Many Americans assume that junk food company giants, like Coca Cola and General Mills, only care about making a profit off the obesity epidemic that is plaguing the United States. These companies are earning millions of dollars in profit from the mostly unhealthy products they sell in stores. In recent years, these same companies have been reducing the amount of fat, salt, and sugar in their products in order to make them ‘healthier’ and appeal to the more health-conscious crowd.
Before writing this essay, Michael Moss spoke with many current and ex-employees of these food giants. A large majority of the people he spoke with had the same feelings about the industry. The people who work for those companies realize that their industry is a slippery slope. Those companies have reduced the amount of salt,
…show more content…
sugar, and fat they put into their junk food products in order to adhere to national health standards and make their products less harmful to the consumer. Even with these reductions, there still is a high demand for junk food. Consumers are still purchasing these high fat, high calorie, high sodium, and high sugar products. These consumers know that junk food is bad for them, but their hunger for these snack foods is more important than their desire to live a healthy life. Jeffrey Dunn was a highly successful Coca-Cola executive in the early 2000’s. In 2001, Dunn was leading over half of Coca-Cola’s $20 billion in annual sales as president and chief operating officer in both North America and South America. At a conference with other food executives, after Dunn’s pitch about marketing a new product, he told Moss that “We are pro-junk food behavior but anti-junk food establishment” (Moss 494). Dunn’s point is that we, as a society, are ‘pro-junk food’ in the sense that we have a habit of snacking. It is almost customary to have some sort of snack food by our side as we are doing homework, watching a movie, watching television, reading, et cetera. Society is snacking in excess and that can be shown by the countless junk food products available on supermarket shelves and the numerous advertisements for these products that are played on television. Society is an ‘anti-junk food establishment’ because we emphasize living a healthy life through eating right and exercising. This is incredibly ironic considering the snacking habits of this country. The media constantly reminds us about the horrors of junk food and the terrible things associated with eating too much of it. Even though society snacks excessively on junk food, we think that eating a healthy meal or doing a little bit of exercise negates the fact that we have been snacking on unhealthy food all day. My feelings on the issue at hand are mixed. I do agree that people snack in excess and that the food giants such as Coca Cola, Pillsbury, and General Mills are trying to make a profit by producing incredibly addictive products. It is known that those delicious, crunchy, salty, sugary junky snacks that we love take a massive toll on our health. But, it is the consumer’s responsibility to make good food choices. In his essay, Moss gives statistics regarding the number of people in this country who are clinically obese, who have type 2 diabetes, hypertension, and gout. Many of these cases of these diseases are caused by poor diet. The other side to these scary statistics are the concepts of vanishing caloric density and the bliss point which are the two major things the food giants use to create the perfect snack foods. Steven Witherly, a food scientist who Moss reached out to, explains what vanishing caloric density is and why it is the reason why we are hooked on junk food.
Vanishing caloric density is “something [that] melts down quickly [which causes] your brain [to think] that there’s no calories in it…you can just keep eating it forever” (Moss 487). Cheetos Puffs are the perfect example of this concept at work. Cheetos Puffs are crunchy, but they melt in your mouth. Because Cheetos Puffs disappear so quickly in the mouth, the brain does not comprehend how many have been eaten or how quickly they have been eaten. Food scientists have engineered countless junk food snacks to be like Cheetos Puffs.
Howard Moskowitz has a Ph.D. in experimental psychology from Harvard. He spoke with Moss about his history in the food industry. Moskowitz has been called on by companies such as Campbell Soup, General Foods, Kraft, and PepsiCo to ‘optimize’ products. During the process of product optimization, food scientists alter variables for the sole purpose of finding the most perfect version, or versions, of a product. Moskowitz discovered the bliss point while working to optimize food
products. The bliss point, according to Moskowitz, is when the product “creates the greatest amount of crave” (Moss 479). The bliss point gives a better understanding of why people continue to snack on different products such as Doritos. Doritos have many individual flavors that create one complex flavor. These different flavors are not overpowering enough to tell your brain to stop eating them. The different flavors that make Doritos so addicting are designed that way. The reason why the flavors are complex and keep your taste buds interested to reach that bliss point and to continue to eat the product. Snack foods engineered with these two concepts in mind are the snack foods that are the most popular and addicting. It is clear that these processes contribute to the creation of addictive junk food, but they cannot solely be blamed for the obesity epidemic. The science behind addictive junk food is only part of the problem. Consumer self-control is the other major part of the problem. We, as a society, cannot only blame the food companies, we must also put responsibility on the consumers. There are some people that would argue that junk food, by itself, is not addicting. They would claim that the consumer’s eating habits are the reason why junk foods are ‘addictive.’ They would say that overeating junk food is the reason why there is an obesity epidemic in this country. Although this is a valid opinion, there is evidence that proves, biologically, junk food is addictive. Research shows that receptors in the brain treat eating junk food like a reward system. When junk food is eaten, the brain releases dopamine, the chemical commonly associated with the brain’s pleasure center. This same chemical is released when a cigarette is smoked or when a person is doing drugs such as heroine. When people eat junk food constantly, they build up a tolerance for it. Meaning, in order for dopamine to be released, more junk food needs to be eaten, therefore, causing a person to overeat. While eating junk food, the consumer does not consciously think about the amount of food they are eating. They are, subconsciously, waiting for that dopamine to be released and to feel that high that the dopamine creates. Furthermore, it has been previously mentioned that junk foods are engineered to have addictive properties. These properties in addition to the way the brain is wired causes a person to be addicted to junk food. One cannot solely blame the consumer or the food companies for causing junk food addiction; the blame is on both the consumer and the food companies. With all of this information, one can answer the big question, “Do the food companies care more about profits than the consumers?” There is no right or wrong answer to this question. The food companies do care about profits, but without consumers, these companies will not make any profits. Junk food will continue to be engineered and optimized as long as there are people who buy the products. As for the obesity epidemic, that is on the shoulders of both the food companies and the consumers.
This is an increasingly concerning factor in the growing national epidemic of obesity. Adverts often mask foods that are unhealthy by emphasising their positive nutritional features – such as dietary fibre and protein. While at the same time ignoring its negative features – including the high amounts of saturated fat and sugar content. In some cases, even products that mention any alleged health benefits are usually outweighed by the health risks associated with consuming the product, that they just fail to mention. In summary, big businesses are using recurring and manipulative persuasive techniques on vulnerable consumers to try to convey the false message of health and nutrition in products when they are in fact more harmful than helpful.
“The Extraordinary Science of Addictive Junk Food” by Michael Moss addresses many issues with big companies and their thought process. Although Moss neglects to show the things that companies do right or do because the consumer desires it. He doesn’t bring to light the different options that big companies put out that are healthier for the consumer. Moss does a good job of pointing out what he believes to be the short coming of big companies towards their consumers. Are big food companies meeting our needs or creating them for us? Should they have to set limits between meeting our genuine needs and making a profit for themselves? Moss’s point of view of the conscious effort to make food inexpensive and addictive is an accurate portrayal.
of Philip Morris, said “People could point to these things and say, ‘They’ve got too much sugar, they’ve got too much salt […] well, that’s what the consumer wants, and we’re not putting a gun to their head to eat it. That’s what they want.” (Moss 267) However, consumers are being unconsciously forced to fund food industries that produce junk food. Companies devote much of their time and effort into manipulating us to purchase their products. For instance, Kraft’s first Lunchables campaign aimed for an audience of mothers who had far too much to do to make time to put together their own lunch for their kids. Then, they steered their advertisements to target an even more vulnerable pool of people; kids. This reeled in even more consumers because it allowed kids to be in control of what they wanted to eat, as Bob Eckert, the C.E.O. of Kraft in 1999, said, “Lunchables aren’t about lunch. It’s about kids being able to put together what they want to eat, anytime, anywhere” (Moss 268). While parents are innocently purchasing Lunchables to save time or to satisfy the wishes of their children, companies are formulating more deceiving marketing plans, further studying the psychology of customers, and conducting an excessive quantity of charts and graphs to produce a new and addictive
In order to right the ship that is America’s food industry, we need to recognize the monopolies in the U.S food industry. These massive food conglomerates must be broken up in order to create competition in the market. This will allow the completion to dictate the market. More companies means more competition, and when companies compete, the consumer wins.
In her book Marion Nestle examines many aspects of the food industry that call for regulation and closer examination. Nestle was a member of the Food Advisory Committee to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in the 1990’s and therefore helps deem herself as a credible source of information to the audience. (Nestle 2003). Yet, with her wealth of knowledge and experience she narrates from a very candid and logical perspective, but her delivery of this knowled...
The "Food/Challenge Corporate Abuse of Our Food." Corporate Accountability International. Stopcorporateabuse.org, 21 June 2013. Web. The Web.
The notion that someone like Ray Kroc-who essentially started the fast food business-could spearhead a nutritional reform is shocking. Ray Kroc is the father of McDonalds and other modern fast food, creating inventions and ideas such as the potato computer, hydrometer, curing bins, and multimixer shake maker that have evolved into an integral part of fast food production. However, if Ray Kroc’s innovation and imagination were out to use to improve fast food’s nutritional
In the US from since the turn of the century, obesity has been a rising and very serious issue. In the 1980’s, western culture experienced a fitness surge, and the major food corporations began producing new products that were “fat free”, but the issue was fat free food did not taste as good so people would not buy it. To compensate the taste, the food companies replaced the fat with sugar.
Many processed food companies have tried to go healthy. Kraft, for example, tried to reduce the amount of calories in their Oreos and even started selling them in 100-calorie packs in the early 2000s. Not long after, in 2003, Hershey’s released a new s’mores cookie that was more fattening and tasted better than Kraft’s new and healthy Oreos. Kraft’s business started to decline, so they decided
The sole purpose of a company is to offer goods and services while making a profit. If people have a liking for food products with so many unhealthy items and are willing to buy them, the companies have no obligation to reduce the amount of added ingredients. The companies aren’t the ones forcing the public to overeat. However, these companies shouldn’t market their products to people who they can easily exploit like children and those who are penurious. Michael Moss, author of the article “The Extraordinary Science of Addictive Junk Food” interviews several people who worked for certain big brand companies and gives us an abundant amount of information on how the food companies make and market their food to “get us hooked”.
Demographics: The target client for Cheetos is both males and females. Cheetos targets anyone and everyone who preferences to eat chips. It doesn't make a difference on the off chance that you are hitched or not. Children are more targeted to their products due to their promotional strategy and mascot image of
Another point of reason I would like to argue about is fast-food restaurants are everywhere and it is difficult for one to find any alternatives. I would also like to ask of the consumers to look at it from another view. There are many choices available to consumers each day some can do harm, while othe...
American culture is changing dramatically. In some areas it’s a good thing, but in other areas, like our food culture, it can have negative affects. It is almost as if our eating habits are devolving, from a moral and traditional point of view. The great America, the land of the free and brave. The land of great things and being successful, “living the good life.” These attributes highlight some irony, especially in our food culture. Is the American food culture successful? Does it coincide with “good living”? What about fast and processed foods? These industries are flourishing today, making record sales all over the globe. People keep going back for more, time after time. Why? The answer is interestingly simple. Time, or in other words, efficiency. As people are so caught up in their jobs, schooling, sports, or whatever it may be, the fast/processed food industries are rapidly taking over the American food culture, giving people the choice of hot
Advertisements have radically changed over the years, and in turn societies eating habits have changed. With the growing availability of technological advancements, marketing companies can now skillfully target specific groups into buying their product. These marketing approaches have become so successful that they are preserving the unhealthy trends that occur in consumerism today, which is why it is essential that we are fully aware of their marketing tactics, their negative impacts on society, and potential solutions to aid in the healthy consumerism of food products.
It became so clear that junk foods lead to a punch of catastrophic diseases like obesity, type two diabetes, vascular diseases and cardiac disorders. Those kinds of diseases cost more than $150 billion annually, just to diagnose, treat people who suffer from them. That disease is chronic and leads to many health-related issues, for example, obesity considers a risk factor for type two diabetes, and high blood pressure, joint disorders and many others (The Denver Post 2012). The key of preventing many chronic problems is nutrition. Low income plays an important role of limiting most people to buy and eat a healthy diet and in the other hand, it is easy for people budgets to purchase junk foods. So controlling the prices of healthy foods to be suitable for all people make good nutrition available for everyone. Adequate diets mean decreasing the epidemic of those serious diseases, and stopping the spread and break the bad sequences that may happen. Long-term exposure to junk foods that are full with chemicals like additives, preservatives have led to chronic illnesses difficult to treat. Also, the chemical added to junk foods are tasted unique and made millions of people becoming addicted to them and are available everywhere for example in restaurants, cafes, lunchrooms (The Denver Post