Pub Date : 2023-07-01DOI: 10.1097/nt.0000000000000614
Tina Bharani, Divyansh Agarwal, M. Robinson
History teaches us that while public health advocates can do much, a country needs well informed and courageous members of Congress to put useful public health measures into law. In the late 20th century, the work of one such individual, Congressman Joseph Moakley (D-MASS), helped to revolutionize the laws on food advertising and labeling and resulted in major gains in information for consumers. Given the recent modernization of nutrition labeling, this article attempts to highlight the initiatives led by the unsung hero of recent past, Congressman Moakley. Specifically, in the practice of nutrition, the behind-the-scenes initiatives that have helped standardize food labels and better educate the consumers to improve public health often go underrecognized. This article presents a brief overview of Moakley's contributions in these domains and identifies gaps for future works in the field of nutrition labeling.
{"title":"History Lesson","authors":"Tina Bharani, Divyansh Agarwal, M. Robinson","doi":"10.1097/nt.0000000000000614","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1097/nt.0000000000000614","url":null,"abstract":"History teaches us that while public health advocates can do much, a country needs well informed and courageous members of Congress to put useful public health measures into law. In the late 20th century, the work of one such individual, Congressman Joseph Moakley (D-MASS), helped to revolutionize the laws on food advertising and labeling and resulted in major gains in information for consumers. Given the recent modernization of nutrition labeling, this article attempts to highlight the initiatives led by the unsung hero of recent past, Congressman Moakley. Specifically, in the practice of nutrition, the behind-the-scenes initiatives that have helped standardize food labels and better educate the consumers to improve public health often go underrecognized. This article presents a brief overview of Moakley's contributions in these domains and identifies gaps for future works in the field of nutrition labeling.","PeriodicalId":19386,"journal":{"name":"Nutrition Today","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47349305","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-07-01DOI: 10.1097/NT.0000000000000617
G. Broad
The topic of “alternative proteins,” a field comprised of both plant-based animal product alternatives and the nascent field of cellular agriculture (eg, cultivated meat), has become a flashpoint for contemporary food system debate. This article introduces the “alternative protein ideological circle” as a framework for understanding the nature of this contestation, as well as the key stakeholder groups who animate the landscape. It argues that perspectives on alternative proteins coalesce around 2 primary ideological poles: (1) meat attachment or carnism, the extent to which people believe or do not believe that eating animals is a natural, normal, and necessary part of contemporary life; and (2) sociotechnical imaginaries, divided between techno-optimistic “wizards” and technoskeptical “prophets.” From there, 4 key stakeholder groups emerge: (1) the “high-tech vegans” (techno-optimists with low levels of carnism); (2) the “ecomodernists” (techno-optimists with high levels of carnism); (3) the “good foodies” (technoskeptics with low levels of carnism); and (4) the “carnivore traditionalists” (technoskeptics with high levels of carnism). The article offers illustrative examples of these groups, drawing from popular media and advocacy. It concludes with reflections on the implications of this framework for nutrition research and practice.
{"title":"Understanding the (Fake) Meat Debates","authors":"G. Broad","doi":"10.1097/NT.0000000000000617","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1097/NT.0000000000000617","url":null,"abstract":"The topic of “alternative proteins,” a field comprised of both plant-based animal product alternatives and the nascent field of cellular agriculture (eg, cultivated meat), has become a flashpoint for contemporary food system debate. This article introduces the “alternative protein ideological circle” as a framework for understanding the nature of this contestation, as well as the key stakeholder groups who animate the landscape. It argues that perspectives on alternative proteins coalesce around 2 primary ideological poles: (1) meat attachment or carnism, the extent to which people believe or do not believe that eating animals is a natural, normal, and necessary part of contemporary life; and (2) sociotechnical imaginaries, divided between techno-optimistic “wizards” and technoskeptical “prophets.” From there, 4 key stakeholder groups emerge: (1) the “high-tech vegans” (techno-optimists with low levels of carnism); (2) the “ecomodernists” (techno-optimists with high levels of carnism); (3) the “good foodies” (technoskeptics with low levels of carnism); and (4) the “carnivore traditionalists” (technoskeptics with high levels of carnism). The article offers illustrative examples of these groups, drawing from popular media and advocacy. It concludes with reflections on the implications of this framework for nutrition research and practice.","PeriodicalId":19386,"journal":{"name":"Nutrition Today","volume":"58 1","pages":"181 - 188"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46220474","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：