The problem of hyper-stimuli

Solving the problem, they created

The problem of food as a hyper-stimuli has reached the halls of power (after all it creates major issues for any public health system) and with that the government policy makers have turned their minds to possible solutions. The ones they have come up with are predictably bureaucratic things like a sugar tax. But increasing the price based on one specific aspect of processed food is not likely to have much of an effect as – at least for most of us – it doesn't go to the reason why we go for processed food over food cooked from scratch (that is already a more cost effective way of eating than the former). In other words, a tax doesn't go to the three things that make processed food appealing: that it is palatable, portable, and plentiful.

The issue is the individualists rebuke to various proposed top down policies to encourage healthy eating – though right in its criticism that it will be ineffective – the possibility for individual solutions – i.e. will power to just stop eating hyper-processed food – is going to be very difficult for most people. Our entire western lifestyle is predicated on the existence of these foods. We work at least 9 hours a day which means that we either must bring or buy the food we need for the time we are at work (or school in the case of kids). Whether we pack or purchase the food we consume makes little difference. The food we pack is probably shelf-stable stuff that can easily survive in a lunchbox (unless you cook in bulk and freeze food to bring like I do – but even I don't manage that 5 days a week) and the food we buy we have no control over and is probably packed with stuff to make it tastier (or hyper-palatable).

For most of us in the western world we are money rich and time poor. An increase in the price of store-bought food (such as the result of a sugar tax) would deter few of us from the convenience of buying not cooking what we eat.

If we are going to solve the obesity crisis one of two things needs to happen. The first is that the availability of hyper-processed foods needs to cease. This is basically impossible when all the economic incentives are in favour of them continuing and essentially mean waving a wand and doing away with most of the foods that currently stock supermarket shelves. The second is that our lifestyles need to change so that food that is hyper-processed doesn't have the same key function in our lives, and for that we need a completely different food culture.

A Food Subculture

Many of the countries that have survived the onslaught of hyper-processed food better than most are the ones which already had a culture where quality of food is the defining factor as well as communal consumption. It is very hard to change the entire culture of a country, but it is much easier to create "cliques" or "subcultures" that differ from the main one.

People that want to buffer themselves from the dominant food culture that creates the conditions for the obesity crisis should find friends that want to cook together, eat together, and share food they have prepared in advance. In a previous house I lived in we used to share cooking and do a "meal swap" where we would take it in turns to pack work lunches for each other (which was a great way to prevent the boredom that comes with always eating your own cooking – which happens even to the best cooks among us).

A key part of a good food culture is re-socialising eating so that it doesn't happen in front of a screen or in the privacy of our own home. When we eat socially, we eat slower, which gives the "I feel full" feeling time to kick in, it also creates a possibility of feedback from people where we need it to curb unhealthy eating habits. We are far less likely to engage in food habits we know are bad for us if all our food is eaten in front of others who are likely to engage in a healthy amount of "food-shaming".

Communal or bulk cooking and eating are also easier in a busy life. It takes almost the same amount of time to cook for 2 people as it does for 16 people. Particularly if you have help with the prep tasks like chopping everything. Leftovers from dinner can then be taken as lunch the next day.

A communal cooking and eating group would be something easy to create within a local area where each night dinner is cooked and eaten at a different persons house or even if the cooking happened one day a week and the leftovers taken for eating the rest of the week.

It is probably the easiest form of community to create, everyone loves food, and aside from a general need to agree rules about what ingredients can be cooked with, no shared values are particularly necessary.