The Fat of the Land

[Emillereid]

One of the hit films at Sundance this year was a documentary called "Super Size Me," about a healthy man — the film's director — who decided to see what would happen if he ate nothing but super-sized McDonald's food for 30 days. His weight ballooned, his cholesterol rose, and his liver functions began to erode — warning signs of a number of chronic diseases that, like obesity itself, have reached epidemic proportions in this country.

According to the World Health Organization, those diseases, including cardiovascular disease, Type 2 diabetes and certain cancers, are now part of a major shift in the cause of death around the world. Old-fashioned communicable diseases, like malaria, are being eclipsed by noncommunicable diseases caused by a dramatic change in diet. Even poor countries plagued by malnutrition are at risk for what the W.H.O. calls a malnutrition "of excess." There are 300 million obese adults in the world, some 750 million more who are overweight and 22 million overweight or obese children under the age of 5.

In hopes of getting ahead of the problem, the W.H.O. has drafted a "global strategy on diet, physical activity and health." Meant to be culturally and regionally responsive, the strategy calls for more physical activity, a reduction in sugars, fats and salt and an increase in fresh fruit, whole grains, legumes and nuts. In other words, exactly what your doctor would recommend if you asked how to lose weight and improve your health. The plan has provoked an outcry from the American food industry — especially the Sugar Association — and that, predictably, has led the Bush administration to request changes. William Steiger, a special assistant in the Department of Health and Human Services, sent a 30-page critique to W.H.O. last month, and his boss, Secretary Tommy Thompson, and members of the Grocery Manufacturers Association flew to Geneva to ask for more time to comment.

<snip>
The administration should be throwing its weight behind the anti-obesity strategy instead of fighting it. Its current stance has nothing to do with health and everything to do with the political power of Big Food — and especially Big Sugar.


http://www.nytimes.com/2004/02/02/opinion/02MON2.html

This administration seems to take BIGCORPA's side on literally every issue -- I mean I might argue with some of the specifics the WHO recommendations -- I'd certainly encourage the consumption of more nutrient dense, low starchy veggies for instance, but how our government can be against recommending less sugar (of no nutritional value) is beyond me. God save us from these fools.