1. The Dietary Guidelines have been consistently influenced by those in the food industry. Is this productive to the cause of keeping nutritional information safe and effective for citizens? Why do these industries have so much influence on those drafting the Guidelines?
I think the obvious, and correct, answer is no. Or hell no for that matter! When government officials are buddy-buddy with food lobbyists, end up working for the companies the lobbyists represent, etc., the only interest being met is the interest being collected off the money former Congressmen are getting from their new employers. The overall interest of the public is completely ignored because of this. The main culprit in why these industries have so much influence is the fact that they have deep pockets. Average everyday citizens do not think it naive to actually have some faith in their elected representatives, the way it should be, and because it seems that most of them do, they do not see anything wrong with the "food" they have been eating most of their life.
2. What is your take on the labeling of wine with the positive effect of lowering heart disease? Is it misleading or dangerous to state the positive effect when the negative effects of alcohol are so well-known? In regards to labeling of wine with the positive effect of lowering heart disease, my feelings are mixed. I think it is generally understood that drinking too much is bad for your health and most people recognize this; if they didn't everyone would be getting tossed for their health. However, I think people are more unaware of what an actual serving is and given "the bigger the better" American mentality, this can be problematic. That is to say, since the companies are marketing red wine is good for you in a general way, without addressing how much, the public can misconstrue this as, "maybe half a bottle will do," rather than, "a glass will do just fine."
No comments:
Post a Comment