Header graphic for print

Food Safety News

Breaking news for everyone's consumption

Sorry Mrs. O, But Jumping Jacks Won’t Cut It

At a recent summit on childhood obesity, the first lady announced a shift in her well-known Let’s Move campaign — away from food reform and toward an increased focus on exercise. Instead of “forcing [children] to eat their vegetables,” she told her audience, “it’s getting them to go out there and have fun.”

Yes, you heard that right. The first lady actually said that eating vegetables is a chore. And that playing is a preferable focus for her campaign because it’s easier.

In February 2010, when the first lady announced a campaign to “end childhood obesity within a generation,” I was immediately skeptical. I worried that “Let’s Move” signaled an over-emphasis on physical activity, a much safer political issue than eating habits, and one that Big Food gladly embraces.

But when I took a closer look, I was pleasantly surprised to see that three of the four issues areas initially identified by the campaign were food-related. (A fifth issue has since been added.) The goals or “pillars” of the campaign are: 1) improving access to healthy, affordable food; 2) providing healthy food in schools; 3) empowering parents and caregivers; 4) increasing physical activity; and 5) creating a healthy start for children.

It’s hard to argue with any of those worthy causes, and it’s important to have the first lady bring attention to issues such as food deserts, and to serve as a national spokesperson in a way we’ve not seen before. I have also given praise where praise was due, such as when the first lady recommended — as part of a checklist for daycare centers to follow — significant limits on screen time for children.

And while the White House insists that food is very much still on the agenda, it’s hard to ignore the potential for politics going into an election year. (When New York University professor Marion Nestle recently dared to question the first lady’s renewed emphasis on exercise, she got set straight by White House chef and Let’s Move advisor Sam Kass; that’s how touchy this subject is.)

Exercise is fun, but doesn’t match the science

Putting politics aside for a moment, let’s talk research, which can often get lost in the shuffle or, worse, distorted by corporate interests.

Obesity expert Dr. Yoni Freedhoff, assistant professor of family medicine at the University of Ottawa, says the first lady’s focus on physical activity to help “end childhood obesity in a generation” is misguided. More importantly, he says, it’s not evidence-based.

He pointed me to many scientific studies showing that physical activity, while important for other reasons, has not been shown to be effective in preventing childhood obesity. (See here, here, here, and here.) On the contrary, data shows that an increase in food intake alone explains the rise in obesity in children.

Children’s diets have changed so drastically in the last few decades, with the increase in calories, for example, due to soda and fast food so large, that moderate increases in exercise are not likely to make a difference.

As Freedhoff explains, it’s a “testament to the simple fact that it’s far more difficult to burn calories than it is to consume them.”

To be clear, exercise does have many health benefits; it just shouldn’t be used to distract us from overconsumption and marketing of junk food. Also, lots of skinny kids suffer from diet-related health problems, including allergies.

So if science isn’t driving the exercise bandwagon, what is?

Playing it safe

After nearly two years, it’s clear that Let’s Move is steering away from anything that challenges the food industry. In fact, the campaign organizers appear eager to form corporate partnerships. For example, the first lady hailed Walmart’s so-called “healthy food initiative” as a new “nutrition charter.” Of course, Walmart hasn’t exactly kept its promises when it comes to the environment, so we have little reason to trust the company when it comes to nutrition.

Moreover, the first lady’s deafening silence over the past few months during extremely heated public battles over children’s diets gives us more proof than we ever needed that she is either unwilling or unable to take on the hard political issues.

While Mrs. Obama certainly showed leadership last year to help pass the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act to improve school food, she hasn’t followed through. The recent hostile takeover of the USDA’s school food regulations by Congress on behalf of the frozen food lobby was one such example.

From the beginning, Let’s Move has also been mostly MIA on the extremely contentious and intractable problem of junk food marketing to children.

In one exception, the first lady gave a strong speech in March 2010 to the Grocery Manufacturers Association (Big Food lobbyists) imploring food companies to clean up their act. At the time, she asked: “What does it mean when so many parents are finding that their best efforts are undermined by an avalanche of advertisements aimed at their kids?”

But her admonishments had little impact. Instead, the food industry has launched a no-holds-barred attack on an attempt by the federal government to place reasonable, science-based, voluntary restrictions on food marketing to children.

To make its case to the feds, kids’ cereal giant General Mills went so far as to argue that getting kids to eat more fruits and vegetables would hurt the nation’s economy because food costs “would increase by a staggering amount.”

The argument was based on a bogus economic study, which warned that demand for fruits and vegetables would skyrocket, resulting in almost $500 billion more spent on imported food and $30 billion less on domestically grown grain. As Donald Cohen, who
recently uncovered this absurd claim, noted:

Even if the voluntary guidelines were that effective and their study was accurate, it’s audacious marketing spin to turn an overwhelmingly positive victory for public health into a big government, job killing attack on freedom.

This one-two punch comes from the very industry players with whom Mrs. Obama claimed she could “find common ground.” And it has left many advocates feeling defeated.

So when, instead of speaking out on behalf of the millions of children who will continue to be served french fries and pizza in school and get bombarded daily with Happy Meal ads, the first lady announces (as she did this week) that Let’s Move has broken a record for jumping jacks, it’s disappointing to say the least.

Here’s what Freedhoff had to say to the first lady:

I‘d tell her that we should be striving to change the environment so as to make lower-calorie, less-processed food choices the default. Let’s Move may be politically palatable, but “Let’s Cook” would likely have a far greater impact on health.

Let’s Cook? Uh-oh, sounds like a job killer.

————————

Michele Simon is a public health lawyer specializing in industry marketing and lobbying tactics. She is the author of Appetite for Profit: How the Food Industry Undermines Our Health and How to Fight Back. “Sorry, Mrs. O, but jumping jacks aren’t enough” was first posted Dec. 15, 2011 on Grist.

© Food Safety News
  • doc raymond

    If memory serves me correctly, we have already read a Simon piece at Food Safety News criticizing the First Lady for advocating for more exerecise in an election year. As I said then obesity has a simple cause: more calories ingested than expended. Kids spend way too much time watching TV, DVD movies, playing electronic games and texting etc. Read here, here, here and here. We had fast foods and sugared cereals back in the 50s. so why attack them now for the new change in our body habitus, and why attack them every other day at Food Safety News?

  • Steve

    ee Doc, surely you must realize the 1950′s were a relatively benign era compared to now. When it comes to marketing to children the food companies are playing heavy-duty hardball. The fact is that kids represent a major consumer segment and have become increasingly targeted by the expanding food processing/junk food industry.
    And studies are showing there is much more to the ole’ simplistic calories-in/exercise-out paradigm. There is the triggering of genetic components involved — and food quality (or rather, lack of quality) is a major determinant in diabetes…
    The key sentence in this article is:
    “Children’s diets have changed so drastically in the last few decades, with the increase in calories, for example, due to soda and fast food so large, that moderate increases in exercise are not likely to make a difference.”
    And this IS a major story because the White House is indeed feeling the pressure from Big Food — and the re-emphasis in Let’s Move reflects it… For our kid’s sake, the more we know about all this the better…

  • James

    Have they re-written the Law of Thermodynamics since the 1950s? Sorry, some of us may be getting old but we’re not that stupid yet. We remember all too well the nuclear attack scaremongers and aluminum siding salesmen. This anti-exercise crusade looks and smells awfully familiar.

  • http://www,marlerblog.com bill marler

    I wrote this a year ago and seems spot on — HOWARD!
    Can we all get along?
    When police-beaten Rodney King uttered those words nearly two decades ago, I am not so sure that many took much notice — even with the 24-hour cable news chatter.
    Since then, as the Internet has allowed everyone to communicate with everyone, and our politics have become so very polarized, common courtesy has at times been kicked to the curb much like Mr. King was.
    Comments on the Internet so often have taken on the tenor of the town hall meetings surrounding the health care debate. Comments have become vicious, facts and arguments are damned, and personal attacks are the weapon of choice.
    Comments on Food Safety News, as well as on other sites we are sure, tend to be made by people who disagree with a point made. Our bet is that you seldom hear from people who agree (although it has been known to happen). On Food Safety News, our policy has been to accept all comments, but we fear that some commentators stifle meaningful debate on the facts by “going personal.”
    A person who comments frequently here sent me an email this past week suggesting that Food Safety News consider a new comment policy. He may well have a point. He also pointed us to the Grist website (disclosure – we are a Grist donor) and Grist’s posting rules, which we not only think make sense, but will adopt in full:
    1. Don’t be a jerk. Nobody likes jerks.
    2. Don’t use profanity. The English language is vast and magnificent.
    3. Don’t be a troll. (Troll: Commenter who makes outrageous or provocative statements purely in order to derail discussion.) You know who you are.
    4. No spam, no solicitation, no links to porn, no Internet detritus of similar ilk. Sell us on your point of view, not your Super-Slanket!
    5. No personal attacks at the author or fellow commenter. Substance, people. Substance.
    6. Seriously, don’t be a jerk.
    We are going to see how this works before we delete any comments or try a different policy.
    Maybe, we all can take it down a notch.

  • Andrea

    I am pretty critical of the Obamas on a number of issues but I don’t see how anyone can criticize the Let’s Move campaign to encourage kids to be more active. We know that kids are less active due to tv, video games, etc. so I really don’t see the harm in this and it’s going to be much easier than trying to change all the school meals to be healthier. I don’t see children’s diets becoming healthier unless parents change them (not government).

  • bobby

    @andrea, i agree. also i can’t tell what this writer is tryign to say. very vague and wishy-washy. and her citing of the study and then the quote denoucing that study, doesn’t seem to jive with her interpretation. maybe i’m misread but i think it’s more likely this is poorly written

  • Alison Demarest

    Simon doesn’t even know what she doesn’t know. The White House already launched “Let’s Cook” as part of the Let’s Move! campaign.
    More importantly, why does a great outlet like Food Safety News publish such nonsense from someone who clearly will never be satisfied with anything the First Lady does–unless it’s demolishing food companies? Every time she puts her hand on a keyboard, Simon sounds like a bitter whiner–offering no solutions for public health, just criticism.

  • Dave

    I’m frankly surprised that anyone would negate the effects of exercise on weight and health. Not only is exercise a critical and essential part of maintaining a healthy weight and strong body, the overwhelming evidence is that diet changes alone do not work.
    Had the author actually researched the issue, she might have found the many studies that look at the change in physiology that occurs with exercise – changes that help to reduce appetite, increase sugar processing, increase taste bud sensitivity to sweets (thereby helping to achieve satisfaction earlier and with less sugar), and initiate other changes at the cellular and neural level. These changes are essential to successful weight loss over time and many do not occur with simple changes in diet alone.
    I wonder how long it took for the author to find an academic to support the poorly-supported position promoted in the article?
    My suggestion: leave the First Lady alone and concentrate on real issues like toxic pollutants in foods and promotion of bad nutritional habits by corporations that benefit from an ignorant populace.