The Food Movement Minute is a top story news analysis for busy foodies. I chew up the top industry and consumer publications each day and spit out only the news that matters most in a quick and entertaining read. I have a very discerning palate.
Today’s topics: Organic to Feed the World, a New Solve for Obesity, Big Soda Focuses on Developing Countries
———-
Can Organic Feed the World?
The Story
The population boom happening on Planet Earth means a lot more mouths to feed. GMO advocates claim bio-engineering and conventional ag is the ticket to get there. However, new research suggests a more organic and sustainable approach may work just fine.
The Details
More efficient. Higher yields. Bigger profits. These are just some of the findings in favor of more organic approaches to farming coming out of a new study that analyzed 40 years of research between organic and conventional practices. The study is the first of its kind to compare farming approaches against four measures of sustainability: productivity, economics, environment and community wellbeing. The research debunks many of the common criticisms put forth about the practice and forms a compelling case for organic playing a major role for agriculture in the future. Currently organic production accounts for only one percent of global agricultural land, despite rapid growth in the last 20 years and sales of organic food and drink that are set to double by 2018 in the US. As of 2013, worldwide sales of organic foods and beverages reached 72 billion dollars.
Why it Matters
Beyond yields and profits, organic agriculture creates less water pollution, lower greenhouse gas emissions, avoids synthetic chemicals and promotes plant diversity and the health of the animals, insects and microbes that exist around these crops. The author of the research suggests that, ultimately, the best path forward is some combination of approaches as well as the acknowledgement that feeding the world is not just about how much we grow but how we use what we’re already creating (aka food waste).
———-
Are Simpler Nutrition Labels the Solve to Obesity?
The Story
OMG, you may want to sit down for this. Americans eat too much and it’s causing us to get fat. I know! Shocked! What may be slightly less shocking is new research that the way foods are presented on grocery stores shelves may be impacting how people decide what to eat.
The Details
KISS: Keep It Simple, Stupid. While a variety of factors influence our food purchasing behaviors, a study published this month says one factor in particular is critical. Researchers analyzed the shopping habits of over 500,000 people at a major grocery chain both before and after the stores began using the Nutritional Value Scoring System (NuVal). The NuVal system assigns each food a score ranging from 1 to 100. The higher the score, the more nutritious the product. The researchers found that applying this scoring system to food products in store resulted in a 20 percent increase in the nutrition content of purchases. Along with an increase in nutrition content, shoppers’ willingness to pay more increased as well. The analysis found that shopper price sensitivity decreased by 19 percent. From a lead researcher in the study, “This is a huge positive change in shoppers’ behaviors, that resulted simply from making the nutrition content of each product very easy to understand, see, and compare to that of other products.”
Why it Matters
Around since 2008, the NuVal system is not without its flaws…it takes a very conventional approach to rating food – focusing on sodium, fat and sugar and ignoring other health attributes such as organic, processing and fortification (not to mention the scoring metrics are proprietary and therefore a mystery). However, even with that, the results of this study are compelling. A single number had a significant impact on health promoting behaviors at shelf and, given shoppers’ willingness to pay more, an ability to communicate a compelling argument that better nutrition is worth more. Whether that worth is defined in dollars spent or a more philosophical perspective that food is medicine, both are true.
————
With Sales in US Sucking, Big Soda Looks to Developing World
The Story
Soda sales in the US are down, waaaay down, and soda manufactures are beginning to shift focus and investments to developing countries as a way to diversify and protect their pocketbooks.
The Details
Over the last 20 years, sales of full-calorie soda in the US have dropped by more than 25 percent. A growing number of Americans say they are actively trying to avoid sugar, and as enemy number one in the “War on Sugar”, soda is taking the biggest hit. Perhaps in a sign that Big Soda is giving up on the US, Coca-Cola and PepsiCo are doubling down in developing countries around the world, buying up local brands, building distribution infrastructure and marketing to new consumers, particularly young people. Coca-Cola alone is investing approximately one billion dollars per year in Brazil, China, India and Mexico. If this migration process is an interesting one and you’re curious how it may play out, you may want to reflect on what happened when the tobacco industry did the same thing in the 1990s. After Big Tobacco was forced to limit marketing in the US, rates of cigarette smoking took a nose dive and the industry redoubled its marketing in countries without strict tobacco control policies to make up for lost profits in the US.
Why it Matters
The anti-sugar campaign that’s gaining so much attention here in the US is built upon a well-structured health and education system. Although we have our flaws, comparatively, the US has the infrastructure to offer better alternatives to its citizens and support their journey to better health. Developing nations not only lack the economic stability needed to make thoughtful decisions in the face of an influx of money from Big Soda, but they lack the education and health resources necessary to deal with the health consequences that are sure to come.
————
Factoid of the Day
Maybe the key to anti-aging is salt, fat and sugar? That appears to be the secret formula for McDonald’s Happy Meals at least. Not that this chiropractor couple is the first to demonstrate the special ability of fast food to sit for years without decomposing, but they are the latest to show off their now six-year experiment. Can we get an “eww”?