Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Timothy Caulfield

GET UPDATES FROM Timothy Caulfield
 

Food Labels Don't Discourage Fat People

Posted: 12/07/11 11:47 AM ET

Canadians are among the most overweight in the world. I was going to say "fat," but that term seems unnecessarily mean-spirited and stigmatizing, especially when you consider that children are a significant part of the overweight demographic.

Delicacy aside, fat we are.

A study released last week from the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development found that one in four Canadian children is overweight, ranking us third in the world. And things seem to be getting worse.

This is a depressing bit of reality. Obesity has been a top public health issue for years. And gloomy obesity facts have become a pop culture fixture. (My favourite is this shocker: According to the World Health Organization, 1 billion humans are currently overweight and 300 million clinical obese.)

Given the public and political awareness of this unhealthy trend, and given all the government reports and recommendations, you'd think we could do something about it. You'd think the trend would be going the other way.

Some recent research from the UK highlights just why the obesity issue is so difficult from a policy perspective. The UK is a country with a fairly comprehensive food labelling system designed to encourage people to make healthier choices. But it turns out that people generally ignore food labels and simply buy what they want. Clearly, the labels are not having the impact that the policy makers had hoped for.

In fact, this finding is consistent with a number other studies on labeling with similarly sobering conclusions like "we did not detect a change in calories purchased after the introduction of calorie labelling" and "no overall decline in calories purchased was observed."

To be honest, we shouldn't be surprised by these results. It is mightily difficult to get people to change their behaviour, even when people know the behaviour in question is unhealthy. (I am powerless against the pull of chocolate. I am talking about meal-sized portions. Mine is not a healthy one-tiny-square-to-get-your-anti-oxidants habit.) Also, there are numerous paradoxical behavioural responses to nutritional information. For example, some studies suggest people eat more calories when they think a food is healthy.

Of course, it doesn't help that there is a massive food industry spending billions on marketing strategies that are aimed at convincing us to eat, eat, EAT. Can sterile food labels compete with images of sexy, hip (and invariably thin) youth enjoying a late-night "fourth meal," to paraphrase the insidiously ingenious Taco Bell advertisement campaign?

It is trite to say that the obesity problem is a complex phenomenon that will be difficult to address, but this needs to be said again and again. We shouldn't forget that innumerable interrelated social, economic and evolutionary forces created this problem. It is going to take innumerable interrelated social policies to reverse it. And it is also going to take time. We are, after all, trying to turn around a big, heavy ship that has had decades to buildup a significant amount of momentum.

Many may view the labeling data as an indication of a policy failure. The UK data, for example, was reported as a "blow to the UK government." But I see it as a call to arms. We need to kick it up a notch. Food labels are a good idea. They provide useful information that may, eventually, help to change the way we think about food and the amount we eat. And while they don't seem to have a dramatic impact on consumption habits, there are hints that the labels do have some positive effects. But more is needed. We need to come at this problem from various directions. We need a wide range of policies including school-based education programs, innovative public health campaigns, tax incentives, and industry regulation (indeed, a national ban on junk food advertisements aimed at kids sounds like a good place to start).

As a society we seem to be faced with two choices: embrace our portly prospects and accept all the health (and health cost) ramifications that accompany this approach; or work to develop a broad range of innovative policies and tools to counter the trend. The choice, especially when you consider the one in four overweight Canadian kids, seems obvious.

 

Follow Timothy Caulfield on Twitter: www.twitter.com/@CaulfieldTim

 
 
  • Comments
  • 2
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Recency  | 
Popularity
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Ghostberry
All empty souls tend toward extreme opinions.
11:29 PM on 12/09/2011
I am fairly sure world wide food insecurity will render this problem void long before any ad campaign.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Nick Hatch
I'm So Meta Even This Acronym
08:58 PM on 12/07/2011
I'm surprised more people do not read labels to make a conscious choice about what they are eating, however I am also far from overweight (although it seems to be more genetic than intentional). I will concede, however, that having determined which brands or labels are the "best" option for whatever I'm buying, I rarely check them again - after all, it took years to become an efficient shopper who doesn't have to pick up and read all about everything he's about to purchase. My recent discovery of gluten intolerance has renewed my hawk's eye about reading labels, but I've been quite interested in the connection between food and disease for very nearly all of my 20's. With all the news about anti-infammatory diets and their clear link to longevity, I'm surprised more people don't pay attention to what they're buying - but I understand with the tide of emotion and neurochemicals attached to food why they would choose to ignore it.