Showing posts with label awareness. Show all posts
Showing posts with label awareness. Show all posts

Monday, 28 May 2012

HEALTHY EATING-AN ENDLESS DEBATING ISSUE!

What does it mean when one is "advised" to practice healthy eating? Does it refer to the way one eats the food or what type of food is to be eaten to maintain good health? If it refers to the eating practice, slow eating as Buddhists practice is considered most healthy. But the foods that are healthy can be many depending on who talks about it. Industry always avers that their food products are good and even if they are not nutritionally balanced, they still do not cause any harm. Nutritionists beg to differ with this stand because scientifically one must eat more and more protective foods like fruits and vegetables, less and less of animal products and high fiber foods. Most consumers are either unaware or mindlessly ignore the principle that one's calorie intake must be balanced with calorie expenditure through physical activities to maintain decent health. Some experts promote the idea that there must be a "facilitatory" environment for helping consumers to practice healthy eating. Most importantly the present situation where healthy foods are priced out of the reach of most people while nutritionally empty products are flooding the market at ridiculously low cost, in every nook and corner in the US, must be reversed if perceptible improvement in the health of population there is to be expected. Here is an interesting expose on this important issue by a learned expert.  

"People are bombarded with conflicting advice, much of it from sources with a vested interest in selling particular foods, supplements or diet plans. Nutrition studies tend to focus on single nutrients, making their results difficult to apply to real diets. No wonder people have a hard time knowing what or whom to believe. This is too bad, really. The basic principles of healthy eating could not be easier to understand: eat plenty of vegetables and fruits, balance calorie intake with expenditure, and don't eat too much junk food. If such principles seem hard to follow, it is surely because of how they affect the food industry. Balancing calorie intake often means eating less, but doing so is bad for business. Food companies must do everything they can to sell more food, not less. So they make foods available everywhere — even in drug, book and clothing stores — and in very large portions. Few people can resist eating tasty food when it's right in front of them. Large portions alone explain rising rates of obesity: they encourage people to eat more calories but to underestimate what they have eaten. Healthy eating requires a food environment that makes it easier for everyone to make better choices. It also requires a food system that makes it cheaper to buy fruits and vegetables than less healthful foods, so everyone can afford to eat healthfully". 

It is true that to day's environment is not conducive to creating clarity in the mind of the consumer, even if he is well read because the vast information surge vis-a-vis food across the global media causes more confusion due to severe contradictions and conflicting ideas. Consumer education is a very difficult task and the current efforts in all countries are grossly inadequate to raise the awareness about all aspects of food among the citizenry. The present curricula followed in primary schools need radical changes and this is an area neglected by many governments world over. If the basic principles of healthy eating whether referring to mode of eating or healthiness of foods consumed are not inculcated at young age, it will be difficult for grown ups to imbibe the same later. Industry cooperation may be difficult to get because business flourishes only when tasty foods are sold which in most cases are invariably unhealthy. A blend of coercive enforcement of discipline in food products marketing and persuasive efforts to wean away the industry from developing recklessly bad food that cockle the taste buds only ignoring the well being of the consumer, can only succeed in the long run.   

V.H.POTTY
http://vhpotty.blogspot.com/
http://foodtechupdates.blogspot.com

Wednesday, 14 March 2012

AWARENESS ABOUT GM FOODS-NO UNIVERSAL CONCENSUS


The controversies surrounding GM foods never seem to be ending with increasing polarization taking place all around regarding their safety. Though countries like China, with authoritarian governments at the helm have adopted GM foods with out bothering about the feelings of their populations, there are many others categorically rejecting these unnatural versions of food as unsafe or not proved unequivocally safe. Recent Bt Brinjal incidence in India has shown how sensitive people can be to issues concerning food safety and environmental protection though this is a country with high degree of illiteracy! Contrast this with the situation in the US where literacy is very high but 80% of market foods contain GM food ingredients. This anachronism can be explained away by the irony that despite being a democratic country the US government does not mandate the industry to declare the GM origin of the ingredients on the front of the pack label denying its citizens the fundamental right to know what they are eating!  Against this background the attitude of people in a country like the UK where citizen's right is highly valued, is worth knowing and this has been highlighted in a recent survey. Here is a gist of the conclusions of this study:

"Twenty nine per cent of those polled said GM food is good for the economy. A similar number- 27 per cent - disagreed with the statement and 44 per cent said they didn't know. Just over half agreed that GM food helps people in developing economies. Twenty four per cent agreed that the foods are safe for future generations - a fall from 31 per cent in 2010. The proportion who believe there to be safety risk also fell, from 39 per cent to 27 per cent, leaving more people sitting on the fence. The men were more pro-GM than the women but levels of varied depending on the potential use of the technology. For instance 64 per cent of those quizzed were supportive of a rice group with built in vitamin A that could stave of malnutrition and blindness. But just 22 per cent agreed with the production of carnations coloured violet through genetic modification. Sir Roland Jackson, chief executive of the British Science Association, said the survey showed 'a pretty high awareness of GM food' and considerable interest in the subject, with two-thirds of respondents interested in it."

Amid all these arguments and counter arguments, a basic issue has been obscured, that is about the personal freedom of the denizen to choose and consume what he wants with full knowledge of its advantages and deficiencies. It is here that governments world over must concede the inevitability of letting their citizens know in a clear and transparent manner what is offered to him by the market and front of the pack labeling must be made mandatory whether one likes it or not. Industry must not be allowed to hijack this right of the consumer through lobbying and money power. The above survey cannot be interpreted, as the GM lobby is trying to do, to mean that consumers are increasingly accepting GM foods but it only exemplifies their dilemma in coming to any conclusion in absence of "conclusive" data regarding the safety of GM foods to humans and the environment beyond a shadow of doubt. 

V.H.POTTY
http://vhpotty.blogspot.com/
http://foodtechupdates.blogspot.com