6
May
2008

Top 10 Junk Foods in Disguise25

If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to my RSS feed. Thanks for visiting!

Mr. Potatohead

Mr. Potatohead? Is that you?

Organic; low-carb; reduced sugar; preservative and chemical free; made from all natural ingredients; and now with special bacterial cultures designed to help you poop! Seriously, is there anything that “health” food can’t do (or fix, or correct, or modify, or prevent…)?

Uhh…yeah. Especially if it’s junk food masquerading as health food.

In recent years, food manufacturers have grown increasingly privy to the American public’s dietary whims. In the early 90s, they fell over themselves to cut the fat, replaced sugar with sugar alcohols to keep up with the low-carb dieters of the new millennium and are now plying us with promises of eco-chic or otherwise “green” food.

The bottom line is that selling health is a huge trend, and manufacturers will do just about anything to make sure their products fit into our definition – albeit fleeting – of what health food is. In fact, for many of these reformed foods, the only real changes that have been made are to the label to play up the positives (“now with whole grains”) and bury the negatives (“but we had to add 20 tbsp of sugar to make it even close to edible!”), leaving you, dear reader, with a product that is only nominally healthier than the original at best.

The following are a selection of ten food items that may be incrementally more healthy than their non-organic, fried-instead-of-baked, full-sugar vs. reduced-sugar peers. But, to us, they all still beg the question, What’s the point?

Nature’s Path Organic Strawberry Toaster Pastries

Organic Toaster Pastry

If the folks over at Nature’s Path didn’t have such a great PR team, chances are the tag line for this product would have been “Nature’s Path Organic Strawberry Toaster Pastries: So you can feel good about serving your kids junk food.” Harsh? Yes. True? Absolutely. In a side comparison between the “healthy” Organic pastries and Kellogg’s Pop Tarts (which we all know “good” parents don’t serve their kids), the pastries were about the same in terms of calories (210 vs. 205) and fat (3.5 grams vs. 4.5 grams) but the Kellogg brand actually had fewer carbohydrates (37.5 grams vs. 40 grams) and less sugar (17.5 grams vs. 19 grams). Although certain foodies suggest that the organic variety taste more “wholesome,” at the end of the day, a toaster pastry is a toaster pastry and it’s definitely not something that you (or your kids) should be eating to kick-start the day!

Dr. Oetker Organic Vanilla Cake

Organic Vanilla Cake

You attend farmers’ markets, you only buy organic, and, where possible, you do your best to eat healthy. But a birthday is a birthday and, as Homer from The Simpsons would say, “mmm…cake.” Unfortunately, however, Dr. Oetker’s Organic spin on vanilla cake is just plain laughable. Besides the fact that cake, in any shape or form, just isn’t healthy, this particular all-natural product contains gum acerbic arabic, the same food stabilizer (as in chemical) used in soda, M&M chocolate candies, gum drops, marshmallows, and many other candies. Still not convinced it’s bad for you? This same ingredient is also used in watercolor paints, shoe polish and other items that you wouldn’t normally consider ingesting. Gum arabic may not kill you, but it doesn’t scream organic either. And you call yourself a doctor, Dr. Oetker!

Annie’s Homegrown Certified Organic Canned Pasta Meals

Organic Canned Pasta

Although, Annie, you seem so genuine with your homegrown canned pasta meals, we know that the product lurking beneath that metal can is nothing but low-grade slop. Let’s look at Annie’s Certified Organic All Stars pasta dinner (which, by the way, Annie is recommending for your toddler). The first four ingredients (by weight) are water, organic tomato puree, organic macaroni stars and organic evaporated cane juice. Uhh…Annie, sweetheart, stop being fancy and call a spade a spade: it’s sugar…and lots of it. So much so that the sugar is listed way before any mention of cheese (even though this particular “dish” is touted as pasta in a tomato and cheese sauce.) Sounds to us like Annie needs to spend a little more time in the kitchen (or possibly on some reputable nutrition sites) before she tries shilling this stuff as anything resembling healthy!

O Organics (Safeway Brand) Organic Yellow Corn Tortilla Chips

O Organics

There’s simply no other way to put this: A chip is a chip is a chip. And what could make it worse? This chip (is a chip, is a chip…) is made of corn. Corn people. Need further proof to stay away? Uhh…they’re a chip…and they’re made of corn. Nuff said, we think!

Nabisco 100 Calorie Packs - Oreo Candy Bites

100 Calorie Packs

The whole 100 calorie serving size has become somewhat of an obsession in our culture as of late, with food manufacturers scrambling to get their newly downsized products stocked on supermarket shelves. On the plus side (see, where not all Debbie Downer here at Mark’s Daily Apple!), the products are all 100 calories, and yes, exercising portion control is always admirable, but at the end of the day, they’re still (pretty much) the same garbage in recycled packaging. Also, if we’re being honest here, have you seen how small those “sensible” serving sizes really are? Realistically, the only person that benefits from the smaller serving sizes is manufacturers, who are able to continue distributing the same food (using the same recipe, same manufacturing equipment, same factory, same workers, etc) while charging at least double the price.

Gatorade Tiger

Gatorade Tiger

You’ve just exercised, you’re worn out, you’re thirsty, you need to replenish, and what could be more refreshing than sucking down 25 grams of sugar. That’s right folks: Gatorade, the very drink developed by athletes for athletes is nothing more than sugar water. And other so-called health beverages aren’t really that healthy either: Odwalla, which touts itself as “nourishing the body whole,” contains about 30 grams per serving (which, it should be noted, is only half of the bottle) and we’d love to tell the folks over at Vitamin Water where they can stick their vitamins!

Activia

Activia

If you made your food purchasing decisions based on the quality of a product’s web site, one look at the Activia portal and you’d be convinced this is quite the super food! While the yogurt is by no means the worst thing in the world, it should be noted that those special little cultures are literally swimming in sugar… in fact, Activia contains 17 g of sugar per 4 oz. serving. Plus… did you see that Saturday Night Live skit? It’ll put you off for life!

Morningstar Farms Chik Patties

Morningstar Farms Chik Patties

If you had to look on the menu, chances are you wouldn’t select a hunk of soy protein isolate, soy protein concentrate and wheat gluten, or, in other words, one of Morningstar Farms’ Chik Patties. And it only gets worse with the addition of wheat flour, corn oil, yellow corn flour and corn starch. One question: is it possible they could squeeze any more corn into this single chicken patty? And also, the package touts 58% less fat, which would be important if this was uhh… 1984 and we still thought that fat was the devil incarnate.

Lean Pockets - Supreme Pizza

Lean Pockets Supreme Pizza

Look! It’s got whole grains! It’s lean! It’s got a whole lot of exclamation points and not much else going on, nutritionally speaking that is. Yes, we get it. A Lean Pocket is convenient. You can literally throw it in your pocket and go and, to be honest, they’ve come a long way from the early Hot Pockets. However, at the end of the day, they’re still a pastry, stuffed with mystery meat and plenty of chemical preservatives and they’re absolutely not something that should be considered even remotely healthy.

Healthy Choice Sweet and Sour Chicken

Healthy Choice Sweet and Sour Chicken

Frozen peach crisp, tempura battered chicken, sweet and sour sauce, what’s not to love about Healthy Choice’s Sweet and Sour Chicken? Yes, the packaging is green, and yes, there are little silhouettes of men running which suggests both that people who eat these exercise and that this meal would satisfy a grown adult (not likely!). However, it should be noted that this meal, in addition to a bunch of decidedly un-healthy chemicals, contains 69 grams of carbohydrates and a whopping 600 mg of sodium. Furthermore, this particular dish was almost universally panned among foodies, with one rather scathing critic noting that it was virtually impossible to mess up sweet and sour chicken but that healthy choice had “achieved the impossible.”

These marketing tricks are sly, but they aren’t fooling the MDA crowd. When you see the words organic, or lean, or whatever claim-du-jour is posted on the packaging approach it with skepticism and a critical eye! To make life even easier, why not just avoid processed and packaged foods altogether? And if you are going to eat a cake, fudge brownies, or toaster pastries, sure, pick the organic version, but at the end of the day you’ve got to remember you’re still eating a cake, fudge brownies or toaster pastries.

TWM tm Flickr Photo (CC)

Further Reading:

More Tuesday 10 Posts

The Sisson Spoof

The Fuming Fuji Fumes On

If you like this post please share it with StumbleUpon.

14
March
2008

Friday Link Love3

The IF Life lists reasons why Intermittent Fasting is for everyone.

Diethack shows us how to avoid workplace injury.

Eating Fabulous reports that Vitamin D Reduces Diabetes Risk in Children.

Parent’s for Ethical Marketing rants about kids and candy.

Modern Forager gives Four Ways to Add Some Excitement to Your Diet.

Art De Vany shows the results of eating right.

ScienceRoll analyzes demo genes using 23andme.

Laurel on Health Food provides eat-by dates for fruits and veggies.

FitSugar gets in on sprinting.

60 in 3 debunks sauna weight loss myths.

Healthbolt reports on acidic enamel-eating junk food.

Bad Science consider the power of the placebo effect.

and last, but not least…

Pharma Marketing Blog uncovers Zetia’s “49 Strategy” to wine and dine doctors.

8
March
2008

Big Bucks, Big Pharma Documentary: Marketing Disease and Pushing Drugs9

No, it’s not our rant this time. Instead, we’re serving up someone else’s argument for your enjoyment and discussion. You’ll find the voices of a whole host of folks closer to the core than we (thankfully) ever get: physicians, a former pharma sales representative, and a former editor of the New England Journal of Medicine.

(And the timing is apt, we thought. Just two weeks ago the British Medical Journal published research that illuminates (too positive a word, yes) the “invisible influence” that the pharmaceutical industry has on physician education. We invite you to read up on the strategy of silent sponsorship of and input into conference sessions that doctors believe are independent presentations.)

And now for our feature presentation:

via YouTube via Media Education Foundation

We have to say that even we were blown away by the montage of ad clips. We knew every single one, and it’s not just because we eat and breathe this stuff. Anyone know if Jay Leno has ever used pharma ads for Jay Walking? We bet our bottom dollar that people would be more familiar with the arsenal of drugs than they are with their elected officials or basic biological concepts. How could they not be? As the video illustrates, this stuff is in our face every day. You sit down to watch even the nightly news, and pharmaceutical options for ED and cholesterol are as much of the experience as the real news stories themselves.

The subtitle of the video, “Marketing Disease and Pushing Drugs,” is all too fitting. This new medical “age” we’re in is crafted to make us feel that it’s normal to be taking medication. It’s the rational, common, proactive thing to “ask your doctor.” And the faces of celebrities, former football stars, heck, even a presidential candidate suggest to us that if those larger than life people take it, why shouldn’t we consider it?

As one of the physicians states in the video, this cultivated message has, of course, resulted in people coming into their doctors’ offices with list in hand of what they want to try. And even if we’re not one of the ones running to see our doctors about the latest magical pill, the string of ad material hits home the idea that we can’t possibly be entirely unaffected by this kind of media. It’s an insidious shift in mindset and health culture that these companies are selling as much as a particular drug itself.

Most of us are undoubtedly old enough to remember the time when drugs (other than over the counter remedies) weren’t advertised on television. Seems like a different age when you look back, doesn’t it? It was.

Further Reading:

Strivor can help you with Motivational Deficiency Disorder.

Big Pharma: Bad Science and Bad Business

PharmaGossip: Things People Don’t Know About Big Pharma

Technorati Tags: , , , ,

6
March
2008

Reader Response: Fast Food Indulgence, Dirty Marketing Tricks and Personal Responsibility40

Wendy’s, not to be outdone, one-ups Carl’s Jr.

In response to last month’s post about Carl Jr.’s fat fetish, conversation got going about occasional fast food indulgence (the temptations, the how-to’s, etc.) as well as whether we were placing too much blame on corporate marketing and not enough on individual immoderation. Reader Rachel offered this perspective:

I gotta say I don’t see anything wrong with indulging once in a while. I understand the popular opinion is that fast food is bad wrong and should be banished from the world. However, as Carla the first commenter stated “moderation”. We as individuals need to take responsibility for what we eat. The whole idea of “the companies made me eat it” is BS. We control our actions not the evil CKE empire. Yes it looks tasty, yes they market it that way- if they were to market cat food in the same way, would everyone eat that too? Come on now people, let’s start taking responsibility for ourselves and stop blaming the handsome fit young man enjoying the obscene mammoth burger for our lack of self control.

We’re all for taking control and responsibility for our own health (That’s what this blog is all about!), and we agree that innocent victim and evil corporate empire is an absurd representation of the situation. At the same time, we dislike shady, tricky, misleading, dishonest (did I miss anything?) marketing schemes. Carl Jr.’s ad campaign double-dog dares its target audience (which we’ll leave for others to dissect) to stick it to the “Man,” who is, by all estimation, a convenient amalgam of the medical establishment and every health advocate, representative and family physician they encounter. “Talk to the finger, doc! Real men don’t think about their health!” Gee, there’s an inspiring example.

We understand it’s free will at work here and that folks sometimes indulge for the sake of taste or lack of time, airport options, etc. But, let’s look at the real message. Clearly, the ad emphasis isn’t on enjoying their monstrosity burger as an occasional indulgence. Indulgence – the concept, even the very word screams “wuss” in this ad paradigm. “Indulgence (scoff)! This is lunch.”

Here’s the rub. These companies aren’t marketing their fare in the pattern of Baskin Robbins. We’re not talking “treat.” They’re out to sell their product as a “meal” and regular work day routine at that. There’s nothing random about the common image of workers riding together, grabbing their lunch through the drive through with hard hats still on. And the message translates. Life follows ads as much as the ads follow life, we’d argue. And it doesn’t bode well for those individuals down the road. But that part was missing, I believe, from the ad campaign.

Those guys’ choice? Ultimately, yes, but we tend to also find fault with the company that sold them on the daily habit and exploited the ignorance behind the choice. Selling self-destruction just doesn’t sit well with us. (And asking tax payers and/or insurance customers to pick up the tab later for these folks’ folly and these companies’ exploitive profit doesn’t exactly make our day either.)

And then there’s the issue of the seedlings. Happy meals, kids’ menus, cartoon contracts and Play Land (birthdays and play dates always welcome!). Start ‘em young. (Why does this strategy sound familiar?) Sure, blame the parents. We do. Yet, the same argument above holds. Only in this case, it’s the ruin of children’s health that brings in the profit. These kids see that it’s “their” restaurant, their colorfully boxed meal, their accompanying little toy prize, etc. Why, how generous of the corporation to be so thoughtful! Oh, and well-intentioned parents out there: be prepared for the guilt trips if you choose to blow off Ronald and his gang. The ads are careful to illustrate that loving, fun moms and dads take their kids to McDonalds. What’s wrong with you? (O.K., the seedling issue really brings out the fist-shaking curmudgeon in us. We’ll take a breath and back away from the soap box now.)

That all said, we get it that we all make our own choices. And we’re not about letting the perfect be the enemy of the good. Avid apples know that we cherish our sensible vices. What constitutes a sensible vice differs from person to person based on what people truly enjoy, what enhances their subjective sense of quality of life. Sure, we aren’t about to advise anyone to make fast food one of those, but that’s our perspective.

Admittedly, it’s hard to find decent studies about the health effects of an occasional fast food indulgence. There are simply too many variables: what kind of fast food, how much, how often, what the rest of the diet is like, how much exercise, etc., etc. A few studies and more informal experiments (ala “Super Size Me”) have analyzed physiological changes related to fast food consumption over a month’s period, and they aren’t too pretty (increasing blood pressure increase, building insulin resistance, abdominal fat gain, etc.).

One big beef of ours (pardon the pun) is the carb load in these meals. The white bread bun, the acrylamide-laced fries, the mammoth sodas… Can you feel your insulin rising just thinking about it? Clearly, leaving those elements off the table, as some readers said they do, makes a big difference. As for fat? Yes, we’re friends to fats, including the saturated crowd. But 1400 calories and 107 grams of fat in one sandwich seems like a waste of a day’s eating to us.

And what are you really getting with that 1400 calories? Not much in terms of nutrients. A heck of a disproportion in terms of omega ratio. Yikes. (Carl Jr. better be popping them fish pills.) Sodium galore and MSG to boot. Preservatives none of us can pronounce and few of us want to imagine, let alone see in action. (But in case you do, here’s the link to the infamous jar experiment from Super Size Me.)

Each of us makes compromises every day, and as prevalent as fast food is in our society, it’s bound to figure into the picture for many of us. At the end of the day, it’s all about informed choices. And as excessive as fast food ad campaigns might be getting these days, at least there’s more information out there about the foods themselves than there was ten or twenty years ago.
And, gee, it was those crazy health advocates who applied the pressure that eventually resorted in their disclosure! Too bad, Carl.

brainware3000, VirtualErn, soundfromwayout Flickr Photos (CC)

Further Reading:

Carl’s Jr.: ‘Feel Good About Being Fat’

How to Eat More Chocolate and Drink More Wine Every Day

They Did It! A 134-lb hamburger has been constructed! (I hope you can sense the sarcasm.)

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

18
February
2008

Carl’s Jr.: ‘Feel Good About Being Fat’19

The proliferation of over-indulgent double meat, double bacon, double cheese, double bypass-surgery monster burgers across our fast-food nation has been taken to an all new level as detailed by this article in Portfolio magazine. (If you don’t believe me take a look at this interactive feature.) It doesn’t take a 7 page magazine article to tell us that fast-food chains from sea to shining sea have hardly even paid lip service to the public outcry against their freakishly fatty fare. You can hardly go anywhere without being bombarded with ads of fit young guys diving into double-pattied, greasy behemoths “no holds barred.” The latest evil-genius marketing ploy uses opponents charges against them by developing a false sense of pride associated with eating something that is so extremely socially incorrect. The bigger burger you eat, they tell us, the higher your middle finger flies in the face of whiny, veggie-eating health nuts.

Obscene

Obscene

Here are some of the more outrageous quotes from the article:

“In an age when other chains have been forced to at least pretend that they care about the health of their customers and have started offering packets of apples and things sprinkled with walnuts and yogurt, Hardee’s and Carl’s Jr. are purposely running in the opposite direction, unapologetically creating an arsenal of higher-priced, high-fat, high-calorie monstrosities…”

“That message may be revolutionary or totally evil or maybe both, but in any case, it goes like this: Anyone can make Americans fat (hell, everyone already has), but only one fast-food company can make them fat and allow them to feel good about it, even get them to feel like they’re making a statement and striking a blow against the forces of political correctness.”

“So Hardee’s dispensed with any semblance of social conscience and in 2003 introduced the Thickburger. In 2004, this begat the downright lurid Monster Thickburger, a messy two-thirds of a pound of charbroiled Angus beef containing more than 1,400 calories and 107 grams of fat.”

“Last summer, Wendy’s introduced the Baconator—two hamburger patties, two slices of American cheese, and no fewer than six strips of bacon.”

“They’re regulars: Tony says he eats at Hardee’s four times a month, sometimes breakfast, sometimes lunch or dinner. He’s quietly, methodically working on a Philly Cheese Steak Thickburger, a large fries, and a tankard of soda. It takes him a solid 15 minutes to get through it all. Arlie Mae is eating a comparatively dainty Big Chicken Fillet Sandwich (770 calories) and fries and drinking a “small” Coke, which is about the size of her thigh.”

“Amid all the bluster, CKE has made a couple of concessions. Carl’s Jr. offers a charbroiled-chicken salad that has just seven grams of fat, and Hardee’s serves a barbecued-chicken sandwich. “It’s a very healthy sandwich. I think we sell about two a day,” Pudzer quips.”

“The development team is currently working on a Cap’n Crunch shake, featuring vanilla ice cream and crushed Cap’n Crunch cereal.”

via Portfolio

I’d say I hope CKE (Carl’s and Hardee’s parent company) will experience the same sort of backlash that McDonald’s experienced a few years back for their in-your-face, overt attempt to sell these artery clogging beef bombs if not for the fact that it was the media and public backlash that is now being used in their favor. In fact, maybe I shouldn’t even be publishing this blog post. My, how the bright red plastic tables have turned.

Albeit a completely wacky idea, I can now at least imagine why the Mississippi legislature thought such desperate measures were called for when they suggested restaurants prohibit serving obese patrons.

What is one to do? Thoughts?

Further Reading:

What Does a 410 lb. Weight Loss Really Look Like?

Conditioning Research: Not Fat! Fast Food Carb Intake Associated with Liver Damage

The Consumerist: Worst Fast Food in America

Modern Forage: UK and US Citizens Love Their Fast Food

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , ,