the order of their pre-dominance (the quantity of the ingredient). But that doesn't tell you how much is actually in the package. If sugar is the second ingredient listed on a package, that doesn't tell you if it makes up 30 percent of the food or 5 percent.

Have you ever picked up a jar of strawberry jam at the supermarket and looked at itsingredient list? A jar of Smucker's strawberry jam lists strawberries as the first ingredient, and then the second, third, and fourth ingredients are as follows: high-fructose corn syrup, corn syrup, and sugar. This tactic is very common. The reason companies often use several sweeteners in one product is so they don't have to list 'sugar' as the first ingredient. As Jerold Mande, a nutrition expert who worked on food labels at the FDA and USDA, explained, 'What we know from some investigations is that companies often use five different sugars in their products so that individually, they don't show up too high on the list.'"

Let's think about that for a moment. Of course, we have food labels so we can get a sense of what's actually in our food. Naturally, the ingredients are listed in the order of their pre-dominance (meaning, the quantity of said ingredient). Now...

Can you imagine being in the strategic discussion at Smucker's (and countless other Big Food companies) coming up with the idea to use THREE DIFFERENT TYPES OF SUGAR so that "Strawberries" could remain at the top of the ingredient list so an unsuspecting customer (you? me? your mom? my mom? your brother? my brother?) will pick it up, take a quick glance and then say, "Strawberries. Awesome. Must be healthy!"?

Seriously. Picture the scene. Walk into the conference room. Pull up a chair. I suspect the meeting/conversation might go something like this:

Boss: "Ok, guys. New label laws say we need to put the largest ingredient in our jar of jam at the very top of the list." Pause. "Now... We ALL know we can't have 'sugar' at the top. It's gotta be strawberries. Right?!"

Everyone nods.

Boss: "I mean, if we put SUGAR at the top, people might catch on to the fact that this is NOT a truly healthy food and we can't have THAT happen! Right?"

Everyone nods again.

Boss: "So... I have an idea." (Leans in...) "What we need to do is throw in a few different versions of sugar to keep the product sweet, but LOOK healthy by keeping Strawberries right at the top of the ingredient list."

Boss: "Here's the game plan: research and pick out all the different names and sources for “sugar” you can find, and let’s rework the recipe. We’ve got product to sell and we need to prioritize our profits."
 
(End of hypothetical discussion…)
 
I wish the above thought exercise had no resemblance what-so-ever to reality, but apparently, given the label’s ingredient list, its probably not too far off the mark. Who thought it was a virtuous idea to manipulate the label like that rather than being honest about your product and/or optimizing it so it ACTUALLY IS healthier?

The book is packed with countless examples of how various stakeholders in our food system are manipulating their products and public policy without regards to our health. I don't get easily enraged, but it's enraging. So...I ask: Can you (and should you) trust a company that does that? Can you (and should you) support a company that does that by buying their products? I don't think so.

You? If you feel so inspired, go check out your pantry and take a glance at your food labels. Let's remember that we vote for the world we want to create with every dollar we spend. Let's do so thoughtfully and wisely, starting TODAY.