"Fast Food Nation" by journalist Eric Schlosser

[DonRocks]

article from the Star Press

Despite being a best seller, the book had no impact on the fast food industry, according to Schlosser. In fact, the conditions he wrote about - the childhood obesity epidemic, food safety, and the exploitation of slaughterhouse and fast-food workers - have worsened, he said.

←

On Thursday evening December 1, 1955, after a long day of work as a seamstress for a Montgomery, Alabama, department store, Rosa Parks boards a city bus to go home....

Cheers,

Rocks.

[Behemoth]

whether or not you agree with the book, it is a great read, I really recommend it highly.

[ghostrider]

Now I'm seeing that actually DonRocks was the one to quote as I did & the rest just quoted him.  Oh well.  

←

Don Rocks is on eG's payroll in the job category of "Oracle in Residence"

and you have "outed" him ...

←

He seems to be very good at his job!

[jgm]

The fast food AND the restaurant industry share PART of the blame for our obesity epidemic. Over the past 20 years, I have gradually forgotten what I've always known, and allowed restaurants, fast and otherwise, set the standards for what I eat and how much I eat. The result: I'm quite overweight. But the wording of that one sentence is crucial: I have allowed this to happen. But I didn't realize I was doing it. I just knew I was getting fat, without realizing that this was the mechanism for it. Denial probably helped a great deal.

After much struggling, I'm finally getting a handle on things. I eat sugary items once a week or less. I'm becoming reacquainted with vegetables, and acquainted with some I've never had before. I'm cooking every doggone vegetable I can find. And trying new (to me) lower-fat recipes that deliver as much flavor and satisfaction as possible.

In my opinion, the way out of this mess is for government and private organizations to educate the public and help people find their own way out. Lawsuits are ridiculous, but so is the fact that various fast food places continue to introduce new offerings that are too large in portion size and too high in calories and fat for one portion, even if the portion size were adjusted.

Yes, personal responsibility is the answer, but a lot of people will not be able to exercise it effectively without education and support from organizations that want to change things. We have had to learn from similar organizations, to stop smoking, exercise, lower our blood pressure, avoid certain kinds of foods to stave off heart problems, etc. etc. and the obesity problem is no different. The food industry is not going to police itself, either, but the answer is not regulation or litigation. The answer is for the industry to change in response to a changing market, and we're already seeing some of that. Personal responsibility will increase with education and awareness.

[Raynickben]

Those of you who suggested going to Subway instead of McDonald's, etc. must really READ Fast Food Nation. To quote "Dean Sager, a former staff economist for the U.S. House of Representatives' Small Business Committee 'Subway is the biggest problem in franchising and emerges as one of the key examples of every [franchise] abuse you can think of'." If you have the paperback version start reading about Subway on page 100.

For Fast Food Nation to be a major influence on anyone requires that they read the book. Plain and simple. Most people don't want to hear that what they eat or like to eat is dangerous for them. It's out of sight, out of mind. The "what I don't know can't hurt me" syndrome. You have to have some initial concern about fast food to decide to learn more.

Fast Food Nation had a very significant impact on the eating habits of my family. Thank you Eric Schlosser for writing it.

[slbunge]

I read Fast Food Nation several years ago, shortly after it was published. I knew before reading it that it would pull together some of the things I already knew about the 'factory food' world. I had already swore off McDonald's and other corporate fast food places for many reasons (I say corporate because I still get a sandwich from a local deli or pizza from a dodgy hole-in-the-wall some times).

I encourage people to read this book. Seems like every so often, those of us who do not have any ties to the start of our food chain should educate ourselves so we can be better consumers.

And as Don Rocks indicates, Schlosser's work has had an effect although it is difficult to measure directly. As an example, McDonald's has stepped up their work with Professor Temple Grandin from Colorado State University on auditing the livestock facilities that supply McDonald's to ensure humane treatment and promote stress-minimizing designs for animal handling (solid fences for pens, curved corrals, etc.). May seem like small potatoes but McDonald's doesn't pursue these sort of expensive programs without pressure from their customers. And the customers may not be aware that there is anything amiss without reporters like Mr. Schlosser.

[MarketStEl]

IAnd as Don Rocks indicates, Schlosser's work has had an effect although it is difficult to measure directly.  As an example, McDonald's has stepped up their work with Professor Temple Grandin from Colorado State University on auditing the livestock facilities that supply McDonald's to ensure humane treatment and promote stress-minimizing designs for animal handling (solid fences for pens, curved corrals, etc.).   May seem like small potatoes but McDonald's doesn't pursue these sort of expensive programs without pressure from their customers.  And the customers may not be aware that there is anything amiss without reporters like Mr. Schlosser.

←

A few more signs that something's soaking in:

--"Adult Happy Meals."

--Kids' Happy Meals with fruit and juice or milk in place of the fries and soda.

There may still be problems with Big Fast Food, but it's clear that people like Schlosser and films like "Super Size Me!" have caught the public's--and hence the fast food merchants'--attention.

The smoking analogy is more than a little relevant. First, it shows that people can be educated to change their bad habits; just don't expect dramatic results overnight.

Second, it shows that messages matter. It wasn't enough to put out the bad news about smoking; it was also necessary to regulate the companies that wanted you to ignore that message and that used their own advertising to drown it out. (I'm sure that the fast-food industry is very aware of the outcome of those tobacco lawsuits. We can't completely trash the trial lawyers here, for it was their work as much as anything else that really uncovered the campaign of deception Big Tobacco waged from 1964 onward.)

Third, it shows that we cannot rely on either a purely libertarian ("it's all up to you, folks") or a purely statist ("There oughta be a law!") approach to repairing the damage done. One area in which state action is useful is in forcing more disclosure of information--in effect, helping the libertarians achieve their stated goal of allowing people to exercise their personal responsibility. Why is state action needed here? Because the groups that can publicize the real story on fast food and nutrition usually cannot match the ad budgets of the fast-food companies, so their message gets lost amid all the come-ons. The companies have historically been reluctant to disclose more information about their foods' nutritiousness, in part because doing so leaves less room or time for the sales pitch.

One more thing: The companies complain that these works lack balance. Well, they're right. Just like the companies' own PR lacks balance. Sometimes, "biased" reporting coming from someone with a clear point of view actually contributes more to a debate than objective, both-sides-now reporting does.

Edited November 22, 2004 by MarketStEl (log)

[munchymom]

Yes, personal responsibility is the answer, but a lot of people will not be able to exercise it effectively without education and support from organizations that want to change things.

...

The answer is for the industry to change in response to a changing market, and we're already seeing some of that.  Personal responsibility will increase with education and awareness.

←

Education really is the key here, and making nutritional information easily accessible is the most important first step. Sure, any idiot can see that a Monster Thickburger is too much food. But, without nutritional info available on site, one might be inclined to think that a Tuscan Chicken sandwich from Panera is a healthier choice than a Big Mac. Wrong - the Panera sandwich is 860 cal/52 g fat, while a Big Mac is 580/33. How many people decide to be "good" and get a bagel with cream cheese from a bagel shop (appx 500/22) instead of a Krispy Kreme glazed donut (205/12) or an Egg McMuffin (300/12)? Even trying to make good choices sometimes backfires in the absence of information. I know all these calorie figures because I went out and bought a book that lists most fast food menus with nutrition information when I joined Weight Watchers. But if the nutritional information were easily accessible at the restaurants (perhaps even displayed on the menu) I might not have needed Weight Watchers.

[rancho_gordo]

Yes, personal responsibility is the answer, but a lot of people will not be able to exercise it effectively without education and support from organizations that want to change things.

...

The answer is for the industry to change in response to a changing market, and we're already seeing some of that.  Personal responsibility will increase with education and awareness.

←

Education really is the key here, and making nutritional information easily accessible is the most important first step. Sure, any idiot can see that a Monster Thickburger is too much food. But, without nutritional info available on site, one might be inclined to think that a Tuscan Chicken sandwich from Panera is a healthier choice than a Big Mac. Wrong - the Panera sandwich is 860 cal/52 g fat, while a Big Mac is 580/33. How many people decide to be "good" and get a bagel with cream cheese from a bagel shop (appx 500/22) instead of a Krispy Kreme glazed donut (205/12) or an Egg McMuffin (300/12)? Even trying to make good choices sometimes backfires in the absence of information. I know all these calorie figures because I went out and bought a book that lists most fast food menus with nutrition information when I joined Weight Watchers. But if the nutritional information were easily accessible at the restaurants (perhaps even displayed on the menu) I might not have needed Weight Watchers.

←

But there are so many other factors than fat and calories. Like the fact that a real bagel and fresh cream cheese are food and the crap from McDonalds is not.

If you eat real food, I think you can simplify your life and be satisfied avoid obesity.

[munchymom]

But there are so many other factors than fat and calories. Like the fact that a real bagel and fresh cream cheese are food and the crap from McDonalds is not.

If you eat real food, I think you can simplify your life and be satisfied avoid obesity.

←

Fast food is an immense industry. It's not going anywhere. Given that people will choose to eat fast food, it seems only fair to give them the tools to do it as wisely as possible, rather than just writing off the majority of the population and saying "they're fat because they deserve it for eating that crap." Fat and calories aren't the whole picture, true, but they're a really big part of it.

[jgarner53]

I read Fast Food Nation a couple of years ago, and it definitely changed my habits. Before, I didn't eat fast food all that often, but I did occasionally (like at least a couple of times a month), and would sometimes just go for the fries.

The only fast food place I'll eat now, and that's usually on a long road trip, when there aren't many options, is In N Out. I can't stand the sight of a supermarket anymore, filled with processed, packaged krep, with meat and fish from who knows where, and shop more locally, paying far more attention to the source than I used to.

One of the things that no one here has touched on yet, perhaps because it isn't directly related to food is the situation for the workers in these places. Minimum wage, very low skill level, and, as Schlosser points out, sometimes considerable risk of danger. There is also the problem of the workers in the plants and slaughtering houses. His stories about people maimed and treated with very little respect, and the ever-increasing need for speed on the line appalled me. It's as much because I feel sorry for the people as for any of the food-related issues.

It may have more fat and calories, but give me a bagel and cream cheese any day over an Egg McMuffin.

[rancho_gordo]

Fast food is an immense industry.  It's not going anywhere.  Given that people will choose to eat fast food, it seems only fair to give them the tools to do it as wisely as possible, rather than just writing off the majority of the population and saying "they're fat because they deserve it for eating that crap."  Fat and calories aren't the whole picture, true, but they're a really big part of it.

←

I'm old enough to remember when everyone smoked. If obesity is really such a problem, the industry can be brought down or tamed if we keep talking about it. But for you to suggest that a Krispy Kreme makes a better meal than a bagel and cream cheese makes me do a double take.

Beyond the fat and calories, there's the subsidies, the other nutrition, the fiber, the mad cow, the slave wages, the bad aesthetics, the mind control over young children, etc.

[NulloModo]

The smoking thing is an interesting comparison.

OK, so things started out with warnings on cigarette packs, fair enough, if you sell something that is dangerous and addictive, might as well warn people.

Then it moved to advertising restriction. OK, to protect the impressionable kiddies, handicap the tobacco companies ability to advertise, it didn't seem to hurt them too much.

Then laws about smoking in certain public places came to be. I can totally get behind these, I mean, hospitals, office buildings, places people have to be (instead of choose to be) and with a mix of smokers and non-smokers, well, the non-smokers shouldn't be exposed to the second hand smoke.

Now, personally, I think it has gone a step too far. In my state (Delaware) a law was passed last year that makes it illegal to smoke indoors anywhere, any business (even a small business owner can't choose to make his or her place smoking or non-smoking), no smoking sections in restaurants, even if the air is filtered and they are completely set apart, no smoking in bars, no smoking in strip-clubs, no smoking in casinos. While there are certainly places one should not be smoking, there are places where one should just expect smoke, and the smoking section of a restaurant, a bar on a friday night, or a casino are examples of these places. The state has already lost millions in revenue to the bars and casinos due to this law, people just drive to PA, MD, or Atlantic City. People know smoking is dangerous, but the government hand-hold on the issue is fucking ridiculous. If someone wants to kill themself with a smoke, by gods let them.

I could see this anti-fast food lobby becoming the same way. First it is mandatory warnings and information (I am all for mandatory posting or nutritional information, although I think warnings are a bit extreme, let each diner decide what is or isn't dangerous to them). Next will come advertising restrictions, no more Ronald McDonald or the Taco Bell Dog (not that he is around anymore anyway), they go off to hang with Joe Camel in the unemployment line. Then maybe restrictions on where fast food can be sold (well, I would agree to some restrictions here, I know some school systems have fast food places in the school cafeteria, this shouldn't be, but if you really look at it, it isn't that much worse (or any worse) than the slop school lunches are already made of). But what if it goes further? What if McDonalds can't set up shop within a certain distance of a school? What if You suddenly need parental consent to buy a big-mac. What if they regulate how much fat/how many calories a sandwich from a fast-food place (or any place) can contain?

Government hand holding and babying just really piss me off. Let adults make their own decisions, let parents educate their kids to make their own decisions. I don't need anyone to legislate my day to day activities, and I resent the hell out of it when someone tries.

[munchymom]

I'm old enough to remember when everyone smoked. If obesity is really such a problem, the industry can be brought down or tamed if we keep talking about it. But for you to suggest that a Krispy Kreme makes a better meal than a bagel and cream cheese makes me do a double take.

Beyond the fat and calories, there's the subsidies, the other nutrition, the fiber, the mad cow, the slave wages, the bad aesthetics, the mind control over young children, etc.

←

What's so sacred about a bagel? The chain-store bagels are huge hunks of refined white flour without a large amount of nutrition. (And since the topic of the thread is fast food, the chain-store ones were the ones I had in mind - I don't know if a real bagel bakery in New York gives you the same outsized serving as, say, a Breugger's.) At least a McMuffin gets you some protein. And I agree with you on your other points - my only point was once a decision has been made to eat fast food, what seems like a healthier option may not be one.

[robyn]

I read Fast Food Nation a couple of years ago, and it definitely changed my habits. Before, I didn't eat fast food all that often, but I did occasionally (like at least a couple of times a month), and would sometimes just go for the fries.

The only fast food place I'll eat now, and that's usually on a long road trip, when there aren't many options, is In N Out. I can't stand the sight of a supermarket anymore, filled with processed, packaged krep, with meat and fish from who knows where, and shop more locally, paying far more attention to the source than I used to.

One of the things that no one here has touched on yet, perhaps because it isn't directly related to food  is the situation for the workers in these places. Minimum wage, very low skill level, and, as Schlosser points out, sometimes considerable risk of danger.  There is also the problem of the workers in the plants and slaughtering houses. His stories about people maimed and treated with very little respect, and the ever-increasing need for speed on the line appalled me. It's as much because I feel sorry for the people as for any of the food-related issues.

It may have more fat and calories, but give me a bagel and cream cheese any day over an Egg McMuffin.

←

So what food do you buy where the people who produce it are well-paid and well-off?

BTW - I don't think Paul Prudhomme eats crummy food - but he goes around in one of those motorized carts - the kind that only older sicker people used to use (but now lots of younger fat people use them). Robyn

[robyn]

I could see this anti-fast food lobby becoming the same way.  First it is mandatory warnings and information (I am all for mandatory posting or nutritional information...,

←

Mandatory posting of nutritional information in all restaurants? There are big legal obstacles unless you apply the law equally to all restaurants. Robyn

[rancho_gordo]

And I agree with you on your other points - my only point was once a decision has been made to eat fast food, what seems like a healthier option may not be one.

←

Sounds good to me. I don't know what Panera is but i think I assumed it was some kind of artison sandwich. I think we mostly agree on things. I was thinking a higher fat/higer cal "real" meal is more often than not a better "deal" than McAnything, nutrionally. aesthetically and spiritually.

Robyn writes:

So what food do you buy where the people who produce it are well-paid and well-off?

Farmers markets? At least it's somewhat better. UFW-picked fruits and vegetables form California?

NulloModo wrote:

Government hand holding and babying just really piss me off. Let adults make their own decisions, let parents educate their kids to make their own decisions. I don't need anyone to legislate my day to day activities, and I resent the hell out of it when someone tries.

I wish you anti-govenment types were as equally outraged by corporate welfare, the deregulation of the media, government subsidies to favorite states and industries, labor conditions in countries that make your food and blue jeans, etc. Level the playing field a little bit and then we can get pissed off.

[NulloModo]

Robyn - I see no reason why that shouldn't be enforced for all restaurants. Maybe not posted up front if it would interfere with decor, but easily accessible in written form for any diner who asks, full disclosure ala FDA requirements for food sold at supermarkets.

Rancho -

I didn't mean to come off as anti-government, and I am trying not to turn this into a political discussion that strays away from food. I have no issue with the government in general, I am by no means an anarchist. Hell, my paychecks come from the government and I work on a military base. I am by no means a fan of deregulation leading to mass-media consolidation, nor of protectionist practices towards certain US industries (steel manufacturing for example), I just didn't see how they fit into the discussion at hand.

I suppose the issue of regulation of foodstuffs/alcohol/tobacco/etc just hits closer to home because these are day to day items that many of us purchase/consume consistently. While I am sure it would be morally superior to get huffy over labor conditions in malaysia (or wherever we are currently 'exploiting' third world labor sources) in the end it would just lead to higher prices on the goods we already have, which is hard to see as a positive. On the other hand, it is quite easy to take offense at the government stepping in saying something to the effect of "You are apparently too stupid to make your own decisions, so we are going to make them for you: you can no longer have a big-mac or enjoy a smoke at bar". The other issues are no-doubt more major on the global scale, very few of us live and think globally. I am happy enjoying my day to day life, and I feel it is perfectly reasonable to become upset when roadblocks suddenly get thrown into it because others can't manage their own.

[handmc]

On the other hand, it is quite easy to take offense at the government stepping in saying something to the effect of "You are apparently too stupid to make your own decisions, so we are going to make them for you: you can no longer have a big-mac or enjoy a smoke at bar".

AMEN.

I always get a kick out of the legislature when they get into the business of passing laws about morals and what is right for you. Talk about working without tools, ah, but I rant. The laws they pass also tend to fail for the ability to be enforced but more tragically to address the issues for which they we passed in the first place resulting in a waste of time and a sensless increase in paperwork for everyone else.

Good topic.

[rancho_gordo]

    I didn't mean to come off as anti-government, and I am trying not to turn this into a political discussion that strays away from food.  <snip>I just didn't see how they fit into the discussion at hand. 

Sorry, I'm not being very clear. I too would like to take the stance if you don't like it or it's bad for you, don't eat it. But my point is that because of those things (corporate welfare, the deregulation of the media, government subsidies to favorite states and industries, labor conditions in countries that make your food and blue jeans, etc), fast food is gaining ground. The prices are artificially low, media doesn't want to offend a major sponsor (or is owned by a major sponsor), et al.

Re the govenment sticking its nose inot our personal habits, I'm just playing devil's advocate here and don't know exactly how I feel about this but does your right to smoke supercede my right not to be around it, especially if it's a health hazard? Does your right to eat super-processed high fat crap reign supreme if this lifestyle is proven dangerous and adds an additional burden on our health care system? Just asking.

I walk or drive by a McDonalds and see the throngs and wonder, Can't you smell that putrid scent? Are You folks nuts? If it were simply a matter of taste or personal responsibility, I'd say fine, but these guys have the upper hand and it's assisted by the government.

[NulloModo]

    I didn't mean to come off as anti-government, and I am trying not to turn this into a political discussion that strays away from food.  <snip>I just didn't see how they fit into the discussion at hand. 

Sorry, I'm not being very clear. I too would like to take the stance if you don't like it or it's bad for you, don't eat it. But my point is that because of those things (corporate welfare, the deregulation of the media, government subsidies to favorite states and industries, labor conditions in countries that make your food and blue jeans, etc), fast food is gaining ground. The prices are artificially low, media doesn't want to offend a major sponsor (or is owned by a major sponsor), et al.

Re the govenment sticking its nose inot our personal habits, I'm just playing devil's advocate here and don't know exactly how I feel about this but does your right to smoke supercede my right not to be around it, especially if it's a health hazard? Does your right to eat super-processed high fat crap reign supreme if this lifestyle is proven dangerous and adds an additional burden on our health care system? Just asking.

I walk or drive by a McDonalds and see the throngs and wonder, Can't you smell that putrid scent? Are You folks nuts? If it were simply a matter of taste or personal responsibility, I'd say fine, but these guys have the upper hand and it's assisted by the government.

←

I see where you are coming from now. No doubt you are correct that certain big business find it easier to compete with the current govt. climate than they would without help. I suppose this book really goes into depth about how this deals with the food industry, and I would personally be interested in reading those segments, maybe I will have to pick it up. Still, for the govt. to be chastising big fast-food with one hand while feeding it under the table with the other... I am sure you can see the problems inherent with a situation like that developing.

With regard to the smoking: I do not smoke, personally. However, I do feel that someone has the right to do it if they are not unduly inconveniencing others. My big issue with the anti-smoking legislation is that in many areas now places where people expect to find smoke are now non-smoking zones. I think anyone could agree schools, office buildings, etc should be smoke-free. However, for seedy dens of debauchery such as bars, nightclubs, casinos, etc, I would personally take the stance that if you want to go, you can deal with the smoke. Either that or let the individual establishments decide if they want to be smoking allowed or non-smoking, give choice and freedom to decide back to the people. If a business finds it is losing business because it has a smoking policy, they will probably go the other way, but if they find it more lucrative to allow it, they do that, either way, what majority of patrons want is what they get.

Now how to tie this in with the fast-food thing: bringing up the potential burden on the healthcare system adds a whole new set of questions. Personally, I would see the easier solution as just denying coverage to those who abused their bodies in the first place. If you have ailments due to a lifetime of poor eating/drinking/etc habits, tough luck, it comes out of your pocket or you don't get the care, shoulda known better. As much as I feel strongly for freedom to choose exactly how to live one's life, I feel just as strongly about being personally completely liable for the results and consequences of those actions.

[rancho_gordo]

I think we agree more than we disagree. But before I take a hardline approach, I want all the information out there, presented as persuasivly as a new McDonald's campaign, helping the not-so-food-obsessed to understand the costs of their non-dairy shakes.

Related to al this, as a father of 2 boys, (3 and 6 years old), the worst part of this war is the toys. Kids get great toys and and for my two, it's about 90% of the appeal. They pick at the food but love the boxes and toys you get with a kids meal, usually promoting the latest Disney movie. My oldest was shocked when I finally told him the food was horrible but we get actually get a better toy on our own without having to go to McDonalds. Their brains just can't make that leap without a little help, even though it seems so obvious to us.

[bloviatrix]

Now how to tie this in with the fast-food thing:  bringing up the potential burden on the healthcare system adds a whole new set of questions.  Personally, I would see the easier solution as just denying coverage to those who abused their bodies in the first place.  If you have ailments due to a lifetime of poor eating/drinking/etc habits, tough luck, it comes out of your pocket or you don't get the care, shoulda known better.  As much as I feel strongly for freedom to choose exactly how to live one's life, I feel just as strongly about being personally completely liable for the results and consequences of those actions.

←

Interesting, but naive. You're not allowed to deny people healthcare because of lifestlye choices. With your logic, a person with HIV should be denied care because the "powers that be" don't approve of alternative lifestlye choices.

[rancho_gordo]

Interesting, but naive.  You're not allowed to deny people healthcare because of lifestlye choices.  With your logic, a person with HIV should be denied care because the "powers that be" don't approve of alternative lifestlye choices.

←

Not speaking for NulloMondo, but I don't think he said he was denying care, just not willing to pay for it.

Dangerous sex isn't a part of being gay (I'm assuming it's not a choice, just who you are.) But should the rest of us pay for someone who knowingly has unsafe sex after say, 1986? We know how you get exposed to HIV. We know what happens when you point a loaded gun. My point is I don't think people know exactly what the cause and effect of eating fast food is.

I'm not speaking in absolutes here. Just thinking out loud about personal responsibility.

Can I say how much appreciate the tone of this discussion? What a nice change after seeing NBA players and fans beat each other up.

[reesek]

rancho gordo, i couldn't agree more. the true horror of FFN is not the food...it's the workers, the conditions and the fact that the fast food (and factory farming, and soda) companies involved are strong-arming the regulatory agencies - and getting huge tax cuts to train workers...while doing everything possible to automate processes - eliminating the need for trained workers.

nullo, i think you'd appreciate the book...but i will say that it makes life harder. it kind of pushed me over the hump with food purchases. i wasn't a big fast food eater, but i also wasn't as dedicated to farmers markets and organics as i've become. to me - the idea that big corporations (ConAgra etc) can decide that i'll eat whatever pesticides, or growth hormones they're putting into my carrots or potatoes or beef (that i buy at a chain grocery) is just appalling. buying organic meat and produce costs me more, but it's more than worth it.