Study: Food Choice Always an Illusion, Except When it's Not
A recent study by Cornell University researcher David Levitsky claims that modern man's ability to choose to regulate our food intake is a myth*. "Food choice is an illusion," writes Levitsky, a nutrition science professor.
[Levitsky and a graduate student] found that a complex combination of factors influenced our food choices, including portion size, variety of foods offered, fat content of the diet, the number of people eating, location, and exposure to food advertisting…
In combination these factors are so powerful that, unless we are restrained by surgery of structured eating plans, or by a dedication to prevent future weight gain (restrained eating), we become vulnerable to all stimuli presented, mostly by commercial interests who have learned to effectively use these techniques to encourage us to eat a little more," they wrote.
"If we add our personal responsibility to resist food cuse to the collective responsibility of government to control the many food signals in our environment… we may amass the power, and the will, to curb the epidemic of obesity."
I'm willing to buy the conclusions the researchers reach in the first paragraph above. It's almost tautology to claim that what we eat is influenced by the food choices available around us, our environment, etc.
But how Levitsky et al. go from arguing lots of factors influence what we eat to the passive voice of food victimization--unless we are restrained rather than unless I restrain myself--and government control is a mystery. Especially when concepts like restrained choice and dedication are so rooted in… choice.
Note: I attempted to read but have not read the study, so maybe the research is clearer than the linked story implies. (The linked site, in addition to providing a dead link to the Levitsky study, also boasts a super-annoying widget that makes text on the page immune from simple copy-and-paste--which forced me to type out the damn text above, which makes me cranky as all get out.)
*Added "is a myth" after realizing belatedly that I'd forgotten to do so in the first place.
Baylen Linnekin is the director of Keep Food Legal, a nonprofit dedicated to preserving and increasing "culinary freedom," the right of all Americans to grow, sell, prepare and eat foods of their own choosing. To join or learn more about the group's activities, go here. To follow Keep Food Legal on Twitter, go here; to follow Linnekin, go here.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Go fuck yourself with a pineapple, you fucking authoritarian shitstain.
That was the first sentence that jumped out at me, also. I wasn't aware such a responsibility existed.
the fact is that a good chunk of society actually believes govt does have such a role or should. They're the same folks who see obesity as an epidemic rather than largely the result of bad choices.
"a good chunk of society"
I see what you did there...
The advertisement I'm seeing on the right is for Dietz & Watson deli meat.
Ready to have your mind blown? I'm eating a sandwich right now.
Ready for your mind to be put back together only to be blown again? I started eating the sandwich before coming to Reason.
My ad is for a Filipina dating service.
Ready to have your mind blown? I'm eating a...
Mine has the Progressive car insurance girl. She is actually attractive in person, and it takes a few hours of make up to make her look like that.
Mine is for weight loss.
I've got Reason hoody girl.
Finally, someone with some sense. This explains why I am powerless to avoid the McDonalds drive through window, and can't avoid walking out of the gas station with a bag of Cheetos, and a Snickers bar.
No doubt, the same factors that force me to purchase shitty foods, also force me to spend hours at the nudey bar each week, and why I sit outside of my local high school each afternoon to watch the girls lacrosse team practice.
I am a victim.
Do you not have girls volleyball or something?
found that a complex combination of factors influenced our food choices, including portion size, variety of foods offered, fat content of the diet, the number of people eating, location, and exposure to food advertisting [sic]
O Rly? Thanks for stating the completely obvious, you abject morons.
the number of people eating
We obviously need strict limits on the number of people at any gathering where food is present.
If Levitsky's claim were true, we'd all be fat. There would be no thin people anywhere.
And as usual by using smarmy and deceptive terms like "stimuli" and "influence" he tries to cover up that what is being talked about here is basic human communication. Communication that is either true or false. When Burger King says, "Come eat our Whopper sandwich, it's delicious!" they are telling me the truth. So when he talks about having the government "save" us from Burger King, what he really means is that Burger King must be punished for figuring out how to make cheap food that tastes good, and must be prevented from telling anyone about their cheap food that tastes good. Because punishing people for success and for truth-telling is par for the course with these assholes.
The second paragraph quoted is the real killer -- it boils down to "unless you decide the way we want you to you must be constrained to decide the way we want you to".
Intercourse with a pineapple seems far too mild a punishment for these slavers.
no hugs for thugs,
Shirley Knott
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Social Science is Super! Scienceee!
which makes me cranky as all get out.
And explains the spelling errors.
A recent study by Cornell University researcher David Levitsky claims that modern man's ability to choose to regulate our food intake.
And what happened there?
Seriously though, I'd like to find every one of these assholes and gouge their eyes out with a plastic spoon.
Thank you, I was hoping someone would inquire as to the unfortunate happenings in the first sentence.
I attempted to read but have not read the study
The individual will is entarten. We have to amass collective power and click the link all at once, super-hard.
(Also, "cuse." You typed that.)
I just read it, and no, there is nothing of substance that you missed. Here are a couple of excerpts:
Our weight monitoring studies demonstrate that it is
possible resist [sic] food primes by providing people with a
means to detect small changes in their weight.
(Yes, they do claim to have editors)
And in the next paragraph...
...only when we separate ourselves
from this environment either by physically restricting
the capacity of our stomach to consume large amounts of
food or restricting our eating to portion-controlled meals,
or by providing ourselves daily reminders of changes in
our body weight, is it possible to control our weight.
You're welcome.
Here's a link but I think there might be a paywall (I got to it thru our library).
...our personal responsibility to resist food cuse...
I do consider it my personal responsibility to combat my food using swear-words at the dinner table.
I guess those eleventy-seven different soups just gather dust on the shelves.
They are all strategically placed there to confuse you into buying the one with the greatest profit margin and least nutrition. Some crackpot scientist on BookTV went through the progression using Cheerios as his example. He said that people really need raw oats and would prefer them, but "corporations" process all of the nutrition out of them and make more money off of the processed product. I really need to find that video, it is classic.
right click view page source, copy the text. You have to search the HTML but you can copy.
Was gonna say. Also, Firefox 8.0 with AdBlock Plus (all hail!) does not have this problem, by which I assume there is some asshole third party that is wrecking things with Javascript.
Don't forget NoScript... one of the best little add-ons ever.
>Firefox
>ad block
>no script
God-tier internet experience.
In Chrome Options(Under the hood/Content settings), I added the domain to javascript exceptions to block javascript just for that domain.
Levitsky gives away the game in the first paragraph. All Stalinists (let's not mix belief systems here, Marxism has been dead since Stalin showed the hard Left the light) believe that a primary reason that anything is sold in the free market is because of advertising.
I guess the days of Congress hauling in CEOs of food companies to "explain" why they advertise, and why there is so much "confusing" consumer choice in packaging are over. National Socialism has been streamlined.
I really want to see a Howard Huges moment again...but with vulgar profanity.
I mean it...If I ever get uber rich and own a company that pisses off congress and I get hauled in front of them (i believe the supoena is compulsory but not answering any questions) I would rail like there is not tomorrow.
It has been a constant theme since Vance Packard wrote The Hidden Persuaders in the 1950s.
The subtext is always "I (and the good people like me) are somehow immune to this and thus should be given the power to dictate to the proles."
"A recent study by Cornell University researcher David Levitsky claims that modern man's ability to choose to regulate our food intake." Eh? Did the rest of that sentence get eaten by the internet?
What is amazing (not) is the babble that man cannot regulate his own food intake, but other men can do it for him.
Worked for me.
Worked for me.
Hey Pol, did you murder more people than Lenin and less than Hitler, or did you edge Hitler out too?
I'm confused. Wouldn't the government workers be exposed to advertising and then use that to force us to eat McDonald's?
Shouldn't the government be regulating stiumli and not choice, then?
If we can't control what we eat then can we control what we think?
Is socialism the result of insufficient governmental regulation of stupid ideas?
If the government gets to decide what you eat, McDonald's will stop advertising and start lobbying the Choosing Foods for Healthier Americans Administration.
Should help their profit margin. Paying off a few bureaucrats is a lot cheaper than an advertising campaign.
Already does; the 10-cent happy toys.
If we can exert no choice in our eating, how did I lose 125 pounds in eight months?
I agree that the choice of what we eat can cause powerful urges to eat more of similar things, but that's why at times I cut out sugar, grains, pasta and potatoes entirely. When the cravings have been gone for a couple weeks, I can consider slowly reintroducing them again.
You were somehow insulated from the corporate culture, or you just got some bad disease from a corporation. Look for a Koch Industries or other presence within 12,000 miles of your home.
NOOOOO!
Don't do it. Those are the things that cuased you to gain in the first place. Not even in moderation. Read the Warty recomended book "Good Calories Bad Calories" and look up Metabolic Syndrome and Glycemic Index. Trust me, you wnat to keep that weight off and stay feeling good avoid ALL easily metaboliozed sugars...ALL!
By the way, excellent job on losing it in the first place, lost 40 myself.
And then I can consider coming to your house and punching you in the dick.
Hey, now that you're not a fatty, you should set about becoming awesome.
I got his other one because of you...Next you know I will be taking stock tips.
I ate two McDouble's yesterday. Total crap nutritionally, but so tasty. No big deal, because I jog every morning. I can eat crap food and drink too much because I exercise. Personal responsibility has to be part of this equation, right? Why solely punish food manufacturers? Why don't they propose some compulsory exercise? Why are some Cornell researchers even concerned about what or why I choose my food? I certainly don't give a fuck what they eat, and would prefer they do the same to me. Jeesh!
So I assume Levitsky opposes Cornell's sale of delicious, delicious cheese fries at RPCC then?
Cornell also produces ice cream that is too fatty to commercially market.
It's delicious.
You enjoyed RPCC? You monster. Louis' Lunch all the way.
My parents were generous with food points but not with cash, so I went with RPCC.
Who said anything about parents?
Thinking about it more, I was wrong. BRB is tops during the day (when it's open).
All theory is against free will; all experience is for it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hOSYiT2iG08
Is it just me, or is the first paragraph ("a complex combination of factors influenced our food choices") pretty much completely negated by the second ("unless we are restrained by . . . a dedication to prevent future weight gain (restrained eating)")?
Shorter Levitsky: "People eat a lot, unless they decide not to."
I can't tell if they're projecting their own pathetic lack of restraint onto everyone else, or that their smug sense of superiority is so complete, that they're convinced that the prols need their Olympic guidance in order to put on their pants in the morning.
Its both, JW. They both project their inadequacies onto everyone else, and deny those same inadequacies by setting themselves up as the Top. Men. everyone else needs to guide them through life.
This professor's "theory" is straight out of the anti-capitalist, stealth-communism of John Galbraith. This guy is just another commie.
All choice is an illusion. You are all figments of my dreaming imagination, therefore, you do as I imagine and have no choice in the matter. You eat what my subconscious decides that you eat.
"If we add our personal responsibility to resist food cuse to the collective responsibility of government to control the many food signals in our environment... we may amass the power, and the will, to curb the epidemic of obesity."
"This message is brought to you by your friends at Adbusters."
"we may amass the power"
Yes, here is the salient point of the article. The rest is just fluff.
Why am I not fat?
The societal pressures of the patriarchy have given you an eating disorder.
John Tagliaferro|12.2.11 @ 1:58PM|#
"They are all strategically placed there to confuse you into buying the one with the greatest profit margin and least nutrition...."
And it WORKS! Except when it doesn't.
I swear I need to find the video from that nut on CSPAN-whatever, or wherever the hell he was speaking. His little bookstore audience was eating it up.
So if I don't restrain my eating, I end up eating a lot?
So, what did you folks have for lunch?
Me, it was leftover enchiladas. Muy tasty.
Left-over meat loaf, nuked with swiss on top, on toasted rye with (amazingly good, for this time of year) sliced tomatoes.
Yum.
KFC, but I get the 4 pc drumstick and thigh all grilled just the chicken, no biscuit, no drink.
I love that my doctor recomended diet calls for fatty ribeye steak, bacon, eggs, more bacon, sausage, and grilled kfc (I supposed I should eat broccoli and spinich too but that is why I take Lighting Juice)
I am moving soon, so I chopped up some leftover ham, and made a burrito of sadness with the ham, some shredded cheese, and some salsa.
It turns out you can crock-pot cranberries and chicken and it turns out OK.
a burrito of sadness
I've done that. At least I usually have some delicious Grandma Dean's Recipe Authentic Olde New Mexico Chili to drown it in.
Small salad from a local cafe salad bar. Very tasty.
Roast Beef and cheddar on sourdough, dill pickle, and a Sierra Nevada.
A yogurt, some smoked/braised pork butt, a Lagunitas Doppel Wiezen and a Sierra Nevada/Oliva Quad. I'm not sure the afternoon will be terribly productive...
-K
Olive Garden. Salad, breadsticks, stuffed mushrooms, minestrone, steak and mushroom panini. All on the company's dime. I love recruiting season.
I feasted on the souls of the recently deceased.
1/2 cup of almonds, a bowl of cottage cheese with kimchi and a plum.
OK, ok, you all got me. Really, we got nothing, and everything I wrote is either self-contradictory or Bleeding Obvious. But we put a lot of time into looking up all these articles, and I'm going up for promotion next year, so we decided to write up some shit anyway and see if anyone would be dumb enough to publish it.
Score!!