AHC: U.S. public much more health conscious, takes on big agribusinesses?

For example, the American public is all over the topics of partially hydrogenated vegetable oil and high fructose corn syrup.

Remember how a goodly number of Europeans protested against "Frankenfood"? Let's say political activism in America is at the same level or even higher.

A POD might be one or several court cases which rule that shopping malls and areas in front of stores are the modern equivalent of town squares and public forums. And smaller court cases determine some of the specific rules, for example, that people can set up tables outside grocery stores as long as they don't block walkways or accost people. And then various activists learn their skills and get good. They learn that blasting people with a bunch of scary facts, even if largely true, is a royal turn-off. Instead, ever so slightly understating your case seems to be the coin of the realm.

Of course, large agribusinesses push back. How do you see this playing out?
 
Last edited:
I guess it depends on which products the American market rejects. Cutting consumption of high fructose corn syrup, to my understanding, should cut down obesity and improve health.
Going all out against GMOs because "big business" and "frankenfood" and increasing the amount of "organic" food vs "non-organics" will cut down agricultural output, which will increase food prices worldwide and will make brown people far from the USA die of malnourishment related deceases as the world's largest agricultural producer exports less food due the drop in production. Not that anyone would care, though.
 
some activists would care and some won't. If people are scared and tight, especially about their immediate future, then yes, it's hard to care about people in other parts of the world.

Other activists really try to connect lines between practices here and practices abroad.

Now, maybe surprisingly, I have read that globalization has been a good thing for developing countries and have lifted a bunch of people out of poverty. Of course, it would probably work even better if multinationals were better behaved. For example, if they put the transparency they're always talking about more into practice, and the 'win-win,' etc.
 
http://www.takepart.com/article/2013/11/08/why-local-may-be-cheaper-organic

“Many [organic companies] are depending on factory farms and imports from China, India, and other Third World countries to enhance their bottom line,” said Mark Kastel of the Cornucopia Institute, which promotes family-scale farming. “They are taking advantage of the goodwill of organic consumers. And the prices are not coming down accordingly.”
So, yes, the people with the energy and money to seek out good, healthier(?) organic food don't always have the energy to focus on sourcing and whether it's locally grown, etc.

And I suspect organic prices are what economists might call 'sticky.'
 
http://m.startribune.com/fda-ruling-means-final-nail-in-the-coffin-for-trans-fat/307759781/

"Our ingredient suppliers have found the removal of partially hydrogenated oils to be technically challenging," Marshall-based Schwan Food Co. said in a statement, echoing other foodmakers' concerns. Still, Schwan, maker of frozen pizza, ice cream and other foods, said it's committed to eliminating partially hydrogenated oils by the end of 2015.

The food industry and individual food companies can petition the FDA to use trans fat in some products, and still be considered "generally recognized as safe."

The Grocery Manufacturers Association (GMA) said Tuesday is developing a petition seeking FDA approval for limited and specific uses of partially hydrogenated oils (PHOs).
With more citizen activism, seems like this could have been done ten years before.

And notice the exceptions, which can easily become the rule. :cool:
 
Top