Roundup - What's the Problem?

"... as an adult, we understand even if you ruin an appetite, there's another appetite coming right behind it. There's no danger in running out of appetites. I've got millions of them." --Jerry Seinfeld. The "Heart Attack" episode.


Fact: When food is in short supply, obesity as a public health problem does not exist. As a matter of fact, being obese under those circumstances signifies being wealthy or of higher economic status than the average population. Look at countries where some are living in poverty, and others are more affluent. Which segment of that society has a problem with obesity?

Fact: When food is made available and affordable, in the presence of abundance, the average person will eat more. Much more. Bigger portions. It is surprising to see people who immigrated as adults from less affluent countries continuing to eat the portions and at the times that they were used to, and stay slim. They have already developed the habits and controls and they stay satisfied with the portions and types of food that they used to consume. Their first generation kids, however, who were not raised in such a controlled environment, may become overweight or obese.

Fact: When food is not only made available in abundance 24 hours a day, but is also advertised all day long, people tend to consume even more. And branding does affect their choices.

Fact: Social networks can strongly enhance the spread of obesity.

One conclusion I can draw here is that: External influences tend to have a stronger effect on controlling how much we eat than spontaneous internal influences, in the average person. It takes a conscious effort and proper habit building and modifications to overcome those external influences. That we are victims of an environment and a culture that facilitates (or may even encourage) habits that will make us unhealthy, the only true refuge is our own ability to change habits and behaviors that developed under those circumstances. Although I stress on over-eating as a deadly habit, it is important to notice that serious under-eating as in anorexia nervosa is at least as deadly, if not more.

Remember, weight control is achieved through three elements:

1. Diet (portion acontrol and quality control)

2. Exercise or physical activity

3. Behavioral change towards healthy habits

Everything else (a diet program, a trainer, a pill, a surgical operation) is a tool that helps you control your energy storage (and, consequently, the weight of fat) through one or more of the above mechanisms.

Stay healthy! Happy Holidays!

The Paradox

Restaurant (A) presents food items that are advertised as being healthy choices, and has even caused some people to lose serious weight. Restaurant (B) was the topic of an entire movie (Supersize Me) which focused on unhealthy eating. Could someone possibly think that eating huge portions at restaurant (A), and picking up choices that were not advertised in their health menu, would still be healthier than eating anything at Restaurant B? Aha, it is the branding thing, again. You remember, we touched on that once before. And here is a very elegant study, actually four studies in one report, that is an eye opener. The article title is “The Biasing Health Halos of Fast-Food Restaurant Health Claims: Lower Calorie Estimates and Higher Side-Dish Consumption Intentions”, that appeared in the October issue of the Journal of Consumer Research.

Study 1: “Calorie Estimations by Subway and McDonald’s Diners” concluded that branding Subway as the healthier choice leads people to believe that Subway meals contain 21.3% fewer calories than same-calorie McDonald’s meals.

Study 2: found that even consumers who are "familiar" with both restaurants estimate that Subway sandwiches contain much less calories than McDonald’s sandwiches containing the “same” number of calories.

Study 3 is the real kicker. Participants were given Subway sandwiches that contained 50% “more” calories than the “unhealthy” Big Mac. In addition to a serious underestimate of the calories in the Subway sandwich, participants who ate the Subway sandwiches ended up ordering higher-calorie drinks and cookies. It is as if those who thought that they ate healthier main-dishes, tended to reward themselves by eating higher calorie side-dishes or drinking more calorie-rich drinks. As you can imagine, they consumed many more calories because of the double mistake (underestimating the main meal calories, and taking richer side orders)

Study 4 actually proved the influence of marketing and branding. When consumers were presented with arguments contradicting the health claims, the “halo effects” mentioned above tended to disappear.

What a fascinating research, and no doubt one that will become a classic. The series of studies were designed to help finding an answer to a question, as stated by the authors: Why is America a land of low-calorie food claims, yet high-calorie food intake?

Source:

Chandon P, Wansink P. The Biasing Health Halos of Fast-Food Restaurant Health Claims: Lower Calorie Estimates and Higher Side-Dish Consumption Intentions. Journal of Consumer Research. Vol. 34 · October 2007

Pierre Chandon, Ph.D. is Associate Professor of marketing at INSEAD, France. Brian Wansink, Ph.D. is the Chair of Marketing and of Nutritional Science in the Applied Economics and Management Department, Cornell University, NY. The data in these studies were collected at the expense of the authors, and the studies were not sponsored by any outside source.

Can TV ads influence our kids' taste buds?

This is not exactly a bariatric surgery topic, but, nevertheless, a very interesting one. Does advertising/branding affect children's taste? Well, we know that TV ads do influence kids, who, as a consequence, keep begging and nagging for an advertised product. The pressuring will intensify, once other parents provided your kids friends with the product. What standing do you have when you stick to the hated "No", while the attractive TV ads say "yes", and peers' parents have given the sign of approval?

A very interesting study came from Stanford Prevention Research Center and Stanford University School of Medicine. It was published in the August, 2007, issue of the "Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine." (1) Kids aged 3-5 years (yes, that young!) were entered into a food tasting game, where they were given 2 identical food items, one wrapped in a McDonald's typical wrapping, and the other wrapped in a plane white wrapping. Items included not only hamburgers, fries and chicken McNugget's, but also baby carrots, which are not even sold at McDonald's, but were placed on top of a McDonald's french fries bag and on top of a matched plain white bag. McDonald's was chosen because it is a good example of a well-branded and heavily marketed source. Guess what? There was a statistically significant higher taste preference for the foods associated with the branded wrappings. This study is remarkable for its hypothesis, and the results that came out of it.

The authors concluded that branding of foods and beverages influences young children's taste perceptions. The authors also suggested that branding may be a useful strategy for improving young children's eating behaviors.

No wonder, a report of a joint "WHO/FAO Expert Consultation" indicated that: "Heavy marketing of fast-food outlets and energy-dense, micronutrient-poor foods and beverages" is a "probable" cause of excess weight gain and obesity. There has been strong evidence of a relationships between television viewing and obesity in children. Could that be, at least partially, due to the food advertising to which they are exposed? You bet.

(1) Robinson TN, Borzekowski DL, Matheson DM, Kraemer HC. Effects of fast food branding on young children's taste preferences. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2007 Aug;161(8):792-7. PMID: 17679662