Michael Pollan

Winners of food label redesign not going to solve a thing

You can see the top two winning entries here.  They are both visually more appealing, particularly the top choice.  However, I don't either of them are particularly compelling or give me any kind of faith that it's going to encourage healthier eating.

Let's pick on the winner:

  • Ingredients.  Are the proportional squares listing ingredients (peanut, vegetable oil) an improvement over just listing them?  What if a small amount of vegetable oil (or arsenic) is really unhealthy?  The additives on the macaroni and cheese box look quite minimal relative to the other ingredients -- does that mean we can safely ignore them?  And if I care about a particular ingredient - say, canola oil - it's actually harder to find.  I could see this feature backfiring.
  • Recommendations.  The thumbs up / thumbs down are a more effective way of enforcing a health paradigm that I think is shit.  An apple gets a thumbs up because it is high in carbohydrate?  A peanut gets a thumb down because of fat content?  These are both whole foods and so to some extent, that's just absurd.  It also continues to emphasize macronutrient content and reinforce fat phobia.
  • Color-coding.  Printing colored labels is expensive and will never actually happen.  Imagine this label in black and white.  It'd lose a lot of it's power.

For people who read food labels, this may be a more visually appealing display.  For people who never read the old food label, I just really don't see them reading this one either.

The only way to truly simplify a food label is to really make a statement about what you believe is important.  Here was my simple proposal for a food label.

The bottom line: call me a skeptic, but it's not gonna solve a thing.

Food Labeling: A Simple Proposal

What would a better food label look like?

We've just seen how calorie labeling doesn't work very well.  The existing food label is a confusing mess of archaic health beliefs.  In fact, Michael Pollan is leading a panel to "rethink the food label".  Food producers have generally fought against changes to the status quo, viewing any re-design as a threat.  Some iPhone apps are side-stepping the labeling process altogether, providing calorie estimates based purely on a photo of the food.

So what to do?

Let's start with a few simple propositions:

  • Nobody will ever agree on what is healthy.  Fat or sugar?  Animals or plants?  Is the War on Salt justified?
  • People value different things.  Vegans care about animal products, raw foodies care about cooking temperature, Jewish folks care about Kosher, Whole Foods shoppers care about organic, paleo folks care about biologically appropriate diets (grass-fed, pastured, etc.).
  • Government is political and changes slowly.  Food labels are designed by committee, in a highly political process, and we'll be stuck with the result for awhile.

Given these realities, what is the best approach?

No Label

There's one approach, probably unrealistic, that says just stop with the food labeling entirely.  Oh no, but how will we know what's in our food?

Exactly.  The absence of any food label will reinforce that we have no idea what is in industrial food products, or how they are made.  The current food label offers the comforting illusion that we actually know what we're eating -- or at least, that we know the nutritionally relevant facts.  But we don't.

Look, it's not as if fruit and produce come with nutrition labels saying what's in them.  Why not put industrial foods on the same footing?  I could either eat this mystery food in a box, or I could buy ingredients and foods that are known entities.

Of course, food companies will always find ways to make ridiculous health claims, so I'm open to the idea that a neutral disclosure is beneficial.

Platform for Labels

I would propose a system where food producers report a wide variety of health facts on the box itself....in a barcode.  Smart phones can easily scan them.  You could have an app that allows you to "choose your food label".  All of the top food labels in the Pollan competition could become a reality, not just "the best one".

Each label might display information in a different way, and emphasize different information.  The Mayo Clinic Label could emphasize saturated fat.  The Vegan Label would report whether a food contains animal products.  The USDA Label could issue some ridiculously stupid recommendations three years after everyone else has.  The Robert Lustig Label can simply report how much sugar is in it.

This is not a revolutionary change -- food labeling has already been heading in this direction with the proliferation of certifications: organic, fair trade, vegan, grass-fed, and so on. 

Benefits

  • No longer one-size-fits all
  • Harder for companies to game the system because they will be evaluated from a wide variety of angles -- not just fat content or calories.
  • Labels can be updated as new science comes to light
  • Innovations from top e-labels can inform the on-the-box label

Here's another benefit.  If you scan your entire shopping cart, then you can get a read on the healthiness of your entire diet.  One carton of ice cream in a shopping cart full of un-processed food isn't a big deal.  One carton of ice cream in a shopping cart full of processed food ain't so healthy.  That is to say, the impact of a carton of ice cream on your diet depends on everything else in your shopping cart.

Grocery stores already collect this information through loyalty cards.  Why shouldn't consumers start to collect and use our data for our own purposes?

Drawbacks 

But what about the poor?  What about people without smart phones?  What about people who don't care enough to check?  What about the people whose health care I'm paying for through my tax dollars?  I want to tell them how to eat!

  • I'd be willing to bet that the food choices of the poor have far more to do with the price of food, access to alternatives, and the design of policies around food stamps than the macronutrients listed on any particular food label
  • Smart phones will be as pervasive as cell phones in less than a decade
  • Many people aren't checking food labels as it is

So go ahead and re-design the food label if you want to, but the end result may be disappointing: just another politicized, one-size-fits-all, "food label by committee".  Better to create a platform for a multiplicity of competing food labels that is dynamic, competitive, and responsive.

But for this idea to work, it needs information: ingredients, processing methods, nutrients, and more.  So rather than expend political leverage for just another one-size-fits-all food label, why not push for information disclosure in a way that doesn't threaten or demonize food companies?

We might just end up with a healthier ecosystem of food labels.

Michael Pollan's new website

Michael Pollan just released a brand new website. 

Love the nice clean site design.  He's got a ton of great content too -- here's a curated selection:

  • The Botany of Desire is less well known than The Omnivore's Dilemma, but just as good.  It takes a "plant's-eye view" and explores how in some sense, plants have domesticated humans, not the other way around. 

"Every schoolchild learns about the mutually beneficial dance of honeybees and flowers: The bee collects nectar and pollen to make honey and, in the process, spreads the flowers’ genes far and wide. In The Botany of Desire, Michael Pollan ingeniously demonstrates how people and domesticated plants have formed a similarly reciprocal relationship. He masterfully links four fundamental human desires—sweetness, beauty, intoxication, and control—with the plants that satisfy them: the apple, the tulip, marijuana, and the potato. In telling the stories of four familiar species, Pollan illustrates how the plants have evolved to satisfy humankind’s most basic yearnings. And just as we’ve benefited from these plants, we have also done well by them. So who is really domesticating whom?"

  • You can find all of Pollan's articles on the site, including The Modern Hunter-Gatherer, a fascinating description of Pollan's experience hunting -- excerpted from Omnivore's Dilemma.  The first line:

"Walking with a loaded rifle in an unfamiliar forest bristling with the signs of your prey is thrilling. It embarrasses me to write that, but it is true."

Read the whole thing, particularly if you're not a hunter.

  • Pollan also has an excellent Resources section covering six topics: Sustainable Eating & Nutrition, Growing Food, Politics & Policy, Animal Welfare, Journalism & Writing, and For Parents & Kids. 
  • A (very) frequently asked question:

"Why aren't you a vegetarian?  I'm not a vegetarian because I enjoy eating meat, meat is nutritious food, and I believe there are ways to eat meat that are in keeping with my environmental and ethical values. "

Full answer here.  Pollan has done more to influence vegetarian attitudes than any outsider would be able to do.  (Just like Ted Nugent will always be more influential in the hook and bullet crowd.)

 

Syndicate content