Rob Rhinehart thought he spent to much efforts and time on food preparing, so he came up with Soylent. An odorless beige cocktail supposed to offer you the ”nutrients required by the body to function”. He uses vitamins, minerals, and macronutrients like essential amino acids, carbohydrates, and fat. Says that he “also added nonessentials like antioxidants and probiotics and lately have been experimenting with nootropics.”
Other than the name - from a science fiction film - and the food laziness talk, Rob thinks his creation as a new way to approach food and global hunger problems. I also though about the connexions we can make towards design. Soylent is designed for optimization, function efficiency. I know human factors like culture, economics and tastiness are never out of the question. But it is interesting to see how “minimalistic” food can be and how wide food design potential is. I don’t know about you, but I can’t see food like a white t-shirt I put on everyday. The considerations are important, but there’s more than that.
Get to know some more:
It’s always nice to get surprised with well done initiatives. Here is Food Day, going for “healthy, affordable, and sustainable food. It is created by Center for Science in the Public Interest(CSPI), is powered by a diverse coalition of food movement leaders, organizations, and people from all walks of life. Food Day takes place annually on October 24 to address issues as varied as health and nutrition, hunger, agricultural policy, animal welfare, and farm worker justice. The ultimate goal of Food Day is to strengthen and unify the food movement in order to improve our nation’s food policies. Thousands of Americans came together for over 3,200 events in 2012. Find out how Food Day was celebrated this year from our blog and photos, and join this push for a stronger, more united food movement.”
Here there are some informations about their priorities, take a look:
New York Times journalist Michael Moss spent three-and-a-half years working out how big food companies get away with churning out products that undermine the health of those who eat them. He interviewed hundreds of current and former food industry insiders – chemists, nutrition scientists, behavioural biologists, food technologists, marketing executives, package designers, chief executives and lobbyists. What he uncovered is chilling: a hard-working industry composed of well-paid, smart, personable professionals, all keenly focused on keeping us hooked on ever more ingenious junk foods; an industry that thinks of us not as customers, or even consumers, but as potential “heavy users”.
‘Only sugar processors have the brass neck to present it as anything other than an ingredient we would do well to eat as little of as possible.’
New York Times journalist Michael Moss spent three-and-a-half years working out how big food companies get away with churning out products that undermine the health of those who eat them. He interviewed hundreds of current and former food industry insiders – chemists, nutrition scientists, behavioural biologists, food technologists, marketing executives, package designers, chief executives and lobbyists. What he uncovered is chilling: a hard-working industry composed of well-paid, smart, personable professionals, all keenly focused on keeping us hooked on ever more ingenious junk foods; an industry that thinks of us not as customers, or even consumers, but as potential “heavy users”.
How do the food giants do it? Moss’s central thesis is that junk food is a legalised type of narcotic. By deliberately manipulating three key ingredients – salt, sugar and fat – that act much like drugs, racing along the same pathways and neural circuitry to reach the brain’s pleasure zones, the food and drinkindustry has created an elastic formula for a never-ending procession of lucrative products.
As Moss explains, the exact formulations of addictive junk foods (and drinks) are not accidental but calculated and perfected by scientists “who know very well what they are doing”. Their job is to establish the necessary “bliss point”, the precise amount of sugar, fat or salt guaranteed to “send consumers over the moon”.
Sugar, with its “high-speed, blunt assault on our brains”, is the “methamphetamine of processed food ingredients”, he believes, while fat is the opiate, “a smooth operator whose effects are less obvious, but no less powerful”. Without salt, he observes, “processed food companies cease to exist”.
There’s nothing earth-shatteringly new in Moss’s assertion that sugar, salt and fat are the unholy trinity of bad food. Food campaigners on both sides of the Atlantic have been saying as much for decades. But the nutrition debate is evolving, and this book is behind the curve. In both the US and UK, the characterisation of saturated fat as a dietary antichrist is being challenged, not by the junk food industry, which makes a mint from spewing out supposedly healthy low-fat products, but by nutritionists and scientists. For instance, a recent review of scientific studies on fat, published in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, concluded that “there is no convincing evidence that saturated fat causes heart disease”.
The problem here is that Moss doesn’t even reference this discussion, merely damning fat in a generic way. So it sounds as if he believes that natural foods that contain it, such as cheese, cream and red meat, are devils incarnate. Many health commentators will have no problem signing up to the argument that the chemically hardened, industrially refined and wholly corrupted oils used to make products such as crisps and fried chicken are undeniably bad for us, but Moss’s all-out attack on fat is more contentious.
Indeed, this failure to draw a distinction between processed junk and natural food is the flaw that runs through this book and weakens its otherwise worthwhile attack. Sugar, salt and fat get lumped together in physiological terms as addictive substances.
On sugar, however, Moss is on strong ground. Only sugar processors have the brass neck to present it as anything other than an ingredient we would do well to eat as little of as possible, so shining a light on it is most welcome. In recent years, the presence of wanton quantities of sugar in popular processed foods, such as breakfast cereals, has largely been overshadowed, even hidden, by the public health establishment’s obsession with fat. Currently, sugar is the dietary baddie that we can all agree to hate.
But in the case of salt, which Moss appears to condemn as an unalloyed dietary disaster, he shoots himself in the foot by pointing out that more than three-quarters of the salt Americans eat comes from processed food. Where is the evidence to show that this ingredient, which we have had in our diets for millennia, is a problem when consumed in small quantities in homemade food? Does anyone really get addicted to the salt they add as they cook?
Ultimately, the reader is left wondering whether Moss actually enjoys eating, or whether, after years of listening to food industry personnel, he has simply come to view it as a minefield of threatening, and less threatening, substances.
The book relies heavily (and at times tediously) on interviews with, and little pen portraits of, industry insiders, many of whom go out of their way to avoid their own company’s products. He uses these people and their anecdotes to tell the story, but this slows the book down, and gets in the way of analysis.
Moss sees his book as “a wake-up call to the issues and tactics at play in the food industry”, and it does succeed brilliantly in evidencing the systematic venality of corporate junk food and drink interests. It’s naive, he warns us, to think that we can make them behave more responsibly. “Making money is the sole reason they exist,” he writes. But as “a tool for defending ourselves as we walk through those doors”, his book is less convincing.
Readers may find themselves asking what Moss thinks we can do, other than being generally empowered by the insight he has given us into industry dirty dealings. I longed for him to urge his readers to “jerf” ( just eat real food), or urge us to look beyond the well-stacked crisp, confectionery and fizzy drinks aisles so kindly provided by our large food retailers, and explore outlets that are part of a growing alternative vision for our food system. But in the final analysis, Moss ducks that opportunity: “They may have salt, sugar and fat on their side, but we, ultimately, have the power to make choices,” he says. If only it was that simple.
Joanna Blythman is the author of What To Eat
Via The Guardian
With the global population set to hit 9.5 billion by 2075, it’s widely assumed the world is eventually going to run out of food. One UN study says we’ll need to increase agricultural production 70% by the middle of the century, if we’re to cater to all the expected bellies.
But, before you imagine the problem is a simple lack of nourishment, you might want to read a comprehensive new report about food waste. It suggests that, instead of a production issue, as such, the real “food crisis” revolves around poor distribution and storage, and careless consumption.
The report, from the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, a U.K. membership group, says we currently waste between 30% to 50% of all food generated–or up to 2.2 billion tons annually. In other words, we could make up much of the projected shortfall just by being more efficient.
“The potential to provide 60–100% more food by simply eliminating losses, while simultaneously freeing up land, energy and water resources for other uses, is an opportunity that should not be ignored,” the report says.
The food waste problem varies according to the development level of the country. In fully industrialized countries, waste tends to occur further up the chain: with supermarkets that reject crops for appearance reasons, or consumers who buy too much and never use it. One U.K. study found that fully 46% of potatoes never made it to market; another found that 30% of all vegetables are never harvested. In the developed world, the problem–if it can be called that–is that food is too cheap. Market signals seem to be insufficient to make sure people don’t waste it.
In sub-Saharan Africa and South-East Asia, wastage is more likely to occur at the farmer-producer stage. “Inefficient harvesting, inadequately engineered local transport systems and deficiencies in infrastructure mean that crops are frequently handled poorly and stored under unsuitable farm site conditions or in inadequate local facilities,” says the study.
“As a result, bruising, moulds and rodents destroy or at least degrade large quantities of food material, and substantial amounts of foodstuffs simply spill from badly maintained vehicles or are bruised as vehicles negotiate poorly maintained roads.”
Southeast Asia loses an estimated 37% to 80% of its rice crop, depending on the country. China’s losses are about 45%, for example, while Vietnam’s are at the higher end, the report says.
As other studies have said, the issue doesn’t begin and end with food. Unnecessary production also means wasting vast quantities of water and energy, increased emissions of greenhouse gases, and the tearing of land that could be used for other purposes.
As you might expect for a report by engineers, the recommended solutions lie in engineering fixes: for example, transferring “engineering knowledge, design know-how, and suitable technology to newly developing countries, and getting governments “to incorporate waste minimisation thinking” into transport and storage infrastructure.
All of which makes sense. More fundamentally, perhaps, we need to decide what kind of food crisis we face. As the report makes clear, it’s not so much a food issue, as one related to logistics and consumption.
via fastcoexist
Keeping our food fresh and more resistant to spoilage got potentially easier these days. People from Fenugreen came up with a very good alternative which is already a sales success, the Freshpaper. This magical biodegradable paper uses organic ingredients like spices and botanicals to keep foods fresh two to four times longer than usual. It comes a little bit smaller than square paper towels. The organic ingredients that makes it up prevent spoiling by inhibiting bacterial and fungal growth also hindering enzymes that cause over-ripening in produce.
The use is simple, just place a sheet in your storage underneath the fruits and veggies. It will keep them fresh for longer.
Freshpaper emits a maple-like scent. It comes from one of the organic ingredients that the paper is made from. It’s fenugreek, used also in maple syrup flavoring. When the scent fades, it’s time for replacement. But you can always compost or recycle the used one.
Want to try it out? It’s also available online on Fenugreen online store.
Better late than never, comes the platform for those who want to shop from local producers, but don’t have time. Cortilia is online, the first local farmer’s organic food market in sales and distribution network. And you can have it all at home. The network isn’t that large yet (available in Italy), but it’s a great initiative that can bring significative changes for both producers and consumers and also for those who aren’t a part of it, considering environmental and social gains.
FOODA – Salone del Gusto e Terra Madre / Article by Ravi Bellardi
“Foods that change the world.” This is the concept that guided the 2012 Salone del Gusto and Terra Madre. The event took place in Turin from October 25 to 29 in a historic moment for the Slow Food movement internationally. The Salone del Gusto had its first year in 1996, Terra Madre in 2004. This year, they come again presenting, proposing and discussing innovative alternatives regarding to those who work the land in a direct contact with environment changes and also to those who regularly transform and consume nature into culture in both traditional and most elaborated ways.
Other than following the event for this post, I was guided by my curiosity about how are people expressing, seeing, comprehending, dealing and experiencing these great food paradigm transformations. The SGTM gave me the opportunity not only to participate in international conferences about politics, international food marketing and global social discussions open to all people, but also to have very nice talks with some farmers, activists, consumers. People, part of a context that might be extremely influent in contemporary conceptions linking Food and Design.
The journey starts actually on October 24, in the Palaolimpico di Torino where the opening ceremony happened. In these occasions, you can see the synthesis of the aim of the event. Multiculturalism is present everywhere, it is brought by the Terra Madre delegates, their teams, flags, clothes, language. It is easy to feel, in every speech, the joy about the successful growth of this great food initiative. What is also evident is the deep preoccupation concerning to the world’s contemporary food and nutrition problems that was well brought by many world community leaders. What closes the night is Carlo Petrini’s speech. The Slow Food president shared his happiness about the event evolution. He called it “reflection fair”, “political initiative”. Yes it is, SGTM is an international celebration of traditional based food relations building paths to be walked by post-industrial cultural complexity where the food is “Good, Clean and Fair”.
The Salone itself offers a great diversity of activities involving little producers, but also some big brands, chefs, visitors in Taste Workshops, educational activities, Slow Food Presidia and conferences. I was pretty happy about having the opportunity of taking part in discussions with some people heading very significant initiatives like Carlo Petrini (Slow Food), Oscar Farinetti (Eataly), José Graciano (ONU), Eric Holt-Gimenz (Food First USA), Vandana Shiva (Slow Food), among many others. It is good to see people acting and talking about considering traditional knowhow and natural solutions for contemporary needs, acting global respecting cultural diversity preservation, problem solving possibilities, dealing with crisis, integrating responsible food products in the society, food distribution issues, quality production/communication/perception, responsible life style idealizations its relations between the environment, food, culture and men. Looking down to my humble notes, I can say that Design related questions are frequent in the discussions, even thought the word “Design” is not mentioned at all.
Walking in the fair, we can have a more practical vision of what is happening. Everybody is eating, even with no food in mouth! From the Italian regions pavilion to some little African community stand it is possible to notice an enormous diversity regarding to territory aspects, but they all have one thing in common. They are all trying to communicate their peculiarities in order to achieve local production/consumption wellbeing following a sustainable global logic. They are communicating with food, cultural signs, knowhow, hospitality, tradition. That is why everybody is eating in different ways. Eating food, eating culture, information. Experiencing this virtuous systems.
Like most people are aware of, our times are changing announcing big consequences. This whole world crisis asks and offers new possibilities. The Salone del Gusto and Terra Madre is, for sure, heading big transformations not only related to food. It’s worldwide wellbeing philosophy influences also many other socioeconomic aspects connecting producers to their land, bringing valorization of traditional knowledge, feeding culture, evidencing consumer’s main role in the context and contributing for the development of sustainable food systems in which (Food)Design professionals should be interested. Design is indispensable to facilitate production policies. Designing systems means to project broadly consistent solutions for resource choices, production, processes, consumption idealizations and output managing. These Design potentials are underground, are essentially the base, and not always claimed or explored. Its shape is defined by aesthetics rules of justice and dignity, not by postmodern aesthetics of superficial new differences, pure curiosity or by what is trendy.
If “Foods” may “change the world”, like the SGTM slogan says, I am sure that Food Design must be a facilitator in this process. The context is made of plenty of good alternatives in dealing with natural resources in food production, cultural diversity richness in food elaboration and promising social developing initiatives. This multidisciplinary scenario shall be connected to people in order to work like it should. The final user, the consumer, the common people are a crucial part in this system. And they will be there experiencing this world if you give them the right opportunities. These “Foods” will “change the world” and Design must be there in order to provide these changes to people in a proper way.
Artist Stefani Bardin, TEDxManhattan 2011 Fellow, shows us her latest project — using a “smartpill” to reveal how we digest differently processed foods.
Stefani produces videos and immersive, interactive installations that explores the influences of corporate culture and industrial food production. Her current project works with gastroenterologist Dr. Braden Kuo at Harvard University where they just completed the first ever clinical study to use the M2A™ and SmartPill devices that look at how the human body responds to processed versus whole foods. She is an Honorary Resident at Eyebeam Art +Technology Center in New York and teaches in the School of Art, Media and Technology at Parsons The New School for Design and in the Food Studies Program at The New School for Public Engagement.
