Category: Food policy

Over 60% of chronically hungry people are women and girls, a stark indicator that food insecurity is profoundly impacted by equality, or more accurately, the lack thereof. Genuine progress towards global food security is fundamentally tied to achieving and sustaining social, economic, and gender equality. A system that functions unequally by design will produce unequal outcomes, creating a vicious cycle of poverty and hunger.

In his seminal work *In Defense of Food*, Michael Pollan famously introduced the term "edible foodlike substance" to categorize the highly processed products that dominate the modern diet. This concept has fundamentally reshaped how many people think about what they eat, challenging consumers to distinguish between nourishing food and engineered imitations. As Pollan argues, a health claim on a package should be seen as a warning sign, not a benefit.

Over 40% of all added caloric sweeteners in the US once came from high fructose corn syrup (HFCS), a stark contrast to many nations. The question of why the US allows high fructose corn syrup is not a simple one, involving a confluence of factors from historical events and agricultural policies to consumer economics.

According to reports from industry trackers like My Health Forward, Whole Foods Market's global purchasing team officially does not procure Apeel-treated items, yet total clarity is hindered by regional purchasing practices. This situation leaves consumers questioning, "Does Whole Foods use Apeel in the USA?" and highlights persistent transparency issues within the supply chain.

According to World Population Review, over 38 countries have banned the cultivation of genetically modified crops, leading many consumers to wonder: where are bioengineered foods banned? The answer is complex, with varied regulations across continents, including outright prohibitions, cultivation bans, and strict labeling laws. This global landscape is shaped by diverse factors, from public opinion to national trade policies.

The United States first introduced a food guide in 1943 during World War II, but the 1992 Food Guide Pyramid remains the most iconic and controversial dietary tool. Despite its ubiquity, the pyramid faced significant criticism for scientific inaccuracies, industry lobbying, and failing to address the complexities of modern nutrition.

The World Health Organization (WHO) has recommended that individuals reduce their intake of 'free sugars' to less than 10% of their total energy intake, with a further reduction to below 5% for additional health benefits. This recommendation underscores a widespread public health crisis driven by excessive sugar consumption and raises a provocative question: should we ban sugar altogether?

In 2023, approximately 13.5 percent of U.S. households, or 47.4 million people, faced food insecurity, revealing a profound struggle for many to consistently access nutritious food. Understanding why is it so hard to get healthy food in America requires a look beyond individual choices to the systemic issues at play.

The Dietary Guidelines for Americans (DGA) are mandated by law to be updated and published by the U.S. Departments of Agriculture (USDA) and Health and Human Services (HHS) at least once every five years. This regular cycle is essential for keeping nutrition recommendations aligned with the latest scientific evidence.

According to a 2024 report by the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), over 733 million people were undernourished, highlighting the urgent need for a more equitable food system. This pressing issue is precisely what is the good food for all agenda designed to address, aiming to ensure everyone has access to healthy, affordable, and sustainable food.