Oras Phongpanangam 1

The two articles, How Junk Food Can End Obesity by David Freedman and The

Extraordinary Science of Addictive Junk Food by Michael Moss, present me with new

perspectives into the food industry itself. Each writer offers different views on food processing

technology, whose image we seem to associate with the detrimental effects of chemical additives

and high amounts of sugar and fat. Moss believes big food companies greed is the source of

obesity problems in America, whereas Freedman counters such a notion with the possibilities to

use food processing to produce healthier food, or even cure obesity. Although they may have

contradictory views on the food industry, I find their statements to constitute a bigger, more

complete picture of the food industry as a whole. However, as accomplished as David Freedman

might be, I find his arguments lacking in credibility, as they are based mainly on his opinions on

the matter, not fact. On the other hand, Mosss article is much more enlightening and trustworthy.

Michael Moss starts his article with an anecdote from a scientist at Pillsbury about his

effort to address the health issue of obesity, which we would soon learn turned out to be a failure,

owing to the attitudes toward such issue of executive officers. The authority figures in the

companies dont have a sense of humor when it comes to [profit]. Theyre a very, very

aggressive company (Moss 493). Hence, they are not willing to risk the profit of the company to

address such problems, and this viewpoint will serve as the main theme of the article.

Throughout the writing, we will encounter three more similar stories revealing insight into the

inner working of different companies: Dr. Pepper, Frito Lays, and Coke, where we can see how

much effort has been put into producing all these mouth-watering products to sell us, consumers,

and how people who try to make a change can meet the end of their careers, owing to the

profitable perspectives. With information based on his investigation spanning four years into the

in-depth secret of the food industry, which involves [talking] to more than 300 people inthe
 Oras Phongpanangam 2

processed food industry (477) and going through the internal company memos, strategy

papers, and handwritten notes (484), his article is full of such fascinating facts and figures

condensed into a few pages of article. This sole aspect can simply render his article more

credible than that of Freedmans, whose lack of credibility I will elaborate on next. Coupled with

his narration of the story that can be summarized as battles between few scientists in the industry

against the greedy executives, he has created a fun and enthralling yet trustworthy and thought-

provoking article. The only way we can dismiss his arguments is to assume that the whole article

is fabricated with fake sources, which is highly unlikely.

Being an aspiring scientist (in other words, nerd), I have to say I am extremely fascinated

by all the science and research behind the development of such addicting recipes revealed in the

article. Who could have thought that food science can be so multidisciplinary? Obviously,

chemistry is involved in developing all chemicals in the formulas like Dr. Pepper flavoring, but

psychological concepts also have great effect in the popularity of products, with concepts like

bliss point and sensory-specific satiety utilized to make the products appeal to as many

consumers as possible. Statistical techniques are also crucial to the evaluation of effectiveness of

products, generating data compiled in a 135-page report just from a taste-testing survey by Dr.

Pepper, which helps recovering it from Red Fusion incident (Moss 481), and revealing the fact

that baby boomers were not eating fewer salty snack even as they are aging, pointing Frito-Lay

to the right marketing strategy (Moss 485). Just for Frito-Lay alone, their research facility homes

nearly 500 chemists, psychologists and technicians [conducting] research that cost up to $30

million a year using a $40,000 device and more (Moss 486). Frankly, this aspect of the article

almost makes me want to eat all those snacks in respect of the dedication poured into making

them. Almost.
 Oras Phongpanangam 3

Freedman, on the other hand, starts his article with his comparison of McDonalds fruit

smoothie with a wholesome counterpart, and according to his rough calculation, the

McDonalds version contains less calories than the other (506). This is just the beginning, as we

can encounter more baseless conjectures like this throughout the article. He will then proceed to

devote half of his article to attacking the whole food movement: the group of anti-junk-food

people who embrace a wholesome diet with minimal processing. These people are dubbed

Pollanites, referring to the eating philosophy of Michael Pollan, a renowned journalist who is

also an advocate of such diet and has authored several best-selling books regarding the diet such

as Food Rules and The Omnivores Dilemmas. This half of the article can be characterized by its

lack of source materials, much consisting of Freedmans personal experience on the matter or his

fallacies-filled interpretations of miniscule evidence he included. All these elements strongly

urged me to fill my print-out with red highlights while parsing the article, which I did.

To name a few of such fallacies, his analysis on Sea Cake from Real Food Daily is

derived from a recipe [found] onlinewhich seem very close to what I ate (512) with no

description whatsoever of how the two recipe are connected in any conceivable way. When he

tries to incriminate wholesome food restaurants as less healthy than the usual ones, he has to

order kale chips and herb-cornmeal-crusted eggplant parmesan (513) from the menu that also

offers AUTUMN GRAIN SALAD and PAD THAI KELP NOODLES (CG) (To be fair, the

menu at Caf Gratitudes green color pallet and the premise of healthy organic restaurant may

make you conflate flat bread pizzas and salad bowls, which have no clear distinction in the

page.) When he cherry picks Vegan Cheesy Salad Booster as an example product from

Wholefood and compares it with Big Mac (512), saying the former contains three times the fat

content of the latter, he almost gets it right. The Salad Booster contains 35% of fat content at
 Oras Phongpanangam 4

serving size of 14 grams (Calories in Vegan), and Big mac contains 13% fat at serving size of

197 grams (Calories in Big), by weight. What he does not mention is that no one sprinkles 197

grams of cheesy granules on their salad in a single meal! His claim about Silicon Valley food

companies [treating technology] as if it is a problem (Freedman 510) is also outright self-

contradictory, as he just cited a weblog and an online food-shopping website in a previous

paragraph. As if the internet is not technology! One of the companies he cited, Wholeshare,

utilize e-commerce to organize buying-club-like groups, which reduce the cost of organic food

considerably (Schatz). All these points filled my reading experience with cringing moments as

the author kept making claims he could not, and did not, prove. Honestly, when it comes to

evaluating the validity of a claim, I can do an even better job than him.

His other half, on the other hand, presents us with his interesting opinions on the junk

food industries. He argues that, contrary to what Pollanites believe, The health concerns raised

about processing itself [are not related to obesity] (517), and that the processing itself, if utilized

correctly, can alleviate or even end the obesity pandemic. Not that this section is free of fallacies;

it is just as red as the other half. But many of his claims do make sense. It is also true that

ordering up 50,000 new farmers markets featuring locally grown organic squash blossoms is

not a plausible solution to the obesity problem American people face this day (522). He also

includes several food processing techniques that can help producing healthy foods which are as

tasty as regular fast food, including scent engineering (528), texture engineering (530), and fat

cushions (529). With these, he introduces a considerably appealing alternative to Pollans

philosophy; while Pollan focuses on changing the bad diet habit of the American people,

Freedman instead says that such method can be unaffordable, and solving obesity at its core, the

fast food industry, is more effective.

This then poses the main conflict between Freedmans and Mosss articles. While Moss

blames the food industry itself as the cause of the western diet, Freedman claims that the

Pollanites impede the food industrys shift toward healthier diet. Mosss narrative is clear: while

some scientists in the companies can see the problem they were causing, the higher-ups just care

more about profit, thus the industry stays the same. His stories of the Coke executive can testify

to that, citing the drinks and drinkers model used by the company to consider the consumers

and figure out how to drive more ounces into more bodies more often (492). Freedman, on the

other hand, claims that because the wholesome-food movement is getting in the way of

strategies that could work better (532). He claims that wholesome diet that Pollan promoted is

infeasible for the poor, and by avoiding fast food we have put big food companies like

McDonalds in a situation that they cant afford to make their food healthier since they need as

much profit as possible. Therefore, wholesome-food advocates are detrimental to the healthy

food development. However, in my opinion, it can be as easily said that the pressure against

McDonalds generated by Pollanites can press them to adjust their recipes to be healthier as well,

since buying their products means we are supporting the current obesogenic recipes. In an

interview, Freedman himself stated that [the argument incriminating Pollanites] was the weakest

part of his argument (Johnson).

The way I see it, Freedmans points are simply much weaker than those of Mosss. Not

only does Freedman write all the absurdities I have pointed out above, even his writing style

testifies against the seriousness of his claims. Looking at his more casual and slangy word

choices like scarf down, drive-thru, Big Food, and junky fare, along with his uses of

informal phrases like about-to-be-best-seller when referring to Pollans book, one can

promptly deduce his unserious and irreverent nature. Mosss diction, on the other hand, makes
 Oras Phongpanangam 6

him and his article look far more sophisticated. Uncommon words like cordial, curb,

qualms, sedentary, and stature, which I honestly dont understand the first time I read until

I get to look them up (some of which I still cant remember the meaning now), complements his

well-researched sources to produce a great article. The lack of informality in his writing also

highlights the spoken phrases from quotes he inserts sporadically, lightening up the article.

Freedman also often makes baseless claims, as I have mentioned earlier, that will be elaborated

on for one or two paragraphs, and dropped away quietly, spawning short snippets with no hard

evidence backing them up throughout the article. An example of this nature can be found in his

description on food companies in Silicon Valleys, where he spends two paragraphs naming a few

food companies, calling their (supposed) lack of use of technology a monstrosity, and then drops

the argument entirely, never to be seen again (510). Moss, on the other hand, does not have to

resort to making claims by himself, as his stories based on his 4-years research can express all

his views without him exerting anything. His three subsections, each telling a single, linear story,

are effective in expressing his concern over the profit-oriented nature of food industries.

Even Freedmans central claim, that food processing can solve the obesity problem, is

just an empty statement, as he never once says in his article that the food industry will be willing

to change the way they sell their products, sacrificing their profits for the goods of society. In this

regard, Freedman does not even disagree with Moss, as he cites a failure like McDeluxe to go

with Mosss telling of failed attempts to change the companies. I consider it clear that he believes

the food processing industry holds the greatest power when it comes to solving obesity problem,

but he does not seem to believe that this is possible, or that the food industry will actually

address the issue.

Therefore, the two articles constitute a bigger, more complete picture, and thus can be

synthesized into a single one as follow: The big food companies had been generating

unimaginable income from their recipes, the fruit of their years of research. However, their effort

to get consumers to consume more and more of their products resulted in an epidemic of obesity

among American people. Concerned with the effects they are causing on the society, some

scientists inside the companies decide to step up and tried to make the problem known to the

authority. They knew how much power science holds, and if used correctly, the techniques like

texture and flavor engineering used to fabricate edible products can be utilized to produce

delicious yet healthy foods. Unfortunately, profits were still the first and foremost goal of the

companies, so they inevitably failed, with some of them meeting the end of their career. The

wholesome-food movement then played a complicated role, either impeding or encouraging the

industry to shift toward healthier recipes, based on the perspective through which we see them.

Even if the food science is so powerful, should we wait for the industry to change? No, I

dont think so. This will certainly not happen soon, at least not in a few years. It is quite common

knowledge nowadays that junk food makes you fat and sick, so keep relying on it while waiting

passively for anything to change will not help. This is why I believe Freedmans claims against

Pollan is so invalid. Even though the food industry holds the greatest power in fighting against

obesity, Pollan at least gives us a way to keep ourselves healthy while other people wont. Sure,

it will not be applicable to everybody, but in small, personal scale his guidelines can be effective

in keeping away from obesity. Moss would agree with this, as he has seen with his own eyes the

stubbornness of the food industry. It is important to pressure them to change for the betterment,

but we certainly cant count on them to change our diet for us.
 Oras Phongpanangam 8

In conclusion, yes, I think Freedmans article is full of nonsense, but he does make a

valid point: the food industry is the key to cure obesity once and for all. However, we have seen

from Mosss anecdotal article that it will be difficult to achieve, as all the big food companies

have invested heavily amount into developing their profits-generating products, and they are not

going to abandon that easily. However, there is still hope, since there are still people out their

fighting to change the industry to better the diet of the whole country. Lets hope that they or

rather WE succeed, and meanwhile, despite Freedmans advice, I will still avoid McDonalds

as usual.
 Oras Phongpanangam 9

Works cited

Calories in Big Mac Cheeseburger. Calorie Count, www.caloriecount.com/calories-

mcdonalds-big-mac-cheeseburger-i21100.

Calories in Vegan Cheesy Salad Booster. Calorie Count, www.caloriecount.com/calories-

living-intentions-vegan-cheesy-salad-i324333.

CG Primary AW16. cafegratitude.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/cg-primary-aw16.pdf.

Moss, Michael. The Extraordinary Science of Addictive Junk Food. They Say, I Say with

Readings, edited by Gerald Graff, Norton: London, 2015, pp. 471-494

Freedman, David H. How Junk Food Can End Obesity. They Say, I Say with Readings, edited

by Gerald Graff, Norton: London, 2015, pp. 506-537

Johnson, Nathanael. No, Fast Food Isnt Actually Good for You: In Defense of

Pollanites. Grist, 26 June 2013, grist.org/food/no-fast-food-isnt-actually-good-for-you-

in-defense-of-pollanites/.

Schatz, Robin D. Food Startup Wholeshare Updates The Old-Fashioned Buying Club With E-

Commerce. Forbes, Forbes Magazine, 30 Mar. 2016,

www.forbes.com/sites/robindschatz/2016/03/30/wholeshare-brings-the-old-fashioned-

food-buying-club-into-the-digital-age/2/#453942fa30c9.

Soto-Escageda, Jos Alberto, et al. "Does Salt Addiction Exist?." Salud Mental 39.3 (2016): 175-

181. Academic Search Complete. Web. 2 Nov. 2016.