David Kessler is no fan of Taco Bell's "Fourthmeal" ("the meal between dinner and breakfast").
The former administrator of the Food and Drug Administration hates how restaurants and food makers relentlessly push the overconsumption of food as if it were a good thing. It only intensifies his belief that processed foods are designed to make us want more.
"Next time you're hungry, try to figure out what triggered it," he told health journalists attending an October conference at the University of Miami.
Kessler, now a professor at the University of California at San Francisco, points to research he and a slew of scientists have done on lab rats and humans that shows potential addictions to foods containing a mixture of sugar, fat and salt. It's also the topic of his best-seller: "The End of Overeating: Taking Control of the Insatiable American Appetite" (Rodale Press, $24.95).
The idea behind the research is pretty simple: We humans are vulnerable to different cues that stimulate our desires. The presence of sugar, fat and salt in processed foods, in particular, arouses a person to want to eat more, he claims.
When I heard Kessler speak, I was struck by his certainty, and I think there are a lot of important concepts to consider. But personally, I'm still skeptical. It's impossible to look at the topic of food objectively -- it's so intertwined with our physical and mental being. We need it, love it and, yes, sometimes hate how it controls so much of our lives.
I think Kessler's point about food marketing is as much to blame for America's widening waistband as the cravings for processed foods. All it takes is a stroll down the supermarket cereal aisle with a 5-year-old to find ample evidence. It is important that adult consumers acknowledge their role in falling for the hype. I'm relentlessly frugal, and I constantly fall for product pitches that offer an affordable and nutritious option. Case in point: "The $7 a Meal Healthy Cookbook" (Adams Media, $9.95). I was giddy thinking I could fix a balanced meal for my family of four cheaply, and that it would be tasty and good for us. Then I started reading. First, the dishes were comparable to any mainstream cookbook and weren't what I would consider especially healthful, including recipes for beef Stroganoff and tortellini soup with sausage. Nutrition information listed on the soup recipe showed it included more than 50 percent of the daily recommended allotment of sodium. The only sign it was "healthy" was that the authors opted to list the amounts of fat, carbs and sodium. Did I mention the $7 budget includes just one recipe? Expect to spend more if you want a salad, veggies or rice to go with your grilled ginger chicken. Oh, and add that to your calorie, fat and carb count.
Booksellers and food makers know I'm out there, scrambling to balance my family's health and happiness. That's why the folks at Kellogg's recently slapped huge labels on boxes of Cocoa Krispies and other cereals claiming to boost children's immunity. A recent backlash over those labels -- and the food maker's decision to stop using the claim -- gives me hope that marketers realize they've crossed a boundary. Advertising is great, but you'd better be pretty careful when pushing parents' buttons about their children's health. At the Miami conference, Kessler mused that the only way to shift attitudes would be to make processed and fast foods uncool, much like what the FDA did with cigarettes while he was commissioner in the 1990s. But he admits it's easier to demonize a known carcinogen. Food health advocates right now are finding ways to do what Kessler suggests, proposing laws to add labels to restaurant menus or suggesting food makers reduce excessive portion sizes. Or, instead of immunity claims on a cereal box cover, list the added fat and sugar content, Kessler says. He hopes food makers invest more in a product's quality and less in over-the-top sales pitches. "If you are selling processed foods," he says, "I would say find a more healthful way to do it."
