Food Politics

It is important to note that, while the CDC Journal Preventing Chronic Disease did publish the collection, all the work was supported by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation’s Childhood Obesity Activity.

Paper A99 posits an interesting intervention.

Children with at least one obese parent may, themselves, become obese and may develop low self esteem.

The ethical thing is to intervene early, stigmatize the child, thereby eliminating any risk of failure or delay in developing sufficiently low self esteem. There is nothing worse than a self-assured obese young person but this is preventable.

Paper A92 is of timely importance to our crusade.

The authors point out marketers offer sweet tasty foods that children innately prefer over bland flavorless treats and this state of affairs must not be permitted to continue, thus “government at all levels has an obligation to act”. The authors do not specify what the governments should act like, exactly, but acting like ‘prying nagging authoritarian dictocrats’ might be a reasonable surmise.

Paper A95 is, in my opinion, the finest of the lot.

The authors craft a much-needed loophole in strident Nanny State interventions and prescriptions. Declaring a child’s status as ” with special health care needs” excuses everyone involved from direct participation in Nanny State enforcement as it is to be imposed upon the common rabble. Fortunately, my child and yours is and always has been ‘special’ in every important way. I think the kid has earned a little sweet treat, don’t you?

Thanks Marion for collecting these references for us all in one place.

@Sigmund – YOU, sir, made me smile and laugh out loud! I love your analysis and pointed summation to these “ethical” essays. Big fat hugs to you!

[...] Marion Nestle provides an interesting look at the ethics of childhood obesity interventions [...]

Sigmund is a troll, Darlene, and he amuses only those who miss the entire point of this blog and of Professor Nestle’s tireless work on behalf of public health.

Cracked summarized the reason for not intervening on obesity better than anyone. (The article itself is about front groups in general, but the first, second, and sixth ones fit our discussion.)

Sigmund forgets that we’re dealing with children, and children are…children.

And of course, there’s always Michele Bachmann, who hates food stamps, but God help you if you try to restrict what they’re redeemable on. (In that case, soda.)