Food pyramid just asks too munch from us
By Beth Teitell
Thursday, July 15, 2004
Was it really necessary for the government
to announce plans to overhaul - and maybe even eliminate - the Food Guide Pyramid
this week? I mean, Martha Stewart's sentencing is tomorrow.
We're not made of steel.
Like the vast majority of Americans, I've always ignored the pyramid, but still there was something comforting about its presence - sort of like the network evening news. I don't watch Peter, Dan or Tom, but I like knowing they're on.
So why's the Department of Agriculture targeting the pyramid, especially after nearly $1 million was spent debating it a mere 12 years ago? Well, you know how something can be a victim of its own success? That's not the case here.
It turns out that while 80 percent of Americans recognize the pyramid - it's that one right there, officer, between the oval and the rhombus - we have no idea what to do with its information.
The pyramid, it turns out, did not motivate people to eat more healthfully. In fact, if the rising obesity rate is any indication, it may have driven people in the other direction (just a theory). I suspect it has something to do with how people define ``sparingly,'' the recommended dosage of the sweet and oily food groups.
If the government truly wants to ``connect'' with individuals - as one official put it - how about printing nutritional recommendations on invitations to high school reunions, or on the three-way mirrors in department stores nationwide?
In addition to mulling a replacement for the familiar shape (an ice cream cone?), the Agriculture Department says it might create a catchy slogan to entice people to a Web site that would be filled with detailed nutritional information.
How about these slogans? ``The waitress thought you were the older of the two sisters.'' ``Have you seen how you look from the back?'' ``You have your great-aunt's arms.''
Or, at a time when congressional leaders are calling
for an overhaul of the nation's color-coded terror threat system because it's
too confusing, why not simply merge the pyramid with Tom Ridge's chart?
Chatter picked up on cellphones about plans to ``meet at Dairy Queen'' or ``watch the game and drink beer and eat chips'' could prompt him to raise the cholesterol alert level a notch. Fast-food workers and morticians would be required to report for duty, stat.
And the food groups could be assigned colors. Eat too many red foods, and your risk of gaining back fat is ``severe.'' Binge on orange snacks, and your risk of going to the ER with chest pain is raised to ``high.'' Yellow foods ``elevate'' your risk of gaining the ``freshman five,'' (especially for people decades past freshman year).
Blue and green foods would carry only ``guarded'' or ``low'' risks of weight gain. (In other words, there'd be no reason to eat them.)
Or, maybe the feds should keep the pyramid shape
and simply flip the suggestions: From now on, Americans would be urged to eat
fruits and veggies ``sparingly'' and make sure to consume 6-11 servings per day
of oils, sweets and fats.
