Cookies help us run our site more efficiently.

By clicking “Accept”, you agree to the storing of cookies on your device to enhance site navigation, analyze site usage, and assist in our marketing efforts. View our Privacy Policy for more information or to customize your cookie preferences.

Accept Deny

GoGreenNation news

Are Americans more obese than ever?

News Feed
Monday, November 18, 2024

Fast food occupies a unique spot in the proverbial gut of America. It’s irresistibly convenient when the fridge is empty —and even when it’s full — it seduces us with consistency, incredible flavors and decent prices.While it all comes with a generous serving of guilt since we kinda know it’s bad for us, Americans can’t help themselves. Americans spent a record $490 billion on fast food in 2023, up from post-pandemic levels. Despite this, surveys consistently show that many harbor deep concerns about its nutritional value, environmental impact and the ethics of its production.This love-hate tension is all part of fast food’s complex place in our lives. A report published Thursday in the journal The Lancet revealed that 75% of Americans are now overweight or obese. While fast food is not solely to blame for that, it does raise questions about the wide availability and nutritional value of ultra-processed foods.But solving an obesity crisis is not as simple as telling people to avoid it. Not everyone who consumes fast food does it because they want to. Many Americans face challenges accessing fresh fruits and vegetables, while an increase in sedentary lifestyles due to modern working practices is not yet fully understood, according to the report. Then there are social factors that limit food choices, like food insecurity, transportation, income, employment, race, educational level and whether you’re a single parent.Attempts to address the issue are not working, noted the report’s authors.“Existing policies have failed to address overweight and obesity,” they wrote. “Without major reform, the forecasted trends will be devastating at the individual and population level, and the associated disease burden and economic costs will continue to escalate.”Obesity will result in up to $9.1 trillion in excess medical expenditures over the next 10 years, according to a June 2024 report by Republicans on the Joint Economic Committee.It’s unclear if this crisis is a priority for the Trump administration, given the incoming president’s well-known love of, and brief employment at, McDonald’s. He’s also a fan of deregulation.While that chaos shakes out, let’s look at some of the leading fast-food ingredients and who let them be there.Sodium overloadThe average fast-food meal contains an alarming amount of sodium. For example, a single serving of McDonald’s fries has 230 milligrams, while a Burger King Whopper packs 911 milligrams, nearly half the recommended daily intake for adults. Consuming this much salt not only raises blood pressure but also puts us at higher risk for heart disease and stroke.Sugar and high fructose corn syrupSugary drinks and desserts dominate fast food menus. A small Wendy’s Frosty cup contains 46 grams of sugar, well above the 25-37 grams per day suggested by the American Heart Association. High-fructose corn syrup, a cheaper alternative to cane sugar, appears in sodas, sauces, and even burger buns. This ingredient has been linked to obesity and metabolic disorders.Questionable meatsWhen fast food chains claim their burgers are made with 100% beef, they’re technically correct. But that label often masks the use of unsellable cuts of meat—trimmings, connective tissue, and fat—ground together into patties. Chicken nuggets, another fast food staple, often contain a mixture of mechanically separated meat, starches, sugar, preservatives, hydrogenated oils and artificial flavorings.Artificial colorings and additivesEver wondered why fast food looks so vibrant? That’s often thanks to chemical colorings like Red 40 and Yellow 5, which have been linked to behavioral issues in children. Even “natural” options like Subway’s multigrain bread once included preservatives like azodicarbonamide—a chemical also used in yoga mats. Subway removed it after public pressure.Who Let This Happen?The fast food industry didn’t become a dietary minefield by accident. Decades of lobbying have shaped policy and regulations that some groups say prioritize corporate profits over public health.The corn lobby and high-fructose corn syrupHigh-fructose corn syrup (HFCS) owes its success to U.S. government subsidies for corn production. The Farm Bill, influenced heavily by agribusiness lobbyists, has ensured corn remains one of the most heavily subsidized crops. Between 1995 and 2020, corn subsidies amounted to over $116 billion in the U.S.This surplus of cheap corn made HFCS a low-cost alternative to sugar, leading to its widespread use in sodas, snacks, and fast food sauces. Despite links to obesity, type 2 diabetes, and metabolic disorders, HFCS remains, thanks in part to powerful lobbying by groups like the Corn Refiners Association.Meat industry lobbyistsThe meat industry has consistently pushed back against stricter regulations on safety and labeling. One infamous example is pink slime, a finely textured beef filler treated with ammonia to kill bacteria. This filler, made from low-quality trimmings squished together, sparked public outrage when first exposed in 2012.After lobbying efforts by meat processors like Cargill and Beef Products Inc., pink slime was reclassified by the USDA as ground beef, meaning it could be more widespread than before.But “pink slime” is fattier and more likely to contain pathogens than ground beef from quality cuts.FDA and additivesFood manufacturers have fought to keep artificial preservatives and additives legal despite evidence of potential health risks. For instance, Butylated Hydroxyanisole (BHA) and Butylated Hydroxytoluene (BHT) are preservatives used in fast food and processed goods to prevent fat from spoiling.Both are listed as “reasonably anticipated to be human carcinogens” by the National Toxicology Program, yet lobbying by food industry groups has ensured they remain approved by the FDA.

Obesity affects more Americans than ever. Fast food is one of the main culprits.

Fast food occupies a unique spot in the proverbial gut of America. It’s irresistibly convenient when the fridge is empty —and even when it’s full — it seduces us with consistency, incredible flavors and decent prices.

While it all comes with a generous serving of guilt since we kinda know it’s bad for us, Americans can’t help themselves. Americans spent a record $490 billion on fast food in 2023, up from post-pandemic levels. Despite this, surveys consistently show that many harbor deep concerns about its nutritional value, environmental impact and the ethics of its production.

This love-hate tension is all part of fast food’s complex place in our lives.

A report published Thursday in the journal The Lancet revealed that 75% of Americans are now overweight or obese. While fast food is not solely to blame for that, it does raise questions about the wide availability and nutritional value of ultra-processed foods.

But solving an obesity crisis is not as simple as telling people to avoid it. Not everyone who consumes fast food does it because they want to. Many Americans face challenges accessing fresh fruits and vegetables, while an increase in sedentary lifestyles due to modern working practices is not yet fully understood, according to the report. Then there are social factors that limit food choices, like food insecurity, transportation, income, employment, race, educational level and whether you’re a single parent.

Attempts to address the issue are not working, noted the report’s authors.

“Existing policies have failed to address overweight and obesity,” they wrote. “Without major reform, the forecasted trends will be devastating at the individual and population level, and the associated disease burden and economic costs will continue to escalate.”

Obesity will result in up to $9.1 trillion in excess medical expenditures over the next 10 years, according to a June 2024 report by Republicans on the Joint Economic Committee.

It’s unclear if this crisis is a priority for the Trump administration, given the incoming president’s well-known love of, and brief employment at, McDonald’s. He’s also a fan of deregulation.

While that chaos shakes out, let’s look at some of the leading fast-food ingredients and who let them be there.

Sodium overload

The average fast-food meal contains an alarming amount of sodium. For example, a single serving of McDonald’s fries has 230 milligrams, while a Burger King Whopper packs 911 milligrams, nearly half the recommended daily intake for adults. Consuming this much salt not only raises blood pressure but also puts us at higher risk for heart disease and stroke.

Sugar and high fructose corn syrup

Sugary drinks and desserts dominate fast food menus. A small Wendy’s Frosty cup contains 46 grams of sugar, well above the 25-37 grams per day suggested by the American Heart Association. High-fructose corn syrup, a cheaper alternative to cane sugar, appears in sodas, sauces, and even burger buns. This ingredient has been linked to obesity and metabolic disorders.

Questionable meats

When fast food chains claim their burgers are made with 100% beef, they’re technically correct. But that label often masks the use of unsellable cuts of meat—trimmings, connective tissue, and fat—ground together into patties. Chicken nuggets, another fast food staple, often contain a mixture of mechanically separated meat, starches, sugar, preservatives, hydrogenated oils and artificial flavorings.

Artificial colorings and additives

Ever wondered why fast food looks so vibrant? That’s often thanks to chemical colorings like Red 40 and Yellow 5, which have been linked to behavioral issues in children. Even “natural” options like Subway’s multigrain bread once included preservatives like azodicarbonamide—a chemical also used in yoga mats. Subway removed it after public pressure.

Who Let This Happen?

The fast food industry didn’t become a dietary minefield by accident. Decades of lobbying have shaped policy and regulations that some groups say prioritize corporate profits over public health.

The corn lobby and high-fructose corn syrup

High-fructose corn syrup (HFCS) owes its success to U.S. government subsidies for corn production. The Farm Bill, influenced heavily by agribusiness lobbyists, has ensured corn remains one of the most heavily subsidized crops. Between 1995 and 2020, corn subsidies amounted to over $116 billion in the U.S.

This surplus of cheap corn made HFCS a low-cost alternative to sugar, leading to its widespread use in sodas, snacks, and fast food sauces. Despite links to obesity, type 2 diabetes, and metabolic disorders, HFCS remains, thanks in part to powerful lobbying by groups like the Corn Refiners Association.

Meat industry lobbyists

The meat industry has consistently pushed back against stricter regulations on safety and labeling. One infamous example is pink slime, a finely textured beef filler treated with ammonia to kill bacteria. This filler, made from low-quality trimmings squished together, sparked public outrage when first exposed in 2012.

After lobbying efforts by meat processors like Cargill and Beef Products Inc., pink slime was reclassified by the USDA as ground beef, meaning it could be more widespread than before.

But “pink slime” is fattier and more likely to contain pathogens than ground beef from quality cuts.

FDA and additives

Food manufacturers have fought to keep artificial preservatives and additives legal despite evidence of potential health risks. For instance, Butylated Hydroxyanisole (BHA) and Butylated Hydroxytoluene (BHT) are preservatives used in fast food and processed goods to prevent fat from spoiling.

Both are listed as “reasonably anticipated to be human carcinogens” by the National Toxicology Program, yet lobbying by food industry groups has ensured they remain approved by the FDA.

Read the full story here.
Photos courtesy of

Related News

Americans will throw out 316 million pounds of food on Thanksgiving. Here's how it fuels climate change

The United Nation estimates that up to 10% of all human-produced greenhouse gases are generated by food loss and waste. That's nearly five times the emissions from the aviation industry.

Mexico City —  Each day, an army of trucks delivers tens of thousands of pounds of fresh fruit and vegetables to Mexico City’s Central de Abasto, one of the world’s largest wholesale food markets. Most of the produce finds its way to people’s kitchens, and eventually their stomachs. But around 420 tons goes bad each day before it can be sold. It ends up, like so much food around the world, in a landfill.Globally, a staggering one third of all food that is produced is never eaten. That waste — more than 1 billion tons annually — fuels climate change. As organic matter decomposes, it releases methane, a greenhouse gas that is much more potent than carbon dioxide when it comes to warming the planet.The United Nation estimates that up to 10% of all human-produced greenhouse gases are generated by food loss and waste. That’s nearly five times the emissions from the aviation industry. For many years, scientists and policy makers have been largely focused on addressing other drivers of climate change, especially the burning of fossil fuels, which is by far the largest contributor to global emissions. But food waste has recently been drawing more international attention.The issue was on the agenda at this month’s United Nations climate summit in Azerbaijan, where for the first time, leaders signed a declaration calling for countries to set concrete targets to reduce methane emissions caused by organic waste. Discarded produce is piled in a dumpster at Mexico City’s Central de Abasto, a giant wholesale market. (Kate Linthicum / Los Angeles Times) Only a handful of the 196 countries that have signed the Paris Agreement on climate change have incorporated food waste commitments into their national climate plans, according to the UK-based nonprofit Waste & Resources Action Program.Many more nations are like Mexico, which is just beginning to assess how it can reduce the 20 million tons of food wasted annually here.A recent report by the World Bank identified several waste hotspots in the country, including the Central de Abasato, which stretches across 800 acres on the south side of the capital. In the dense warren of stalls, the best-looking produce is displayed prominently: ripe bananas, glistening limes and orderly rows of broccoli and asparagus. In the back are fruits and veggies that no longer look perfect: mushy papayas, wilting spinach and bruised tomatoes. A few years ago, market organizers launched an initiative to collect the produce that looks too old to sell but is still perfectly usable. They donate it to food banks and soup kitchens. Organizers say they’ve reduced the amount of food that is thrown out by about a quarter since 2020 — and have provided meals to tens of thousands of hungry people. “It’s much better to donate,” said Fernando Bringas Torres, who has sold bananas at the market for more than four decades. “This food still has value.” Environmental activists say reducing food waste is one of the most attainable climate solutions, in part because its not politicized. Asking companies and consumers to cut back on the food they send to landfills is far less charged than urging a reduction in meat consumption, energy use or the number of gas-fueled cars on the road. “People on the left and the right both have a gut reaction to it because it is a waste of resources,” said Christian Reynolds, a researcher at the Center for Food Policy at City University in London. Reducing waste “is not a silver bullet” to stop global warming, Reynolds said. “But it’s up there with the things you’ve got to solve, and it’s a useful way to open doors around climate change.”Scientists say cutting back on waste is valuable because methane traps heat at a much higher rate than carbon dioxide. An average of 420 tons of produce goes bad each day before it can be sold from Mexico City’s Central de Abasto. (Kate Linthicum / Los Angeles Times) Methane emissions are to blame for about 30% of the recent rise in global temperatures. U.N. climate leaders say slashing them is a vital “emergency brake” that will help curb the extreme weather already seen across the world today. About 20% of methane emissions come from food loss and waste, an umbrella term that describes all food that is produced but not eaten. It includes crops destroyed by pests or extreme weather, produce or meat that spoils in transport because of faulty packaging and food that goes bad at market before it can be sold. It also includes all food purchased by individuals or served at restaurants that ends up in the trash. A vendor holds peppers at the Central de Abasto market. (Kate Linthicum / Los Angeles Times) The data on food waste are stunning: It takes an area the size of China to grow the food that is thrown away each year.Globally, around 13% of food produced is lost between harvest and market, while another 19% is thrown out by households, restaurants or stores.Food waste takes up about half the space in the world’s landfills.An estimated 316 million pounds of food will be wasted in the United States on Thanksgiving alone, according to the Chicago-based nonprofit ReFED. That’s the equivalent to half a billion dollars worth of groceries thrown away in a single day.Experts say some food waste in inevitable. Humans need food to survive and it degrades quickly. Modern food systems are built around the transport of products across long distances, increasing the likelihood that some things will spoil. But they say there are relatively pain-free ways to reduce waste at all stages — from producer to consumer. The simplest thing is to reduce the amount of extra food being produced in the first place. Many vendors at Mexico City’s Central de Abasto donate their produce to food banks. (Kate Linthicum / Los Angeles Times) But other solutions include fixing inefficient machinery that makes it hard to harvest all of a crop, bettering poor roads that prevent food from making it from farm to table and improving packaging, so food stays good for longer.At the end of the chain, restaurant workers can be better trained to prepare food in a way that avoids waste. Retailers can be encouraged to avoid over-buying and to stop the practice of stocking only perfect-looking produce and discarding the rest. And consumers can be encouraged to eat all of what they buy and lower the temperatures on their refrigerators to delay food from going bad. There has also been a major push to get retailers to change how they label foods, given that many consumers throw out products if they are past their sell-by date. “We should be making sure that our food safety policies are not getting in the way of our climate goals,” Reynolds said. California Gov. Gavin Newsom recently signed a bill, AB 660, that would bar food-sellers from using the term “sell by” on packages, requiring them to switch to “use by” or “best if used by.” Advocates say it would dissuade Californians from throwing away food that is still good. Each day, an army of trucks delivers fresh fruit and vegetables to Mexico City’s Central de Abasto, one of the largest wholesale food markets in the world. (Kate Linthicum / Los Angeles Times) Other efforts are focused on recovery and redistribution — getting food that is about to spoil into the hands of hungry people. Each year 783 million people around the world go hungry, with a third of the global population facing food insecurity.World leaders “are starting to make the connection between the the climate impact and social impact,” said Ana Catalina Suárez Peña, an advocate with the Global FoodBanking Network, which works with food banks in more than 50 countries. Her organization recently developed a calculator for food banks and businesses that allows them to measure the volume of methane avoided by curbing food waste. The group found that six community-led food banks in Mexico and Ecuador prevented a total of 816 metric tons of methane over a year by redistributing food that would otherwise have gone to landfill. That is the equivalent of keeping 5,436 cars off the road for a year. Tools to measure food waste — and the savings generated from avoiding it — are an important part of tackling the problem, said Oliver Camp, a food systems adviser at the COP summit.Though he was heartened by the summit declaration calling on countries to set targets for avoiding food waste in their climate plans, he said there was still much progress to be made. Countries need to implement a “comprehensive, costed national strategy based on data as to where food loss and waste is occurring, and evidence-based interventions to avoid it,” he said. The World Bank analysis of Mexico found that most of the country’s emissions come from the energy and transportation sectors, but that the food wasted here is the fifth biggest contributor. “There is an overproduction by farmers,” said Adriana Martínez, 48, who runs a stall at the Central de Abastos that she inherited from her late father. She said customers “only want food that looks perfect.” Each week, about 30% of her product begins to go bad. In the past, she would have sent it to the overflowing dumpsters that sit behind the market. But now she calls up a market organizer who connects her with a local food bank. Martínez said her father, who grew up poor, would be happy knowing that food from the stand is helping other people instead of decomposing in a dump. “He knew hunger,” she said. “And he hated waste.” Mexico City’s Central de Abasto is filled with rows after row of fruits and vegetables imported from 20 countries. (Kate Linthicum / Los Angeles Times)

Food
Climate
Waste

Meds Like Ozempic Are Causing Folks to Waste More Food

By Ernie Mundell HealthDay ReporterFRIDAY, Nov. 22, 2024 (HealthDay News) -- America's kitchen trash bins are receiving more unwanted food as...

By Ernie Mundell HealthDay ReporterFRIDAY, Nov. 22, 2024 (HealthDay News) -- America's kitchen trash bins are receiving more unwanted food as appetites falter among people taking GLP-1 weight-loss meds, a new study shows.GLP-1s like Ozempic, Wegovy, Mounjaro and Zepbound all work by making food less desirable, and it's showing up in more food wasted at dinner tables, said a team led by Brian Roe, of Ohio State University.The study surveyed 505 new GLP-1 users. It found 25% agreeing that they had wasted more food since taking the drugs, compared to 61% who disagreed. There was some good news, however: Food wastage appears to decline as people adjust to their GLP-1 medication.“The fact that food waste appears to decrease as patients acclimate to the medication suggests there may be a fairly simple remedy -- advising patients new to these medications about the possibility of discarding food as their diets change, which could reduce food waste and lower their spending," said Roe, a professor in the department of agricultural, environmental and development economics.According to the researchers, 6% of all U.S. adults were taking a GLP-1 medications as of spring of 2024. The medicines act on a hormone in the small intestine to help lower blood sugar, slow stomach emptying and signal fullness in the brain.In this study, almost 70% of respondents were taking semaglutide (Ozempic, Rybelsus, Wegovy) and nearly a quarter were taking tirzepatide (Mounjaro, Zepbound).Many were relatively new to the drugs: Only a quarter had been using them for more than a year.Everyone was asked to agree or disagree with the statement, "Since beginning this medication, I have found I waste more of the food that I purchase."About a quarter agreed that they were wasting more food, and that rate rose to 30% among people who'd only been taking the medication for 90 days or less.Nausea was a leading cause of folks tossing out food, the study found. However, it also appeared that certain food types were looked on less favorably once people commenced GLP-1 therapy.According to the research, people tended to shy away from alcohol, pasta and other carbohydrates, fried foods, sweets and dairy once they began taking a GLP-1, added more produce, protein, fish and healthy fats to their diets instead.Once vegetable consumption began to rise, food wastage started to fall, the study found. According to the researchers, veggies have long been the most commonly wasted food group in the United States.People who'd been taking a GLP-1 for at least one year lost an average 20% of their starting body weight, the study found.The new study was published recently in the journal Nutrients.Will changing food habits also shrink grocery bills for people taking Ozempic and its kin?Maybe, said Roe, and a study looking at the household finances of GLP-1 users is planned.“People taking these medications in all likelihood will be spending less on food, but whether there is a chance to offset the cost of the drug through reduction in food spending remains to be seen,” he said in a university news release.SOURCE: The Ohio State University, news release, Nov. 21, 2024Copyright © 2024 HealthDay. All rights reserved.

Food
Health
Waste

Give Beans a Chance

The unglamorous food has the potential to remake American diets, but it has an image problem.

This is an edition of Time-Travel Thursdays, a journey through The Atlantic’s archives to contextualize the present, surface delightful treasures, and examine the American idea.I love a good bean: tossed with vinaigrette in a salad, spooned over pasta, served on a plate with rice and corn. The bean is a powerful little food, all the more for its shapeshifting capacities. Many people can appreciate that these legumes are cheap and healthy, but they still fall short of widespread adoration or even respect.Yet, over the decades, Atlantic writers have turned to the bean’s revolutionary potential again and again. The humble bean, small, unglamorous, packed with protein, has been a source of inspiration for those seeking to remake the food system, fight climate change, and add some better flavors into American homes. In a 1975 article loftily titled “A Bean to Feed the World?” the historian Richard Rhodes made the case for centering the soybean in the American diet. “We continue to sing of amber waves of grain, not dusty pods of beans,” he bemoans in the opening line.Noting that the soybean was, at the time, the No. 1 cash crop in the country, Rhodes argues that Americans should be eating it as a source of protein on its own, rather than feeding it to the farm animals that then became dinner. “Conversion of soybeans to food for humans is worth looking at,” he writes. (The soybean, a cousin of the lentil and black bean, has about 30 grams of protein per cup.) Alas, soybeans remain primarily the provenance of livestock today, with the exception of the small percentage used to make popular foods such as tofu.In 2017, James Hamblin made the urgent climate case for replacing beef with legumes in Americans’ diets, given that cows are among the top agricultural sources of greenhouse gasses worldwide and take up great swaths of arable land. Hamblin explained that by swapping beans for beef, the U.S. could “achieve somewhere between 46 and 74 percent of the reductions needed” to meet the 2020 greenhouse-gas-emission goals set out by President Barack Obama in 2009. (Americans have not wholesale rejected beef in favor of beans, but, in large part because the pandemic slowed travel and economic activity, we did end up meeting those climate goals.)Part of the problem with beans is that they are not that attractive a food. In a 1992 article, the food writer Corby Kummer acknowledges the “insipid” nature of beans before walking readers through some ways to prepare tasty—and easily digestible—bean-based dishes. But for the horticultural writer Richardson Wright, the bean’s humility is what makes it heroic. During World War II, he wrote that “the coincidence of Saturday night and baked beans was of divine provenance, and with the ardor of the freshly converted, I insisted that we practice.” In a time of loss, a pot of beans—which he calls “farinaceous catechumens,” likening them to starchy bodies readied for baptism—can mean everything. The quasi-religious tone of his Proustian meditation on beans is moving; still, his dietary choice was borne out of desperation and limited rations.The image of beans as a backup when you don’t have, or can’t afford, anything better has proven hard to shake. Even as vegetarian diets are on the rise and Americans recognize the environmental impact of beef, eating meat remains an intractable part of American life. For all the trendiness of brothy beans and Rancho Gordo subscriptions in recent years, many Americans still haven’t made legumes central to their diets. One estimate found that, as of 2019, the average American ate approximately 55 pounds of chicken a year compared with roughly 2.5 pounds of cooked black beans (American bean consumption is low compared to many other countries). Still, there are reasons to hope: Americans have embraced hummus, which is made of chickpeas. Chic New York restaurants are serving bean-based dishes. And a climate campaign with ties to the United Nations is pushing to double global bean consumption by 2028. Though the bean may not be the flashiest ingredient, it is persistent—and it may even shape a better world in its image.

Food
Animals
Health

What to know about HHS and how RFK Jr. could lead it

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. could radically reshape the Department of Health and Human Services if he is confirmed as secretary of the agency under President-elect Trump. Why it matters: The onetime independent presidential candidate has been one of the country's most prominent vaccine skeptics for years, alarming public health experts about his nomination to lead to HHS.His appointment to HHS would also come 16 years after he was considered for a cabinet appointment by former President Obama. Obama had weighed appointing Kennedy — then an environmental lawyer — to the head of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).Kennedy's views range from cracking down on food additives to conspiracy-tinged ideas about fluoride in water.State of play: Kennedy's nomination to HHS Thursday came after weeks of speculation over what role he would play in the incoming administration.Trump promised in October he'd let Kennedy — who endorsed him after dropping his own presidential bid — "go wild" on federal oversight of food and medicine.Experts have warned that he could help erode key parts of the health care system and lead to an increase in preventable disease. Between the lines: Kennedy's selection has divided Republicans on Capitol Hill, though some in the GOP remain optimistic Kennedy will secure the requisite number of votes to be confirmed by the Senate.What is the HHS?The Department of Health and Human Services is a nearly $2 trillion agency is in charge of dispensing nearly 25% of the federal budget and employs more than 80,000 federal workers.HHS encompasses other departments that approve new medications, conduct infectious disease research and contribute to other public health services.It includes departments whose work touch on immigration, child support and adults with disabilities.HHS also processes Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests, allowing journalists and other members of the public to request records from the federal government.What departments fall under HHS?HHS encompasses 13 operating divisions. Americans may be familiar with the FDA, CDC and NIH — particularly after the COVID pandemic — but other lesser known divisions can still impact their everyday lives.The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is tasked with regulating new drugs and medical devices, approves new vaccines, and ensures the safety of the food supply. After the 2022 Dobbs decision, the FDA has also helped make medication abortion more accessible. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) helps respond to infectious disease outbreaks like the bird flu and the COVID-19 pandemic. It also tracks food-borne illnesses like E. coli and listeria.The Centers of Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) overseas health insurance programs that benefit millions of Americans nationwide.The Office of Refugee Resettlement helps support refugees, unaccompanied minors and asylum seekers who are in the U.S. The National Institutes of Health oversees vaccine and other biomedical research, like cancer research. It includes the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) which was headed by Anthony Fauci during the COVID-19 pandemic.The Administration for Children and Families helps fund foster care and Head Start child care programs across the country.What could Kennedy's appointment mean for Americans?As head of a large and influential agency, Kennedy could begin implementing some elements of his "Make America Healthy Again" agenda.Kennedy has previously outlined plans to clear out entire departments from health care agencies, such as the FDA's nutrition department, in a bid to root out unspecified "corruption." He also said he would advise water districts against using fluoride, a mineral that occurs naturally in water but is often added to the water supply to help prevent tooth decay.He has also expressed interest in pausing drug development and infectious disease research at NIH for eight years, in favor of studying chronic disease. Zoom in: Kennedy has repeatedly denied that he is anti-vaccine and said he won't take away any vaccines from Americans. But he's continued to promote unbacked claims about vaccines causing various illnesses.He is also a proponent of drinking raw, unpasteurized milk, which both the FDA and CDC warn come with serious health risks. As the head of HHS, Kennedy would be able to initiate the roll back of the FDA's raw milk regulations.Go deeper:What to know about RFK Jr.'s positions on vaccines, drugs and health careHow RFK Jr.'s MAHA movement could shake up public healthWhat a Trump-empowered RFK Jr. could do on health care

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. could radically reshape the Department of Health and Human Services if he is confirmed as secretary of the agency under President-elect Trump. Why it matters: The onetime independent presidential candidate has been one of the country's most prominent vaccine skeptics for years, alarming public health experts about his nomination to lead to HHS.His appointment to HHS would also come 16 years after he was considered for a cabinet appointment by former President Obama. Obama had weighed appointing Kennedy — then an environmental lawyer — to the head of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).Kennedy's views range from cracking down on food additives to conspiracy-tinged ideas about fluoride in water.State of play: Kennedy's nomination to HHS Thursday came after weeks of speculation over what role he would play in the incoming administration.Trump promised in October he'd let Kennedy — who endorsed him after dropping his own presidential bid — "go wild" on federal oversight of food and medicine.Experts have warned that he could help erode key parts of the health care system and lead to an increase in preventable disease. Between the lines: Kennedy's selection has divided Republicans on Capitol Hill, though some in the GOP remain optimistic Kennedy will secure the requisite number of votes to be confirmed by the Senate.What is the HHS?The Department of Health and Human Services is a nearly $2 trillion agency is in charge of dispensing nearly 25% of the federal budget and employs more than 80,000 federal workers.HHS encompasses other departments that approve new medications, conduct infectious disease research and contribute to other public health services.It includes departments whose work touch on immigration, child support and adults with disabilities.HHS also processes Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests, allowing journalists and other members of the public to request records from the federal government.What departments fall under HHS?HHS encompasses 13 operating divisions. Americans may be familiar with the FDA, CDC and NIH — particularly after the COVID pandemic — but other lesser known divisions can still impact their everyday lives.The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is tasked with regulating new drugs and medical devices, approves new vaccines, and ensures the safety of the food supply. After the 2022 Dobbs decision, the FDA has also helped make medication abortion more accessible. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) helps respond to infectious disease outbreaks like the bird flu and the COVID-19 pandemic. It also tracks food-borne illnesses like E. coli and listeria.The Centers of Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) overseas health insurance programs that benefit millions of Americans nationwide.The Office of Refugee Resettlement helps support refugees, unaccompanied minors and asylum seekers who are in the U.S. The National Institutes of Health oversees vaccine and other biomedical research, like cancer research. It includes the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) which was headed by Anthony Fauci during the COVID-19 pandemic.The Administration for Children and Families helps fund foster care and Head Start child care programs across the country.What could Kennedy's appointment mean for Americans?As head of a large and influential agency, Kennedy could begin implementing some elements of his "Make America Healthy Again" agenda.Kennedy has previously outlined plans to clear out entire departments from health care agencies, such as the FDA's nutrition department, in a bid to root out unspecified "corruption." He also said he would advise water districts against using fluoride, a mineral that occurs naturally in water but is often added to the water supply to help prevent tooth decay.He has also expressed interest in pausing drug development and infectious disease research at NIH for eight years, in favor of studying chronic disease. Zoom in: Kennedy has repeatedly denied that he is anti-vaccine and said he won't take away any vaccines from Americans. But he's continued to promote unbacked claims about vaccines causing various illnesses.He is also a proponent of drinking raw, unpasteurized milk, which both the FDA and CDC warn come with serious health risks. As the head of HHS, Kennedy would be able to initiate the roll back of the FDA's raw milk regulations.Go deeper:What to know about RFK Jr.'s positions on vaccines, drugs and health careHow RFK Jr.'s MAHA movement could shake up public healthWhat a Trump-empowered RFK Jr. could do on health care

Food
Government
Health

Op-ed: What a Second Trump Administration Could Mean for Your Food

First, food prices could increase. A lot. And this time, food inflation will be driven by food policy choices, not by the Covid-19 pandemic. After the role food prices played in the election, some might wonder why Trump would place tariffs on food imports, which could increase food prices if the costs are passed along […] The post Op-ed: What a Second Trump Administration Could Mean for Your Food appeared first on Civil Eats.

None of Trump’s supporters voted for food that costs more and is less safe. Nevertheless, a second Trump administration could be a disaster for eaters, farmers, food and farm workers, and provide a windfall for the largest food and farm interests. Here’s why. First, food prices could increase. A lot. And this time, food inflation will be driven by food policy choices, not by the Covid-19 pandemic. After the role food prices played in the election, some might wonder why Trump would place tariffs on food imports, which could increase food prices if the costs are passed along to consumers. But that’s not all he might do. The Trump team might also reduce food assistance for poor people, as House Republicans have already proposed. A Mexican agricultural worker cultivates lettuce on a farm in Holtville, California. (Photo by John Moore, Getty Images) Deporting food and farm workers, as Trump has pledged, could also increase the cost of producing food (and be devastating for families and rural communities). In combination, tariffs on food and farm products, reducing food assistance, and driving up labor costs could be a food affordability triple whammy for many of the people who just helped put Trump back in office. “If Trump truly wants to ‘Make America Healthy Again,’ he will ban toxic pesticides and food chemicals, put warning labels on junk food, and require farmers to test for pathogens before they water their crops.” Second, the people who feed us could lose important workplace protections. The COVID-19 pandemic unmasked the harm food and farm workers face, but that might not stop the Trump team from weakening labor standards. Many of the people who feed us are not only at risk of being deported, they may also have fewer legal protections at work if industry lobbyists are placed in key positions at the Department of Labor and the Department of Agriculture. Even if Trump fails to deliver on promised deportations, food and farm workers will live and work in constant fear—and face increased harassment. Third, as hard as it is to imagine, our diets could get worse. While Trump and some of his supporters have pledged to “Make America Healthy Again,” the industry lobbyists who will likely run the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) and Food and Drug Administration (FDA) could instead weaken school nutrition standards (as Trump tried to do during his first term), reverse plans to require a warning label on junk food, weaken proposed limits on “healthy claims” on food packages, reduce access to local food sources like farmers’ markets, and replace nutrition science with pseudoscience. Fourth, despite Trump’s pledges to the contrary, our food and tap water could be filled with toxic pesticides and pathogens. The Biden-Harris Environmental Protection Agency banned toxic pesticides, including most uses of chlorpyrifos. The first Trump administration reversed a ban of chlorpyrifos, and a second Trump administration could reverse the ban again—and undo other recent chemical safety progress, including efforts to tackle toxic “forever chemicals.” The next Trump administration could also increase the risk of pathogens by reversing proposals to address salmonella in chicken as a favor to Big Meat. Fifth, the new Trump team could gut voluntary programs to help farmers get their farms “climate ready” and reduce methane and nitrous oxide emissions. Climate pollution from farming could account for 38 percent of U.S. emissions by 2050—up from 10 percent today. That’s more likely  if the incoming administration diverts funding for reducing emissions and instead funds infrastructure projects like irrigation pipelines. The same voluntary practices that reduce emissions can also help farms withstand extreme weather. If funding is cut, farms could become more vulnerable. That’s not the only way a second Trump term could make things worse for most farmers. Tariffs will be bad for farmers because important overseas markets will be lost. Not only that, efforts to address monopoly control of the things farmers buy—like seeds, chemicals, and equipment—and monopoly control of the places farmers sell their goods will likely grind to a halt. If the past is prologue, the Trump team will raid USDA’s coffers to help disburse billions to the largest, most successful farmers and once again leave smaller farmers, especially farmers of color, with no safety net. Whether election-year pledges to “Make America Healthy Again” will produce a meaningful change remains to be seen. What’s clear is that no one voted for higher food prices, more hunger, increased diet-related disease, or more toxic pesticides and pathogens in our food–including most Republican voters. Public opinion research shows strong bipartisan support for anti-hunger programs, protecting workers, keeping food safe, and helping farmers address climate change. Handy Kennedy, founder of AgriUnity cooperative, feeds his cows on HK Farms on April 20, 2021 in Cobbtown, Georgia. (Photo by Michael M. Santiago, Getty Images) While the election shows we may not agree on everything, everyone agrees that our food should be affordable, safe, and produced in ways that protect our workers and our neighbors. Everyone, that is, except for the industry lobbyists who may soon be running the federal agencies charged with protecting us. Some of us will be able to choose organic or buy water filters. Others will live in states where state policymakers will continue to step in to protect us. But most of us—especially most of the voters who elected Trump—will be unprotected from higher prices and food and water that can make us sick. Counting on health gurus and other false prophets will be no substitute for the hard work that lays ahead. If Trump truly wants to “Make America Healthy Again,” he will ban toxic pesticides and food chemicals, put warning labels on junk food, and require farmers to test for pathogens before they water their crops. He will help farmers prepare their farms for extreme weather and avoid becoming a leading source of greenhouse gas emissions. He will not only ensure that people have enough to eat, but also that they have more healthy food choices and fewer foods with misleading health claims. And he will make sure that the people who feed us aren’t living in fear or putting their own health and safety in jeopardy. The post Op-ed: What a Second Trump Administration Could Mean for Your Food appeared first on Civil Eats.

Food
Agriculture
Climate

Suggested Viewing

Kumu Niu

The island of O'ahu is covered with coconut palms, but for fear of liability the vast majority of these sacred trees have been stripped of coconuts. The grassroots movement "Niu Now" is on a mission to restore the "niu," or coconut, as a fundamental food crop in Hawai'i and spread the Indigenous wisdom of "aloha 'āina:" loving land and serving people.

Land Use
Indigenous
Food

Voice of Vanilla

In the rainforests of Madagascar, vanilla offers hope to farmers hindered by the relentless tide of poverty and cyclones. How will the women responsible for vanilla cultivation weather the storms that threaten their livelihoods? Join us on this journey to uncover the truth behind one of the world’s most beloved spices and to support the women farmers at the heart of the vanilla industry.

Social Justice
Food
Business

America Recycled

Two brothers ride recycled bicycles through the American South over two years, seeking radical locality amid rampant globalization. As they learn to survive on the road, several modern homesteading communities take them in, guiding them toward the west coast and turning their idea of the American Dream on its head.

Resources
Food
Documentary

Sockeye Salmon. Red Fish

Sockeye, a species of wild salmon, is born in Kamchatkan waters and spends its entire life in the Pacific Ocean. Only once does it return to fresh waters - to give offspring, start the circle of life, and die. It is an inexhaustible resource that feeds billions of people on the planet, restored every year! But soon, we may find ourselves facing the unimaginable: humans will exhaust the inexhaustible!

Animals
Food
Extinction

Swallowtail - An Apprenticeship Story

Swallowtail: An Apprenticeship Story follows six young aspiring farmers as they navigate the rollercoaster season of 2019-2020 in North Central Florida. The film centers on the thoughts and experiences of these apprentices who leave home to live at Swallowtail Farm and how the COVID-19 pandemic turned an already challenging learning experience into an unprecedented one. Throughout their journey, they reflect on issues of food security, sustainability practices, and community.

Agriculture
Food
Youth

Join us to forge
a sustainable future

Our team is always growing.
Become a partner, volunteer, sponsor, or intern today.
Let us know how you would like to get involved!

CONTACT US

sign up for our mailing list to stay informed on the latest films and environmental headlines.

Subscribers receive a free day pass for streaming Cinema Verde.
Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.