Americans are learning more about food, and eating better

Consumers’ calls for lower-impact ‘food with integrity’ have surged recently, and a set of recommendations from the US Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee took food's role in the environment into account for the first time.

Matthew Mead/AP
Brown butter asparagus with pecans was plated in Concord, N.H.

Earlier this year, the US Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee (USDGAC) released a set of recommendations, based on scientific research, to help guide Americans’ eating habits. The committee’s suggestions – eat a mostly plant-based diet, drink water (gasp) when thirsty, and avoid processed sugars in foods and beverages, among others – were nothing new. But hearing them from a government panel was. 

The USDGAC also took food’s role in the environment into account for the first time, acknowledging the value of more sustainable diets. This thrilled food policy advocates, who have been warning of the disastrous environmental effects of industrial meat production for years. 

“It’s ridiculous to separate environment from health,” says Michele Simon, a public-health lawyer who works on food-industry issues. “We live in the world.” 

The guidance stirred outrage in some corners of the food industry. Associations for sugar and beef producers, in particular, mounted aggressive press campaigns in response. But the recommendations are part of a larger shift toward a more conscientious approach to food, from both an individual and a global standpoint. 

In the developed world, people have more access to information about where their food comes from and how it affects them than ever before. That’s influencing choices. Americans drink about 20 percent less soda than they did in 1998. As more people become aware of the nutritional and environmental effects of meat, vegetarianism and veganism are growing. Five percent of Americans now identify as vegetarian or vegan, and the country’s meat consumption fell 12.2 percent between 2007 and 2012, according to the Department of Agriculture. 

Even for non-vegetarians, better treatment of food animals is becoming a bigger concern, thanks to documentaries and undercover online videos highlighting deplorable conditions in slaughterhouses and industrial dairy and egg farms. Such footage raises concerns not only about animal welfare, but also food safety.

“The availability of that information is a bigger driver than whatever the government is going to force on people,” says Warren Solochek, a restaurant-industry analyst with NPD Group, a market-research firm.

It also makes it harder for industry lobbyists to exert their influence on food policy, Ms. Simon says. In the past, the USDGAC, which meets every five years, has been criticized for conflicts of interest. Scientists whose research was funded by the American Meat Institute, the Sugar Association, and McDonald’s, to name a few, sat on its board. But, Simon says, such conflicts rarely go unnoticed these days. “The old lobbying system, where you buy [a lawmaker] lunch and call it a day, isn’t enough anymore.”

Still, food companies, sensing opportunity, are accelerating the shift. As soda sales lag, soft-drink companies are shifting their focus to other areas: Coca-Cola made major investments in coffee in 2014, for example, by purchasing a stake in Keurig Green Mountain. It has gradually boosted its stake in the tea, fruit juice, and water sectors of the drink market since 2007. 

Scores of meat, poultry, and dairy producers have made pledges toward more ethical food sourcing. In March, McDonald’s announced it would stop using meat from chickens raised with antibiotics also used in human medicine on its menu, following similar pledges from Chick-fil-A and poultry giants like Tyson and Perdue. Aramark, a chain that runs thousands of dining halls and cafeterias, recently pledged to convert its entire egg supply to cage-free by 2020. 

Customers want “food with integrity,” says Mr. Solochek. “[Companies] that choose locally sourced, fresh ingredients can put that on their website and know that people are looking at it.” 

Obstacles remain. Not all elements of those dietary guidelines – the “best version ever,” as author Mark Bittman said – will trickle into policy. Also, policy alone won’t likely change behavior, especially when it comes to nutrition (though it does inform public programs like school lunches). “The top three foods in restaurants are hamburgers, fries, and pizza, and that hasn’t changed in 20 years,” Solochek notes. 

But the call for a better food system is growing louder, and the political and business worlds are listening. 

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.