Posts

This year I made some pretty meaningful changes in my life, many of which I’ve been meaning to make for a while, and finally accomplished during my transition to college life. First, I’ve started being more active in maintaining my health. Now that I’m in charge of my own diet, I’ve made efforts to incorporate more vegetables into my diet and not lean too heavily towards any one food group, as I realized I often tend to do. I’ve also made visits to the gym a part of my weekly schedule and biking my primary mode of transportation. This, combined with necessary changes, such as making sure I set aside enough time for sleep each night, keeping track of my schedule, and making my own appointments has made me feel, overall, more independent and capable.

There are some more changes I would like to make. Primarily, I would like to increase my involvement on campus and in my hobbies. Aside from ENR and my job, I have yet to become involved in anything else. I plan to change this next year by joining more clubs and more actively pursuing my hobbies. I have already gone through the list of student organizations at Ohio State and chosen a few to try out this fall. I also plan to get back into dance by taking lessons off campus next semester.

Ultimately, the prompt for the changes I have made and would still like to make is wanting to set up good habits for the rest of my life. The changes I have made so far will set me up to live a healthy and productive life in the future, so long as I continue them. As for the changes I plan on making, I have a tendency to focus on working hard now with the rationale that I can do the things I enjoy later. However, I think it might be better to balance the two, as the things I enjoy doing aren’t necessarily unproductive. I think this mindset will allow me to find a better balance that can continue to be applied to my life after I graduate and get a job.

I am trying to reduce the amount of things I take in from the world around me. In eating more vegetables, and thus less meat and dairy products, I am reducing my impact in that regard. By making biking my primary mode of transportation, I have further reduced my impact on the world. I am giving back to the world through volunteering events, some of which are through ENR.

My Earth Month Action Plan fit into my year in review in a few ways. By researching the meaning of certain food labels like organic and free range, I have learned that although a food’s labels may lead you to believe something about the product, it is not necessarily true. Learning this information and sharing it has allowed me to give back to the world in a small way, as I, and possibly those I have shared these facts with, will judge the food products we buy more closely. By calling my representative I have taken political action that will hopefully make a positive impact as well. Additionally, taking a closer look at the nutritional makeup of my regular purchases has allowed me to weed out things that are actually quite unhealthy, and further improve the care I am taking of my health. I will continue to keep a closer eye on food labels and their meanings in the future.

My first two weeks of action have gone fairly well. For my first action, I examined the food labels of my regular purchases at Target and tried to determine if their nutritional content matched up with how healthy I perceived them to be. To my surprise, the granola I buy, while fairly high in carbs as expected, did not have nearly as much sugar as I thought. On the other hand, my favorite brand of yogurt contains 31 grams of sugar per serving. According to the American Heart Association, women should only consume around 25 grams of sugar in a day. It also contained a surprisingly large amount of cholesterol, fat, and sodium, especially for something I considered a healthy snack. In fact, I realized that despite the way I perceived them, the chocolate granola I buy was a fair bit healthier than the blueberry yogurt. My other regular purchases include dark chocolate, which I didn’t consider very healthy in the first place and about matched my expectations, and unsweetened soy milk, which was better than I thought, containing a variety of vitamins, as well as protein and potassium. Ultimately, I’ve decided to reconsider my purchase of yogurt as a healthy snack, and opt for fresh fruits and vegetables instead when I am able.

For my second action, I initially planned to spread information about misleading food labels to my friends and family. However, I decided to switch the order of my second and third action. The action I took instead was researching the meaning of common phrases placed on food labels, such as all natural, fat free, no sugar added, and so forth. I compiled a list of these phrases, and researched their legal meaning as defined by the FDA. Taking this action first will allow me to be as informed as possible before beginning to spread information. The restrictions tend to be fairly loose, some even more than I first assumed. For example, when a product is labeled as free range, there are no requirements for the amount, duration, and quality of outdoor access. So consumers looking to buy ethical products may be led to believe the animals are treated at a standard they are not.

In my final two weeks, I foresee a few challenges. Next week, I will spread the information I have gathered to my family and friends. I need to find a way to make this information quick and easy to go through so that it may actually inform them and potentially compel them to change their purchasing habits or do more of their own research. For my final action, I have decided to call my representative instead of emailing them, as I have heard that is the most effective way to voice your opinion. I need to have a clear, concise point when I call so that I communicate what my concerns are and hopefully have them taken under consideration.

For Earth Month I have decided to take the following four actions. For my first action, I will be researching the food items I regularly buy at Target. My goal is to find out if the items are actually as healthy as they claim to be. I think this could be difficult because I don’t have an education in nutrition, and therefore may not be able to tell if a certain amount of sugars, fats, or carbohydrates is reasonable, or if a certain ingredient is harmful. I will use reliable websites that cover nutrition to examine the nutritional contents of the food items I regularly buy.

My second action will be researching common buzzwords printed on food packaging, like heart healthy, all natural, etc., to see if and how those terms are regulated by the government. I will use official government websites and reliable articles over the subject of misleading food labels to gather information. I think it may be challenging to gather meaning from legal terminology used in these government regulations.

My third action will be spreading the information I’ve learned. I plan to provide my family and friends with the information I have gathered, and perhaps acquaintances, given an appropriate opportunity. Ideally, this will not only educate them, but potentially lead them to inform others, whether intentionally or by chance in conversation. The challenge I may face is a lack of interest from others. It isn’t possible for me to make anyone take an interest in this topic. I will attempt to alleviate this difficulty by making the information engaging and easy to read and comprehend.

My fourth action will be writing a letter to my representative expressing my concerns on the subject of food regulation. I think it will be challenging to compose a letter that conveys my opinions and sounds educated enough to be taken seriously. I will rely on the information I have gathered throughout the month to increase the chances that my letter will be taken into consideration.

The information I heard in class from our guest speakers increased my belief that community organizing is an effective way to address the issue of food labeling. I thought that spreading the information through communities and organizing would be the next best way, after political action to address my issue. However, after seeing how it was effective for our speakers, I started thinking that it could be equally as important as political action.

My biggest takeaway from this class session came from Jessie’s presentation. She talked about how when she worked on the street conversion project, people began to take an interest, asking if they could get involved. This caused the project to be very successful. The most effective way to enact lasting, impactful change for an issue through community organizing is to get people’s attention and interest. If you can do that, the movement grows organically and the effects are far greater than through an individual effort.

With food labeling, this would involve spreading the information of which foods or labeling keywords to watch out for, as well as the larger issue of how the government has failed to set regulations for food labeling that would force companies to label honestly. If the information is spread effectively, people will begin to take actions, whether it be looking after their own health better by checking to see if the health claims made by food companies are true, refusing to support dishonest companies by buying their products, or expressing their dissatisfaction with current regulatory standards to their representatives.

I don’t have a large audience that I can reach, so I don’t think I can enact a large-scale change through this method myself. However, I can share the information I have learned about food labeling standards with my friends, family, and acquaintances. If they go on to share it with others, then I have been able to make a difference in a small way.

The issue of food labeling can be effectively addressed through community organizing. One of the greatest challenges when it comes to food labeling is awareness. People tend to believe what they see on food packages, not putting much thought into what labels mean, or considering if the claims made are true. In my personal experience, I’ve found that some of my family will accept the claims made on health foods and nutritional supplements at face value, assuming that they could not make these claims if they are not fact. However, tying back to the political issues of food labeling, regulation is surprisingly loose. Certain phrases like “all natural” are loosely defined at best, and largely left up to interpretation. While tighter regulation would be the most effective solution, action must be taken to protect unknowing consumers in the meantime.

This is where community organizing comes in. Protests and marches not only express dissatisfaction with current regulatory standards to policymakers, but also bring the issue to the attention of others. There are also other ways to spread knowledge about what is actually in our food. People that post articles on the meanings behind certain phrases on food packages are helping to arm consumers with the knowledge they need to make the best choices for their health. Another important thing to know is how to read food labels. There is a lot of information on current food labels, but much of it is lost on the average person, myself included. It is unreasonable to expect everyday consumers to understand the significance of the number of saturated vs. trans fats, or how the number of calories from fat affects them. One of the greatest challenges is simply getting the information out there. The most effective way for this information to be spread is by people or organizations with a certain amount of fame or influence. People that have an audience not only have the reach to spread the information, but their viewers tend to trust them and care about what they are saying. For example, when local new channels run stories over food labeling, it reaches a wide demographic and helps educate the community.

The video I chose to watch was a story done by CBC news over whether certain foods that claim to be good for you, or “part of a nutritious meal”, are actually healthy. They break down the ingredients per serving and explain the significance of them. The first food item they investigated was Nutella, which advertises itself as a breakfast food, despite having more sugar per tablespoon than chocolate icing. The second food item they looked at was Campbell’s Healthy Request soup. The packaging would lead buyers to believe that it is heart healthy. However, despite being a single serving size, the soup claimed to contain two servings, cutting the sodium on the label in half. For a consumer that had reason to worry about their sodium intake, if they were not careful, they could be very misled about the health of this soup, as it contained the same amount of sodium as an entire bowl of potato chips. They also reviewed o loaf of vegetable bread, that in its entirety contained the nutrients of about a seventh of a medium carrot, fruit snack bar with the vitamin c of a sixth of a strawberry, and several Smart Kraft Dinners which contains similarly small percentages of their advertised ingredients. At the end of the video, the nutrition expert they had on made the point that government regulation to stop food labels from being so misleading is necessary.

Seeing these supposedly healthy products compared to other products made it easy to understand what they actually contained. New stories like this are very important, as they not only debunk popular beliefs held on specific products, but prompt consumers to take a closer look at food labels, and not take the packaging and marketing at face value.

The information I heard from Councilmember Brown slightly altered my initial thoughts regarding the issue of food labeling through the lens of political action. My overall thoughts on how to enact political change were that protests and marches would be the most effective way to bring this issue to politicians’ attention. However, after listening to council member Brown talk about her experience in office, I learned that direct contact with a representative, whether that be in person, on the phone, or through email, is the best way to ensure that your concerns are being heard and increase the likelihood of them being addressed. The caveat to consider here, with my particular issue, is that the political system differs from the local level she discussed to the national level. At the local level, politicians have a smaller constituency, and therefore can devote more of their time to hearing and addressing individuals’ concerns. At the national level, officials have larger scale issues to deal with and may not spend as much time dealing with individuals. Since food labeling is something regulated by the federal government, it may not be as easy to bring this issue to the attention of those who can change related policies. However, it still seems like an effective strategy when possible.

My biggest takeaway from the discussion with Councilmember Brown is that it is important to engage in local government. The policies she talked about addressed a wide range of issues, from education, to transportation, to recycling, to immigration and refugees. Within the smaller constituency of local government, it is easier to make a meaningful impact on the issues one cares about. Oftentimes, people overlook this opportunity, paying attention only to the national policies and issues.

After this class, I think one of my personal actions should definitely be contacting my representative and speaking to them about the policies currently being discussed related to the regulation of food labeling. Additionally, I should do further research to see if there are any policies or organizations within the local government that may have some influence of food labeling.

The issue of food labeling is best viewed through a political lens. Most of the actions being taken to make a change in food labeling are related to politics and government regulation. This is because it is the government that creates the guidelines and requirements for food labeling. These guidelines are intended to protect consumers’ right to know the contents of their food and make decisions based on complete information. The majority of political action being taken is done with the goal of convincing the government to mandate the labeling of GMOs. People are holding protests and marches in order to raise awareness for their cause and get the attention of politicians. Individuals that want to get involved with this, or other food labeling issues, can participate in protests, contact their elected officials, and become more educated and aware of what companies are and aren’t required to include on food labels. The primary challenge that exists is food companies’ and lobbyists’ resistance to these changes. They use their influence to prevent stricter labeling guidelines from being enacted.

The Ted Talk I chose to watch covered the specific issue of labeling genetically engineered foods. The speaker, Gary Hirshberg, explained what genetically engineered foods are, what their impact on people and the environment could be, and why citizens have the right to know which foods are genetically engineered. He explained that due to corporate influence, the FDA has not acknowledged a significant difference between these new forms of crops and their non-modified counterparts. However, in countries across the world, including the entirety of the European Union, not only is labeling genetically engineered organisms mandated, but tests and studies must be conducted to approve them for sale. An interesting argument he made is that the discussion over whether these goods are safe for consumption has been used as a smokescreen of sorts, and is actually immaterial to the discussion of whether they should be labeled or not. Companies hire third party researchers to provide proof that their products are not harmful, but even if they are not, they should still be labeled for the sake of transparency. He made the point in his speech that if foods are found to be harmful, they are banned. Just because the process is not proven to be harmful does not mean it should not be labeled. Processes that materially change the products and would be of interest or concern to consumers are legally required to be labeled. Other examples include whether food has been irradiated or their country of origin. So despite the safety of these processes, consumers have the right to know about them.

The second important fact I took away from this video is that the results of studies conducted over the safety of GE crops are often dubious. The majority of these studies have been conducted or funded by the patent holders themselves. A specific example he gave was a strain of corn containing the insecticide Bt. When the crop was filing for approval, they claimed that the Bt would be destroyed within seconds of entering the human body. Now, however, studies have come out confirming the presence of Bt in pregnant women. Studies are not required to confirm the safety of the new crops. I find this especially concerning, and further cements my belief that labeling regulation need to be strengthened and reformed.

There are many issues that require the attention of sustainability-minded individuals. However, one person cannot give their full attention to every one of these problems. It is important to narrow them down a select few that one feels strongly passionate about, do the research to become properly informed on the complexities of these issues, and then take deliberate action to fight these issues. The three issues that I found myself most interested in were disparities in access to education, food labeling, and sustainable agriculture. I decided to explore these issues through the three pillars of sustainability, in order to select the one that I feel most strongly about.

The first issue I explored was sustainable agriculture. This issue affects the environment, as well as public health, in ways people might not expect, and is therefore fairly important to society. Current agricultural practices cause significant harm to planet. The use of pesticides is one of the biggest factors. While the small amount on each piece of produce may not be enough to harm a human being, these chemicals can build up in the body, and potentially contribute to diseases and damage to the nervous system. They harm the environment as well. Pesticides can spread to surrounding land and water, killing animals like frogs and fish, disrupting the ecosystem. Fertilizers can cause similar problems, such as running off into nearby ponds and causing a surge in algae growth, which disrupts the ecosystem as well. Sustainable agriculture would not only help solve these problems, but create jobs. The job market for sustainability experts would increase, as well as manual laborers to set up any new systems put in place. On the other hand, environmentally sustainable practices in agriculture may be less profitable, resulting in increased food prices.

The second issue I explored was disparities in access to education. This issue plays a huge role in the economy, and affects everyone, often determining the futures of children with no power to change their educational situation. Equal access to education would help society because people without access to education are more likely to turn to a life of crime. With the alternative of higher education and lucrative jobs, the crime rate could fall. The more skilled and qualified work force created by better access to education would help the economy as well. Businesses would see more profit when employees are more skilled. Additionally, unemployment and poverty due to being underqualified for jobs results in more need for government programs like food stamps and welfare. The decrease in underqualified workers would result in a decreased need for these programs. Another societal issue caused by disparities in access to education is that due to larger minority populations in inner city schools, where these disparities are most severe, it can contribute to the perpetuating of racial stereotypes. An increase in science and environment education would result in a more environmentally conscious population as well.

The third issue I explored was food labeling. This issue is crucial to public health, with obesity, heart disease, and weight related diseases being as prominent issues as they are today. Clearer food labeling could also have a positive impact on the environment. This issue holds personal significance to me, as several members of my family struggle with weight and diet related health issues, and I hope that improvements in food labels will help them see how their dietary choices are affecting their health. Food labeling is currently obscure, difficult to interpret, and not as regulated as it should be. Clearer food labeling would improve society because people could make smarter, more informed choices if they understand what exactly it is that they are putting into their bodies. Economic benefits could result from this healthier population, as people and government health insurance (Medicare and Medicaid) would end up spending less on health care related to things like heart disease. Better food labeling could result in consumers supporting healthy products, and change the market by forcing other companies to make healthier foods to compete. Transparent food labels would also allow people to determine what foods are actually environmentally friendly and hold companies accountable.

The issue I chose is food labeling. It is the issue that I have the greatest personal connection to, and although it is an issue that affects everyone, few people pay it much attention. I intend to explore it further by researching what current efforts are being made to regulate food labeling, and what consumers should watch out for in the meantime to avoid being tricked by false or misleading claims made by food companies. I believe I’ll be challenged by my overall limited knowledge of nutrition, as nutrition education in schools is lacking and the information I have sought out online is often questionable or contradicted by other equally legitimate sources.