Reading response: "The politics of government dietary advice", Marion Nestle and Jennifer Lisa Falbe

The main focus of this article was on the development of nutritional guidelines by the federal government and the various factors that come into play when establishing the recommendations. The authors provide an overview of the history and importance of nutritional guidelines, particularly the food pyramid developed by the U.S. Department of Agriculture. According to the article, the food guides have been produced since the 1900’s, with the intent of helping Americans overcome nutritional deficiencies. Although these nutritional guidelines are designed to benefit everyone, there is significant controversy over wording, food examples, measurement methods and other aspects. One of the primary reasons for the controversy is pressure from industry-specific special interest groups, each of whom want more of their commodity to be consumed. Because the consumption of food, unlike shoes or clothing, is limited, the pressure to carefully word the guidelines is intense. Instead of saying what not to eat, the guidelines, in particular the USDA food pyramid, say to “limit consumption” of some foods and give a range of amounts for other segments. Also, by encouraging exercise, the guidelines place more of the responsibility on the individual, removing blame from the government and the food companies. Overall, the article gives an interesting take on the various forces that shape the development of nutritional guidelines.

I had never before considered this aspect of nutritional guidelines, although it makes a tremendous amount of sense. Special interest groups have a significant influence on ag and food policy and flex their muscle in a number of different ways. Commodity specific groups, such as wine and grapegrowers’ groups have used public campaigns to promote the benefits, such as antioxidants, that are provided by drinking wine. Various diet-pushers, from Atkins to raw food, have launched entire lines of products along with their promotional campaigns to profit from our obsession with weight. Animal rights and other anti-agriculture groups have made their presence felt as well. By utilizing campaign tactics that elicit strong emotions from the general public, specifically those far removed from the agricultural industry, groups such as the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) have effectively banned certain practices and even brought about the demise of the California egg industry with the passage of Proposition 2 (American Veterinary Medical Association). While each of these examples is an illustration of free speech, its time for Americans to become better educated about food choices and their impact on health.