A cursory survey of a google search of the same title will present thousands of results which are contradictory to each other. From NCBI articles to Buzzfeed articles, and from saturated to trans fats, there seems to be no common consensus regarding the effect of fats on our physical wellbeing. In this modest piece, I will not attempt to answer this question, but rather analyze the effects the onslaught of nutritional data can have on the general populace. The aspect I want to introduce as underlying the methodologies contributing to mass disinformation is the politicization of information and data to further one’s own end. This act is viewed in media groups, state advisory groups, and lobbying groups.
The essential feature we must address before moving forward is my claim of politicization. This first requires a definition of politics which is general to all and devoid of particular characteristics. This definition is that politics is simply the framing of an action through a value system. For example, legislation reducing the alcohol percentage in beer from 5% to 3.2% is an action that would not exist without values. But for values of LDS piety, or aversion to acts correlated with alcohol, the legislation would not exist. An essential feature of all politics is that all of life is political; that is, no action exists without a cause.
We are now experiencing the politics of nutrition, such as the FDA banning trans fats. While Forbes is a modestly respectable journal, no media news outlet is free from political action, especially when it comes to something as relatable and general as food. The action of publishing this type of article would not exist if it wasn’t for the values of making money, and while not evil in and of itself, the desperate pursuit of profit can lead to sensationalism in media.
The next aspect of nutritional politicization occurs in state sponsored advisory groups. As an established organization of a republican democracy (in the US), state advisory groups are an attempt to free the profit motive from information. However, state advisory boards, like all facets of life, engage in political action. Regarding saturated fats, the USDA writes that
Cut back on foods containing saturated fat including:
desserts and baked goods, such as cakes, cookies, donuts, pastries, and croissants
many cheeses and foods containing cheese, such as pizza
sausages, hot dogs, bacon, and ribs
ice cream and other dairy desserts
fried potatoes (French fries) – if fried in a saturated fat or hydrogenated oil
regular ground beef and cuts of meat with visible fat
fried chicken and other chicken dishes with the skin
whole milk and full-fat dairy foods
https://www.choosemyplate.gov/saturated-unsaturated-and-trans-fats
However, despite asserting that all of these foods should be avoided because of their association with fat, they have ignored that these listed products contain processed sugars, salt, and lactose (a form of sugar) which may impede your physical health as much as fats, possibly. The values of promoting the general welfare are only as good as the understanding of correlations is. See the AHA claiming that coconut oil is bad.
The final group which engages in nutritional politics is lobbying groups, who like media groups have a vested interest in framing actions through value sets. So much so that their salary depends upon it. Lobbying in the US is a billion dollar industry, and agricultural industries upon which fats are produced- both plant-based and farmed- are large industry with pecuniary interests. Its not a shock then that heterogenous products would be pitted against each other with the ease of exploitation the connotation of terms such as good and bad through marketing as well as lobbying.
Everyone is subject to political action. At its most fundamental level, every aspect of life is political. However, the action of using data to make a claim to your own benefit on a pecuniary basis has consequences which, least of all, result in an extreme general misunderstanding of a single topic. This is the case with fats. Are they good? Bad? Honestly, I do not know. There are simply too many vested interests making claims.
Data/Society/Decision-making Spring 2019 