Labels and Fables
There are several definitions of labels, the sort you tend to hear most often these days (such as "transparency" and "full disclosure") and the ones we often slap on people ("he's as tight as a drum" or "he's nuts"...or worse). We slap labels on people in ways that seem to come too easily, a form of divide that's both noted and perpetuated by our media, our societies, and our parents and friends (our upbringing). An article in Psychology Today put it this way: Categorical labeling is a tool that humans use to resolve the
impossible complexity of the environments we grapple to perceive. Like
so many human faculties, it's adaptive and miraculous, but it also
contributes to some of the deepest problems that face our species. Researchers began to study the cognitive
effects of labeling in the 1930s, when linguist Benjamin Whorf
proposed the linguistic relativity hypothesis. According to his
hypothesis, the words we use to describe what we see aren't just idle
placeholders -- they actually determine what we see. Take Heinz 57 ketchup...
Call it what you will, from marketing to false advertising, the labels we see almost everywhere are growing more and more difficult to sort. In the case of a simple brand of ketchup, Smithsonian reported that there were never "57" varieties but just the random lucky numbers 5 and 7 that Henry J. Heinz felt were catchy enough together to move yet another product of his (over 60 at the time, his start to fame actually coming from horseradish and pickles). Cute, you say, but not really damaging. But what about some of the more generic terms that appear on many other products, such as "all natural." As it turns out, the term has no meaning and no regulation here in the U.S. In fact, you could print out this post on something like rice paper and describe the resulting questionably edible version as "100% natural"...no problem (and no violation of truth-in-advertising policy). Hmm, breads, juices, granolas, all those "natural" products? But wait, it's gets even murkier for truth be told, the U.S. falls somewhere in the middle of truth in labeling with some countries being more stringent and others being more lax...so let's jump to pet food.
Should you see the term "human grade" on a can of dog or cat food, well, it might as well say "natural" for the term is equally meaningless and unenforced. Throw in the term "flavor" (such as "real chicken flavor") and it likely means that that concoction was lightly sprayed with something before being packaged (the words "made with real chicken" only requires 3% of a product to be used). As far as "by-products" (such as "beef by-products"), well, just think of all the parts of a cow that would not appear in your grocery store, everything from bones and tendons to unmentionable innards. It can get worse of course when it comes to making products for humans, as noted in a piece in The New Yorker on that latest quasi pyramid scheme of essential oils that will help you sleep, digest, release and basically cure what ails you. This cuts closer to me because two of the largest producers of essential oils originate and currently operate out of my state of Utah, a state known for its bevy of unregulated herbal remedies and vitamin mixtures, not to mention its record level of multi-level-marketing companies such as Nuskin, noni berries and weight loss products (Utah is actually the world leader in MLM companies): Multilevel-marketing companies such as Amway and Mary Kay have long sold people --primarily women-- the idea of building a business by working their social connections. A decade ago, that happened through hosting parties or classes; these days, the chatty, relationship-based sales pressure favored by the companies takes place largely on social media, and the industry is attracting a greater share of young people. In recent years, a number of multilevel-marketing companies that target millennials have cropped up, selling everything from leggings (LuLaRoe) to jewelry (Stella & Dot). Marketing pros advise newcomers to “friend” strangers, reach out to acquaintances from high school, and post daily selfies of themselves enjoying the products they sell...Everyone in the industry studiously avoids any comparison to pyramid schemes, which are illegal, but the structural similarities are hard to ignore...The Food and Drug Administration is charged with preventing sellers of alternative-health products from making unfounded medical claims. Without ample independent testing, companies can’t assert that their products prevent, diagnose, treat, or cure disease. Pick up any bottle of vitamins or supplements and you'll read that disclaimer (albeit in the tiniest of print, a cautionary and mandatory notation so small that many have never read or seen it even though it's printed on every bottle of vitamins and supplements): These statements have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration. This product is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure or prevent any disease. Simple reason?...laboratory testing is often prevented (in many cases, by Congress) or results in unsubstantiated results for the claims (should you see a bottle without such a notice, be extra leery for it is likely home-made or being illegally distributed). So then what's with such trends as pomegranate juice or goji berries or eating raw kale (which is now showing signs of thyroid damage if taken in large quantities)? Here's one view from Web MD: Manufacturers aren't required to test their products for safety and effectiveness. Some supplement ingredients have been tested in animal or human studies. For example, folic acid has been shown in studies to reduce the risk of birth defects in pregnant women. However, other supplement ingredients haven't been studied well, or at all...The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) does regulate dietary supplements; however, it treats them like foods rather than medications. Unlike drug manufacturers, the makers of supplements don’t have to show their products are safe or effective before selling them on the market. And to think that much of this may have started with butter.
In a story some years ago in National Geographic, butter (which has been with us for 4000 years) came under attack when beef tallow was made into a spread back in 1869: In that year French chemist Hippolyte Mège-Mouriès --spurred on by a hefty financial prize offered by Emperor Louis Napoleon III-- patented a lower priced spread made from beef tallow. He dubbed it oleomargarine -- from the Latin oleum, meaning beef fat, and the Greek margarite, meaning pearl, this last for its presumably pearlescent luster. The Emperor was hoping that a cheaper butter alternative would benefit the lower classes and the military, neither of which seems to have appreciated it much. Mège-Mouriès sold his patent to Jurgens, a Dutch butter-making company, which eventually became part of Unilever, still one of the world’s major producers of margarine...Butter, traditionally, is yellow, a color ideally derived from plant carotene in the milk of grass-fed cows. Margarine, on the other hand, as made in the industrial vat, is white, the unappetizing shade of grade-school paste. Margarine manufacturers, to better appeal to the public, wanted to tint their product yellow; butter producers objected, claiming that yellow margarine, fraudulently masquerading as butter, was a deliberate ploy to deceive the public. (Butter from corn-fed cows is also anemically pale, and is routinely dyed to turn it an attractive butter-yellow; this practice, however, butter makers argued, was simply a cosmetic tweak.)...In the cash-strapped days of the Depression and during the butter shortages of World War II, however, margarine inexorably began to bypass butter. This was helped along by improvements in the manufacturing process -- margarine was now made from hydrogenated vegetable oils rather than animal fats...In the seemingly unending duel between butter and margarine, butter is winning the latest round: as of 2014, butter had surpassed margarine as America’s favorite spread. We’re now each eating on average 5.6 pounds of butter a year, as opposed to a dwindling 3.5 pounds of margarine. New evidence has shown that the trans fats in margarine may be worse for us health-wise than the saturated fats in butter.
It's difficult to believe all that you hear or see; but on deciding what goes into our bellies or in our heads it would seem that we have to believe or trust someone. Sustainably caught, organic, BPA-free, non-GMO...consumer testing is extensive but not all-encompassing. As of some five years ago less than 2% of all imported seafood in the U.S. was inspected for bacteria or disease (the rate drops to .01% when it comes to drug residue, a rate which is similar for much of our major cities' drinking water although tests done on cities such as San Diego showed high levels of both prescription and illegal drugs in waste water heading out to sea). In the short period since, the population and the demand for food or any sort has skyrocketed, all while the funding and the number of inspectors has declined; the sheer volume of food makes thorough inspections almost impossible. So you may plan to grow and raise your own food off grid but would you know what was in that soil before you moved there, or what's now in the surrounding air or water? (mercury from coal burning --my state's and many other states and countries main source of power generation-- floats in the air and settles in the soil and waterways hundreds of miles away; regulations by the Environmental Protection Agency to control such emissions in the U.S. have recently been overturned by President Trump) Our world has become a world of caveat emptor and it is up to us to discover what we do and do not want to spend our money on or put into our mouths or on our skin. We can join in on the many fads and popular marketing efforts appealing to our hearts but how much of what we hear or read is true (note the recent controversy over the popular Susan G. Komen cancer research drive and how little of your money might actually be going to breast cancer research). Many manufacturers and retailers are trying to and want to stay above board in their "transparency;" but just as with the labels we slap on others in our daily lives such defining can soon lead to polarizing and blaming others -- as a quick test, what image comes to mind when you hear words such as alt-right, CEO, humanitarian, politician, us & them, etc. Politics, religion, big business... when our big institutions begin to fail us, we need to perhaps step back and look at our own values and what's inside of us. We all know people and groups with good if not excellent intentions and goals and many of them are standing there in front of our faces. Sometimes this connected world of ours can send us so far away that we are pulled away from what is right there in front of us...locally raised food, the corner cafe, the charity using every single donated dollar, the friendly proprietor whose skin color doesn't determine your view of his or her outlooks or beliefs or family life. It's all there right in our view, and ironically we can see that nothing is labelled.
--An updated note; A good example of how labels can unconsciously lock our views of others can be seen in the movie Maudie, a true story of a tiny, almost subservient woman who is raked with rheumatoid arthritis but overcomes much of that to become a world-famous artist. One bonus of watching the film is to see a stunning acting portrayal of the real Maude Lewis by actress Sally Hawkins...you will truly be stunned by both people!
Call it what you will, from marketing to false advertising, the labels we see almost everywhere are growing more and more difficult to sort. In the case of a simple brand of ketchup, Smithsonian reported that there were never "57" varieties but just the random lucky numbers 5 and 7 that Henry J. Heinz felt were catchy enough together to move yet another product of his (over 60 at the time, his start to fame actually coming from horseradish and pickles). Cute, you say, but not really damaging. But what about some of the more generic terms that appear on many other products, such as "all natural." As it turns out, the term has no meaning and no regulation here in the U.S. In fact, you could print out this post on something like rice paper and describe the resulting questionably edible version as "100% natural"...no problem (and no violation of truth-in-advertising policy). Hmm, breads, juices, granolas, all those "natural" products? But wait, it's gets even murkier for truth be told, the U.S. falls somewhere in the middle of truth in labeling with some countries being more stringent and others being more lax...so let's jump to pet food.
Should you see the term "human grade" on a can of dog or cat food, well, it might as well say "natural" for the term is equally meaningless and unenforced. Throw in the term "flavor" (such as "real chicken flavor") and it likely means that that concoction was lightly sprayed with something before being packaged (the words "made with real chicken" only requires 3% of a product to be used). As far as "by-products" (such as "beef by-products"), well, just think of all the parts of a cow that would not appear in your grocery store, everything from bones and tendons to unmentionable innards. It can get worse of course when it comes to making products for humans, as noted in a piece in The New Yorker on that latest quasi pyramid scheme of essential oils that will help you sleep, digest, release and basically cure what ails you. This cuts closer to me because two of the largest producers of essential oils originate and currently operate out of my state of Utah, a state known for its bevy of unregulated herbal remedies and vitamin mixtures, not to mention its record level of multi-level-marketing companies such as Nuskin, noni berries and weight loss products (Utah is actually the world leader in MLM companies): Multilevel-marketing companies such as Amway and Mary Kay have long sold people --primarily women-- the idea of building a business by working their social connections. A decade ago, that happened through hosting parties or classes; these days, the chatty, relationship-based sales pressure favored by the companies takes place largely on social media, and the industry is attracting a greater share of young people. In recent years, a number of multilevel-marketing companies that target millennials have cropped up, selling everything from leggings (LuLaRoe) to jewelry (Stella & Dot). Marketing pros advise newcomers to “friend” strangers, reach out to acquaintances from high school, and post daily selfies of themselves enjoying the products they sell...Everyone in the industry studiously avoids any comparison to pyramid schemes, which are illegal, but the structural similarities are hard to ignore...The Food and Drug Administration is charged with preventing sellers of alternative-health products from making unfounded medical claims. Without ample independent testing, companies can’t assert that their products prevent, diagnose, treat, or cure disease. Pick up any bottle of vitamins or supplements and you'll read that disclaimer (albeit in the tiniest of print, a cautionary and mandatory notation so small that many have never read or seen it even though it's printed on every bottle of vitamins and supplements): These statements have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration. This product is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure or prevent any disease. Simple reason?...laboratory testing is often prevented (in many cases, by Congress) or results in unsubstantiated results for the claims (should you see a bottle without such a notice, be extra leery for it is likely home-made or being illegally distributed). So then what's with such trends as pomegranate juice or goji berries or eating raw kale (which is now showing signs of thyroid damage if taken in large quantities)? Here's one view from Web MD: Manufacturers aren't required to test their products for safety and effectiveness. Some supplement ingredients have been tested in animal or human studies. For example, folic acid has been shown in studies to reduce the risk of birth defects in pregnant women. However, other supplement ingredients haven't been studied well, or at all...The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) does regulate dietary supplements; however, it treats them like foods rather than medications. Unlike drug manufacturers, the makers of supplements don’t have to show their products are safe or effective before selling them on the market. And to think that much of this may have started with butter.
In a story some years ago in National Geographic, butter (which has been with us for 4000 years) came under attack when beef tallow was made into a spread back in 1869: In that year French chemist Hippolyte Mège-Mouriès --spurred on by a hefty financial prize offered by Emperor Louis Napoleon III-- patented a lower priced spread made from beef tallow. He dubbed it oleomargarine -- from the Latin oleum, meaning beef fat, and the Greek margarite, meaning pearl, this last for its presumably pearlescent luster. The Emperor was hoping that a cheaper butter alternative would benefit the lower classes and the military, neither of which seems to have appreciated it much. Mège-Mouriès sold his patent to Jurgens, a Dutch butter-making company, which eventually became part of Unilever, still one of the world’s major producers of margarine...Butter, traditionally, is yellow, a color ideally derived from plant carotene in the milk of grass-fed cows. Margarine, on the other hand, as made in the industrial vat, is white, the unappetizing shade of grade-school paste. Margarine manufacturers, to better appeal to the public, wanted to tint their product yellow; butter producers objected, claiming that yellow margarine, fraudulently masquerading as butter, was a deliberate ploy to deceive the public. (Butter from corn-fed cows is also anemically pale, and is routinely dyed to turn it an attractive butter-yellow; this practice, however, butter makers argued, was simply a cosmetic tweak.)...In the cash-strapped days of the Depression and during the butter shortages of World War II, however, margarine inexorably began to bypass butter. This was helped along by improvements in the manufacturing process -- margarine was now made from hydrogenated vegetable oils rather than animal fats...In the seemingly unending duel between butter and margarine, butter is winning the latest round: as of 2014, butter had surpassed margarine as America’s favorite spread. We’re now each eating on average 5.6 pounds of butter a year, as opposed to a dwindling 3.5 pounds of margarine. New evidence has shown that the trans fats in margarine may be worse for us health-wise than the saturated fats in butter.
It's difficult to believe all that you hear or see; but on deciding what goes into our bellies or in our heads it would seem that we have to believe or trust someone. Sustainably caught, organic, BPA-free, non-GMO...consumer testing is extensive but not all-encompassing. As of some five years ago less than 2% of all imported seafood in the U.S. was inspected for bacteria or disease (the rate drops to .01% when it comes to drug residue, a rate which is similar for much of our major cities' drinking water although tests done on cities such as San Diego showed high levels of both prescription and illegal drugs in waste water heading out to sea). In the short period since, the population and the demand for food or any sort has skyrocketed, all while the funding and the number of inspectors has declined; the sheer volume of food makes thorough inspections almost impossible. So you may plan to grow and raise your own food off grid but would you know what was in that soil before you moved there, or what's now in the surrounding air or water? (mercury from coal burning --my state's and many other states and countries main source of power generation-- floats in the air and settles in the soil and waterways hundreds of miles away; regulations by the Environmental Protection Agency to control such emissions in the U.S. have recently been overturned by President Trump) Our world has become a world of caveat emptor and it is up to us to discover what we do and do not want to spend our money on or put into our mouths or on our skin. We can join in on the many fads and popular marketing efforts appealing to our hearts but how much of what we hear or read is true (note the recent controversy over the popular Susan G. Komen cancer research drive and how little of your money might actually be going to breast cancer research). Many manufacturers and retailers are trying to and want to stay above board in their "transparency;" but just as with the labels we slap on others in our daily lives such defining can soon lead to polarizing and blaming others -- as a quick test, what image comes to mind when you hear words such as alt-right, CEO, humanitarian, politician, us & them, etc. Politics, religion, big business... when our big institutions begin to fail us, we need to perhaps step back and look at our own values and what's inside of us. We all know people and groups with good if not excellent intentions and goals and many of them are standing there in front of our faces. Sometimes this connected world of ours can send us so far away that we are pulled away from what is right there in front of us...locally raised food, the corner cafe, the charity using every single donated dollar, the friendly proprietor whose skin color doesn't determine your view of his or her outlooks or beliefs or family life. It's all there right in our view, and ironically we can see that nothing is labelled.
--An updated note; A good example of how labels can unconsciously lock our views of others can be seen in the movie Maudie, a true story of a tiny, almost subservient woman who is raked with rheumatoid arthritis but overcomes much of that to become a world-famous artist. One bonus of watching the film is to see a stunning acting portrayal of the real Maude Lewis by actress Sally Hawkins...you will truly be stunned by both people!
Comments
Post a Comment
What do YOU think? Good, bad or indifferent, this blog is happy to hear your thoughts...criticisms, corrections and suggestions always welcome.