Physical Inactivity Highest in Appalachia and the South

According to a new study released by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Americans living in Appalachia and the South are the most likely to be physically inactive during their leisure time.  The states ranking among the highest are Alabama, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Oklahoma and Tennessee, whose physical inactivity rates are 29 percent or greater for more than 70 percent of the counties.  Compared to the high physical activity levels on the West Coast and in the Northeast, the South’s sedentary ways are catching up with them.  Soaring obesity rates and high levels of undiagnosed diabetes are among the most significant results of physical inactivity in these areas. 

For most people, it’s no surprise that exercise controls weight, reduces the risk of type 2 diabetes and heart disease, strengthens bones and muscles and overall increases energy.  Yet, the CDC found that physical inactivity in these areas wasn’t just about laziness or an unawareness of the health benefits of exercise, but more so due to a lack of health-promoting initiatives.  Since this study, the CDC has partnered with multiple community organizations and policymakers to implement projects aimed at getting people off the couch and on their feet.  Among these initiatives are the National Diabetes Prevention Program and numerous state-based Nutrition, Physical Activity and Obesity programs, which emphasize dietary change, coping skills and support to help participants lose weight and increase physical activity to at least 150 minutes per week.  

This study brought to mind the Jamie Oliver show Food Revolution, which chronicled Appalachian families struggling with obesity, diabetes, poor diets and a lack of physical activity.  Needing an intervention, the families were taught how to cook healthier foods at home, advocate for healthier food in their school lunches and overall improve their health enough to see their grandchildren grow up.  An eye-opening portrayal of the incredible obstacles facing many of these families in terms of improving their health, I thought the show was a great education tool for all Americans.  I wish it were coming back for another season!

I applaud the CDC for focusing their efforts on an area of the country so desperately in need of health-related resources and I hope their efforts are met with success.  Unfortunately, diet-related health issues run much deeper than not exercising, as Food Revolution so boldly revealed.  They can be a manifestation of socio-economic status, education, access to food, cooking skills, statewide politics and so much more.  This complicates the issues, but no matter what, we have to start somewhere, with a targeted approach at the local level to get communities moving.  The clock is ticking. 

Mark Bittman Spreads the Word about a more Sustainable Food System

Mark Bittman visited the MFA last week to promote a healthier American diet that’s sustainable for the planet and our health.  Advocating for fewer meat products and more plants, he called this new way of thinking as much a food movement as a political movement.  The lecture was nothing I hadn’t heard before from the likes of Michael Pollan, Eric Schlosser and Marion Nestle, but nonetheless it was great to hear it one more time, from Bittman’s perspective, with a very engaged audience.  Following are some highlights from the lecture.  

Bittman began by discussing how the American palate is based on and heavily influenced by savvy marketing campaigns that steer us towards consuming junk food and meat-based products.  “We are lead to believe that we like donuts and chips and that we need meat to be healthy,” he said.  “However this comes from the influence of the food industry.  If we want to reduce meat consumption, and turn towards a more plant-based diet to reduce our ecological footprint, we need to use our purchasing power to steer the industry.”  In other words, we as consumers are going to have to actively make decisions about our own diets and their ecological impact because the food industry isn’t on our side. 

Bittman went on to describe the many hidden costs in the inexpensive American diet.  “We spend 7% of our income on food, which is the lowest in the world” he said. “Yet, our cheap food has many hidden and forestalled costs.”  Bittman used the example of a $0.99 hamburger.  This may sound like a great deal, but when you look more closely you realize this isn’t the case.  Not only are hamburgers contributing to our outrageous obesity epidemic, but livestock production uses an extraordinary amount of land and water in production.  In fact it takes nearly ten times the amount of land to produce meat as it does plants and at a rate of producing 10 billion animals a year, it doesn't take long to see that this isn't sustainable.

So what can we do about it?

Bittman offered a number of solutions to the problem, stressing the need to move quickly and enact change now. 

*First he mentioned organic and local as two options that reduce the environmental impacts of agricultural production and bring products closer to home with less travel time to market.  

*Second, we should address the obesity epidemic with anti-obesity campaigns just as powerful as the anti-smoking campaigns.  Its taken a while, but they've worked. 

*Third, the government needs to step up.  Whether it’s supplying better foods into our school lunch programs, taxing large food processing companies, reducing government subsidies of the large commodities, especially corn, taxing soda or reducing junk food marketing towards children.

 *Fourth, we should be subsidizing healthy foods like fruits and vegetables.  This could include giving tax breaks to the poor when they buy health products, supporting farmers markets, CSAs or farm to table direct sales or most importantly subsidizing the cooking material to teach people how to cook.  Only 10% of all meals are cooked at home and only 20% of this food comes from unprocessed vegetables.  Clearly we have to start learning what to do with all the vegetables we should be eating.

An interesting lecture, a good message and a good slide show to present the facts.  I hope Bittman continues to spread the word about the need for a healthier and more sustainable food system!  Boy do we need it!

A Step Up for Animal Welfare at Whole Foods

Whole Foods has recently introduced a 5-step Animal Welfare Rating system for all chicken, beef and pork sold in their stores.  This system, designated by a color-coded sticker, is designed to give customers better transparency as to how their meat was produced and allow consumers to make more informed purchasing decisions.  Developed by the nonprofit Global Animal Partnership, this rating system allows third-party certifiers to audit farms and rate their practices using the 5-step system.  The tiers range from Step 1 – no crates, cages or crowding to Step 5 – the animal spends its entire life on one farm.  Already more than 1,200 farms and ranches that supply Whole Foods have received the Step certification and more are on the way.

I think this is a huge step in the right direction for our food system, environment and health, and I’m glad a large grocery store chain is taking some initiative to educate consumers on what they’re actually paying for.  What I like about this labeling scheme/certified standard is that it’s uniform across all stores.  I think it’s important for the consumer to identify one set of standards in the midst of so many conflicting messages.  It also makes the consumer think about what they’re eating and what practices they’re supporting.  Even the “informed” shopper of a Whole Foods may assume whatever product they put in their cart has a wholesome value over its conventional counterpart at the Stop & Shop, but what I think this rating system will expose are different quality standards you didn’t think existed within Whole Foods itself.  Consumers will hopefully begin to read the labels and feel a sense of power in understanding where and in support of what their money is going. 

Our country desperately needs to start to thinking about meat production in a new way.  In my opinion people shouldn’t be eating meat at all or at least very little of it, but with the understanding that everything happens incrementally, I think Whole Foods is on the right track.  I would love to see similar rating systems in mainstream grocery stores where consumers also need a better education about what they’re consuming.  Maybe this will take more time, but for now any awareness is a good thing and I applaud Whole Foods for their effort!

FDA to Limit Salt in Food Supply

In April 2010, The Institute of Medicine (IOM) urged the Food and Drug Administration to propose new regulation to limit the amount of salt in the American diet.  It is no surprise that thousands of Americans die each year from cardiovascular disease and one of the biggest contributors to this is too much salt in the food supply.  Much of the effort over the last 40 years to reduce sodium consumption has been unsuccessful because regulation has been voluntary on the part of the food industry.  Today this is compounded further by the fact that Americans have increasingly turned to sodium rich, heavily processed foods and restaurant meals for the bulk of their diet.  

The IOM’s recommended approach to solving this problem involves a multitude of stakeholders, including all players in the food industry, from manufacturers to restaurant and foodservice operators, public health and consumer organizations, and government agencies like Health and Human Services, to reduce sodium content gradually over a number of years.  The slow adjustment to the American palate will first allow consumers to develop new tastes in a way that will go unnoticed and not create public outcry and second give food manufacturers time to reformulate their products.

All of this seems like a firm step in the right direction, and surely there is no quick fix to any problem in our food system, but with most adults consuming twice the amount of recommended salt in their diets each day, can we wait for such a gradual process?  Much like proposals to reduce fat and sugar in the diet, are we sacrificing the health of American consumers for the needs of the food industry and their bottom line?

The 2011 Dietary Guidelines, put out just last week seem to think sodium should be reduced to less than 2,300 mg or one teaspoon per day, starting now.  I couldn’t agree more.  I propose that while we wait for the food companies to slowly reduce the amount of salt in a bag of Doritos or a box of Cheez-its, we as consumers get ourselves educated about what we put into our bodies.  I think it should be mandatory for the multi-stakeholder groups involved in this effort to simultaneously begin a ferocious sodium awareness campaign to educate consumers.  Consumers clearly don’t understand the importance of reading food labels, decreasing the amount of processed foods they eat and cooking more at home where the ingredients are measured.  Everyone is at risk for the health consequences of too much sodium and although the IOM makes some good recommendations, I worry that something too gradual will translate into something that has a far lesser effect than intended.