How now brown cow?

Let's face it, one of the joys of childhood is a cool, freshly stirred glass of chocolate milk. And, let's face it some more, even in adulthood is it a welcome treat. Results of a study were published pointing to the health benefits of chocolate milk. Good news!

Since the article linked above appeared in the New York Times, there have been many more articles and blogs touting the benefits of brown milk (Do all kids think brown milk comes from brown cows? I had a "pet" brown cow when I was little - her name was Brownie... and, her milk? Not brown - so disappointing!).

Many of the subsequent articles on chocolate milk have talked about the benefits published in the study and have omitted critical facts. One of the problems with studies and how they are shared with the public is the person publishing includes and omits information for the sake of column size and special interests. Also, I think it is important to know this study took place in Barcelona, Spain where they have different standards and culture on the quality of food.

To be clear and for the sake of science -- this study gave participants 20-gram sachets of soluble cocoa powder with instructions they mix it with skim milk.

This is not the same as buying a gallon of chocolate milk at the convenience store. This is not the same as mixing some Nesquick (Ingredients? Sugar, cocoa processed with alkali, soy lecithin, salt, artificial and natural flavors, maltodextrin) into milk from cows pumped full of hormones and antibiotics. This is not the same as a chocolate milk shake from your favorite fast food place.

Let's help each other be more aware and educated consumers. Please don't fall for the marketing spin put on every study for the sake of sales (the Nesquick web page already touts the "benefits" of chocolate milk!).

If we stick together and share good information, we can improve our health. You can buy organic cocoa powder online. This one has 1 ingredient Organic Cocoa Powder (100%). Now that is much better. Cheers!

Follow-Up on Manwich

Up early, good exercise and some time this morning reading comments on yesterday's redux blog on Manwich led me to see if there were any updates on the ConAgra website since they didn't have nutritional information when last I checked. Goodness... are we going to have fun with this for a few days!

Yes, ConAgra has updated and launched a new site for Product Nutrition information. Excellent, I thought. I will go and search for Manwich and see what I can find. Should be easy, right? ConAgra would want their consumers to quickly find the information they are seeking, right? Ha!

I would consider myself a pretty savvy web user and... this is one of the most confusing, difficult-to-use search features I've ever encountered. For the record, the idea of the web is to make it easy for people to find what they are looking for. Can I just have a search box to type in Manwich and get the nutritional information? No! 

When I tried the search box and entered Manwich, I did get a nifty news release on the Investor Relations page that talks about the release of the "full serving of vegetables" campaign and says: 

• "new television advertising campaign promoting the full serving of vegetables found in each serving of Manwich"
• "mark Manwich’s first new creative campaign in three years"
• "new strategic message requires a deeper communication with the target consumer"
• "promoting the full serving of vegetables strategic messaging and encouraging moms to feel good about serving Manwich to their families more frequently"
• "lighthearted spots feature a young girl who is dressed as a Manwich for a school play while her classmates are dressed as vegetables. She touts the wholesomeness of Manwich to her classmates and family."

Excuse me? This a strategic message to encourage Moms to feel good about serving Manwich? How about a strategic message to help Moms understand what is healthy and good for their family? How about a commercial with only the vegetables on stage? 

There are so many things wrong with this, I don't even know where to begin. Discuss and share. Until we get together and point out the absurdity of such things the people who need good and honest advice the most will continue to be subjected to "strategic messages."

Tomorrow? An experiment in actually using ConAgra's Product Nutrition Search. Stay tuned!!!

Change Food Advertising: One Parent at a Time

After Monday's post on Princess Soup, Jane Brody and the NY Times have joined the bandwagon to talk about marketing food to kids. Jane's blog contains some important data about how food companies skirt the rules when determining what they market to kids.

Bottom line - don't allow your kids to watch TV. It is the greatest power of consumers and parents. If the TV is off, the kids won't watch the commercials and won't want the sugary cereal and sodium-laden soup. If the kids aren't watching the commercials, the food companies will abandon the commercial market (who knows what they'll next come up with, but we'll deal with it when it comes). This will drive down the cost of television commercials making way to the organizations that support whole, natural food to begin to buy commercial time for things like broccoli and kale. Go kale!

Food Marketing to Kids

Princess Soup raised my awareness. Today, I did a little digging on the business of marketing food to our children. According to this report, published in 2007 by the Kaiser Family Foundation, children ages 2-7 see an average of:

• 17 minutes of advertising each day
• 12 food ads each day or more than 4,400 a year

Food companies spend billions of dollars each year advertising food to our children. Few, if any, of those dollars are devoted to whole, natural fruits and vegetables.

Am I the only one who considers this is problem? Until we can change the advertising rules your best bet is to turn off the television.

Princess Soup?

Last week, I had the opportunity to spend some time with my favorite three year old. We visited the local grocery store to pick up a few items and, since this three year old is my niece, I was willing to oblige her requests when I asked her, "What would you like to eat?" Her response, "Princess Soup." I told her I didn't know what princess soup was, assuming this was her name for something she enjoys (she is a princess, after all) and not something one could actually identify on the grocery store shelves. And...

I was sad to discover "Princess Soup" actually exists. Apparently Disney and Campbell's Soup have combined forces to sell food to children. Sigh.

Do Squirrels Call the Vet?

Mobile phones are ubiquitous. The number of Americans with a mobile phone is 89% (as of June 2009). How many wild animals have mobile phones? Zero. Or at least I have not witnessed any animals with mobile phones. Google doesn't even know what to do when I seek such data. Go ahead and try it... interesting results.

When Americans feel sick, we call a doctor. Not only do we call a doctor, but we expect the doctor to cure us. And cure us NOW. Give us a pill, a shot, a surgery, a something (an anything!) to make us feel better.

Here is an interesting thought... What do squirrels do when they feel ill? Do they call a veterinarian? They cannot, even if they had the desire. They don't have mobile phones.

What they do is perhaps the best model for what we humans might consider. They rest, they eat a specific plant or root (proven effective by eons of squirrel experience), they drink more water, or their animal family gathers to say goodbye.

I'm not proposing we stop calling our doctors when we don't feel well. I'm not suggesting we walk away from our American medical system in favor of walking into the forest and eating plants. I'm also not suggesting we call a vet when we're not feeling well (though I do contend my animals get far better health care than many humans I know).

What I am suggesting is each of us (yes, I mean you and me) consider our bodies intuitively know what is best for us. I am suggesting we stop assigning responsibility for our health to someone else. Be your own primary care doctor. Be your own caretaker. Make the choices you know are best for your health and well being. Not the choices some "expert" suggests, certainly not the choices a marketing campaign suggests, and, in many cases not the choices your family exhibits.

Health is personal. Take a hint from nature. Make your own health your own first mission.

Mini Soda + Mini Snacks = Mini Me?

Coca-Cola announced today it will produce 90-calorie mini-cans of soda. This follows the trend of 100 calorie snack packs started a few years ago. Good idea? Let us consider...

A can of classic Coke is 12 ounces and 140 calories, or 11.68 calories per ounce. On Coca-Cola's website the nutrition information says 8 ounces of classic Coke is 97 calories, or 12.125 calories per ounce. First of all, I'm confused about the discrepancy. Secondly, the can sitting in front of me claims the serving size is 1 can. Why is the nutrition information on the website stated in terms of 8 ounces? And, why are the numbers different? Classic Coke is classic Coke. Yes, or no? Who remembers the "New Coke" debacle? And, I digress...

Let us average the calories per ounce from these two data points and presume an ounce of Coke classic is 11.89 calories per ounce. Therefore, the new "mini-cans" of Coke will be roughly 7.5 ounces.

I'm presented with so many thoughts here, which to cover first???

1. Is 12 ounces of Coke classic actually considered one serving?
2. If 12 ounces is one serving, why is the nutrition information on their website posted based on 8 ounces?
3. Why would they produce a new product only 1/2 ounce less than the nutrition information included on the website?
4. Is Coca-Cola merely attempting to get "credit" for being concerned about the health of their consumers?
5. Is this in response to PepsiCo's announcement it is joining the "Healthy Weight Community Foundation"? Coca-Cola had to do something, after all!
6. Is this simply a marketing ploy to get the Coke name in the press?
7. Is this a brilliant strategy to increase revenue and make stockholders happy?

To round out the discussion, let's peer into a little history. This website has a great look back at the creation of 100 calorie snack packs. Some highlights:

• Started in 2004 by Kraft
• Within three years, the sales of 100 calorie packs was more than $200 million
• Sales grew 28% in one year alone
• The consumer pays between 16 and 279 percent more by buying 100 calorie packs

Wow.

I believe we all will support things to make it easier to make better food choices. Yes, it is tough to take one cookie out of the pack and leave the rest of the row intact. It is harder to eat one chip. In some ways, the 100 calorie packs are good for us. We have to make a more conscious choice to open another 100 calorie pack; it is much less obvious to take another handful from a big bag (who will notice, anyway?).

And, yet, I'm left with a little tickle of doubt. Is Coca-Cola only really creating mini-cans to make it easier for their devoted fans to enjoy a Coke without over-indulging? Or, would they like sales to increase by 20-plus percent this year and would they like their consumers to pay over 15 percent more for the product?

A greater number of smaller cans, just like a greater number of smaller calorie packs, are not good for our Earth. More manufacturing cost, more waste, more energy to create and distribute, more trash. Why are we creating and supporting (with our purchasing power) products that undermine our own willpower and strength to make good choices while they are damaging the environment?

Isn't it better to spend the time, money and energy educating each other (and our kids) about real nutrition? Coca-Cola is an American institution and sometimes there is nothing better than a ice-cold glass of Coke. And, for our health, only sometimes (have you read the ingredient label?)!

Perhaps it would make more sense if Coca-Cola spent their valuable time and resources by sending each person in America one 12-ounce can of Coke every three months to enjoy at will. We could look forward to our quarterly can of Coke, enjoy it without guilt and feel good about our health and our concern for the environment. Or, we can fool ourselves into thinking the people making money from us are really only creating new products for our benefit.