An Urban's Rural View

Judging from the comments of reviewers like my DTN colleague Jerry Hagstrom (http://tiny.cc/…) and the New York Times columnist Mark Bittman (http://tiny.cc/…), the new film Fed Up is well done but contributes little to advancing the debate over obesity.

Though the movie has "fantastic graphics" (Hagstrom) and a "bright, peppy, presumably crowd-pleasing presentation" (Bittman), its message echoes what critics of the food system have been saying for years: The American diet is unhealthy and the big bad food companies are to blame.

This is problematic, but not because it's entirely wrong. The American diet IS unhealthy, the food companies ARE partly to blame (though Fed Up, the reviews suggest, distorts and exaggerates their role). If millions of Americans emerged from the theatre determined to change their eating habits, the film would merit praise for that alone.

The problem is that viewers might come away thinking they don't have to do anything. If obesity is all Big Food's fault then only Big Food can fix it. If that takes a push and a slap from government, then have at it, Uncle Sam.

A more pressing problem may be who will watch it, anyway. Bittman, who is quoted in Fed Up, thinks it will attract a wide audience. "As of this writing, the movie is in 19 markets, and doing well," he says. "If it were in hundreds of theaters, it would probably change more lives than any movie released this year, because if people see the film, they will get the message. It's not a subtle one."

Hagstrom disagrees. "Fed Up has good intentions and raises valid issues," he writes in his National Journal column, "but it is almost two hours long and is so broad in its condemnation of the food industry that it's questionable whether it will find a viewership beyond the people who already agree with the producers' viewpoint, or whether it will have any impact on public policy."

Though I follow the obesity debate and will probably take in the movie, I do not look forward to it. The rut we've fallen into in this debate has become tedious. To overcome obesity, Americans need to understand how complex the problem is, not just how big it is. If I'm reading the reviews correctly, Fed Up oversimplifies it.

According to both Bittman and Hagstrom, for example, the film downplays the value of exercise: People can't work out enough to take off the extra poundage Big Food entices them to put on.

Maybe that's true for the already obese, but is there really no role for exercise in preventing people from becoming obese? At the risk of seeming hypocritical in my criticism of oversimplification, let me illustrate the point with an oversimplification of my own.

My wife and I recently returned from 18 days in Europe, where we toured museums and churches and historical sites. We each came back a half pound lighter than we left.

Now we've embarked on a two-week drive from Washington, D.C., to Newport, Oregon. From experience making this drive in the past I know we'll both be up a couple of pounds when we arrive.

Yet in Europe we breakfasted on buttery croissants and cheese and often eggs and meats as well. We supped on Wiener schnitzel and other breaded, fried meats, usually with potatoes.

We indulged in mid-afternoon snacks -- apple strudels and chocolate tortes and ice cream. We guzzled whole-milk cappuccinos, often topped with whipped cream.

We drank beer and wine as if Prohibition loomed. Back at the hotel at the end of the day, we stopped at the bar before retiring for the day's second or third dessert and downed it with a last glass of wine.

In the U.S., by comparison, we rarely eat desserts or snack on sweets. Our daily diet is much heavier in fruits and vegetables than it was in Europe. Driving across the country we will no doubt eat a few fast-food meals. But on the whole we'll take in less sugar and fat each day than we did in Bratislava, Budapest and Vienna.

The difference between our losing weight in Europe and gaining it here isn't the food. It's the exercise. In Europe we were on our feet walking all day. Now we're in the car. The pounds we pick up driving for two weeks will come off once we arrive and my wife resumes her walking and I my swimming.

Is exercise the whole answer, then? Of course not. But can the makers of Fed Up really deny there are weight consequences to a sedentary lifestyle?

If you doubt the American lifestyle has become more sedentary, check out the first chart here http://tiny.cc/…. Half a century ago, nearly half of America worked in agriculture or manufacturing. Today barely a quarter of us do. Not all service jobs are sedentary but a lot of them are.

Don't even get me started on the disappearance of recess from American schools. When I was in school we had three outdoor-play periods a day, well over an hour total. Many grade-school children today get none.

Hagstrom thinks Fed Up undermines its own argument "through a series of interviews with obese working-class children about their struggles and failures to lose weight. While the film makes the point that the children are exposed to advertising, the scenes of these families seem to say that working-class people just can't make good food choices or get exercise."

Somehow we need to dig the obesity debate out of its rut and admit it's not a black-and-white issue. The food companies play a role by pandering to the innate human love of sugar, fat and salt. They make money selling us things we like to eat, whether they're good for us or not.

Unfortunately, many of us still want to eat them even when we know they're not good for us. Many of us don't like to exercise, either, and if we have an office job and family responsibilities we'll have few chances to.

It's going to take a mixture of education and regulation to change all that and it's going to take time. Increasing Americans' awareness of the problem is good. Oversimplifying it isn't.

I can only hope when I finally see the movie, it will prove more nuanced than I fear.

Urban Lehner
urbanity@hotmail.com

(ES/)

© Copyright 2014 DTN/The Progressive Farmer. All rights reserved.