Neither Big Energy Nor Big Food Are Behaving Princely Re: Public Health
I’ve often written that Big Energy is on the same path that Big Tobacco chose to take in the mid 20th Century: knowingly causing significant damage to the population’s health and safety, but covering it up as long as possible. In fact, here’s a piece summarizing the huge financial forces behind climate change denial.
But if you’re looking to award a prize for egregious corporate behavior that involves obscuring the negative effects of your product, you can’t throw out Big Food. I have several colleagues whose mission in life is to deal with the skyrocketing rates of childhood obesity and diabetes, both functions of the lack of decent nutrition, particularly for inner-city kids. One of these associates just sent me this article that aired on National Public Radio, and suggests that the food industry may be the 21st Century incarnation of what the tobacco industry perpetrated over the past 60-or-so years. It wouldn’t surprise me if they were greeted with the same barrage of litigation — and the same public loathing.
Good food is readily available; people do not need to buy junk food. If people stopped buying junk food, the manufacturers would stop making it. That said, one could question the ethics of catering to the destructive desires of the public, especially when it drives up national health care costs.
About a year ago, I complained to Smith’s supermarket that I was unable to find healthful breakfast cereal in their store. After complaining a few times, they finally corrected the situation. Meanwhile, with some inconvenience, I was able to buy healthful cereal elsewhere.
People assert that in some areas, healthful food is not available. But have they complained to store proprietors?
Fast food need not be a problem either; at Subway sandwich shops, it is easy to get healthful food. People can boycott McDonald’s and other places where it is next to impossible to get healthful food.
With adequate education, coupled with labeling requirements, I doubt that restrictive laws are required.
Adequate city planning would also improve national health. There are many places where it is impossible to go any place without motorized transportation. Sometimes there aren’t even any sidewalks. Surely better city planning would encourage more walking and bicycle riding.
At one time, kids either walked or rode their bicycles to school. Now schools are often located in remote areas forcing kids to take a ‘bus to school or be driven by their parents. Laws are partly responsible for that; laws often require a large campus size forcing schools to move to remote areas when they expand.
Please see more below /my Page, http://www.c-hcci-kohut.com
The organic agriculture food farming, with earth magnetic supporting, – without a pesticide-herbicide and chemically-fertilize.
The ultra clean hyper eff.. ICE technology and the food production of my art is not allowed, not expected knowledge because it isn´t patented and will be never patented, In a hegemony monopoly strategy and plan protocol based society, a 500-600 billions of $ worth knowledge isn´t allowed if it IS NOT A CORPORATISM OWN.
A paradigm change of the ICengine& energy-future
http://www.c-hcci-kohut.com
Yours Sincerely G. Kohut
“Unlimited bio-economics evolution of ICengine & energy technology/Shamsergyharvester”