U.S. Food Policy TV (episode 2): Interview with Brian Wansink

Brian Wansink is author of Mindless Eating: Why We Eat More Than We Think. In this interview, we discuss the Ig Nobel Award in Nutrition, the Bottomless Soup Bowl, the McSubway Study, the misleading power of the "Halo Effect," and whether it is hopeless to seek to change food and nutrition policy.

The first episode of U.S. Food Policy TV appeared in August. We are still on the steep part of our learning curve here.

Wansink Appointed Director of CNPP

Dr. Brian Wansink, who was recently interviewed on this blog for his receipt of the Ig Nobel prize, was appointed Executive Director of the USDA's Center for Nutrition Policy and Promotion (CNPP) last Wednesday.

According to the USDA press release:

At CNPP Dr. Wansink will be responsible for overseeing the planning, development and review of the 2010 Dietary Guidelines for Americans, the food pyramid known as MyPyramid.gov and programs including the Healthy Eating Index, the USDA Food Plans, the Nutrient Content of the U.S. Food Supply, and the cost of raising a child.

Praise comes from Marion Nestle, the Ethicurean and Eating Liberally for USDA's appointment of a university researcher, as opposed to recent appointments that have come directly from various industry positions. Wansink's novel research on home and restaurant environmental triggers for unhealthy eating and overeating informs his book Mindless Eating: Why We Eat More Than We Think- about how to modify immediate environments in order to change nutrition behavior, without creating new regulations or directly attacking individual behavior.

Healthy choices for school meals

The Institute of Medicine (IOM) at the National Academies on October 20 published new guidelines, which may lead to more healthy meals in federal school nutrition programs.

The recommendations, if implemented by USDA, will bring school meals standards in line with the most recent Dietary Guidelines for Americans. In light of current concerns about overweight and obesity, the IOM report suggests food energy maximum levels as well as the current minimum levels. It also suggests upper bounds on salt and saturated fat.

The report, titled School Meals: Building Blocks for Healthy Children, seems astutely focused and un-fussy. It recommends a drastic simplification in the way nutrition standards are used in meal planning and determining a meal's eligibility for federal reimbursement. It suggests nutrient benchmarks for developing federal standards, but it recommends that actual meal planning and reimbursements be based primarily on foods instead of nutrients. Rather than pursue a long list of distracting micronutrient benchmarks, the report promotes fruits, vegetables, and whole grains.

In a special child nutrition issue of Choices Magazine from the Agricultural and Applied Economics Association (AAEA), published today, Iowa State University economist Helen Jensen comments: "the recommendations are consistent with a growing body of research, as well as encouragement from stakeholder groups to change the school meals to be consistent with the dietary needs of school children today." Jensen is editor of the special issue and also a member of the IOM committee that produced the new report.

Today's special issue of Choices also contains gently contrasting views about measures that school food services might take to improve school meals, while remaining financially viable. Cornell economists David Just and Brian Wansink use principles of behavior science to suggest nudges in the direction of healthier meals:

Thus, the object of using behavioral economics in school lunch rooms is to guide choices in a way that is subtle enough that children are unaware of the mechanism. These subtle changes often have the advantage of being relatively cheap and easy to implement. This is a clear advantage given the financial climate. However, behavioral economic instruments cannot achieve 100% compliance. For example, the only way to eliminate soda consumption in a school is to eliminate the soda. If we instead approach the problem by allowing choice but place the soda at some disadvantage in the marketplace, we can reduce soda consumption substantially but not eliminate it. To preserve choice, we will necessarily have to allow some individuals to purchase items that are less nutritious. But we can make these choices less convenient or less visible, by moving the soda machines into more distant, less visited parts of the school.

(Wansink was interviewed at U.S. Food Policy in 2007).

On the other hand, I have an article in Choices, with Friedman School graduate student Mary Kennedy, discussing the economic environment in which school food services must operate. Because of interactions between student demand for more and less healthy options, we suggest that reining in less healthy competitive foods may give school food authorities more room to maneuver in providing better choices.

The Just and Wansink article in this theme warns against unintentionally increasing the appeal of unhealthy products by banning them outright. Nevertheless, placing some reasonable limits on competitive food is not really economic heresy.

For centuries, economists have admired markets as a coordinating tool for economic decisions in communities composed of households, but economists have always acknowledged beneficent non-market decision-making within households. Schools are not marketplaces but educational institutions responsible for the welfare of their charges.

If schools are expected to respond to the current epidemic of childhood obesity by improving the school food environment, and taxpayers are reluctant simply to provide more resources, then there is some merit in considering measures to enhance the relative competitive position of healthy meals served through the National School Lunch Program and School Breakfast Program.

Far out

The fascinating food behavior researcher Brian Wansink, who was appointed last year to head USDA's Center for Nutrition Policy and Promotion (see earlier post), certainly breaks the mold of previous holders of that position (see my video interview with him last year). The CNPP is responsible for the Dietary Guidelines, MyPyramid, and the Thrifty Food Plan.

An electronic mailing this week from Wansink's Mindless Eating site, with his name at the bottom, invited readers to check out a program of web classes called HealthTeleClass.

The "renowned" teachers include Dr. Tea (owner of an "Herbal Emporium" in LA) ...


... John Basedow (a "fitness celebrity") and John Rowley (a "motivational guru") ...


... Karen Curry (a "long time student of prosperity teachings," who has used them "to create miracles in her own life") and Brad Yates ("internationally known for his creative and often humorous use of EFT").


I don't even know what EFT stands for, unless it is Electronic Funds Transfer.

I am sure these are excellent teachers, and I think it is safe to guess that no endorsement by USDA of this seminar series was implied. Still, I wonder if the upcoming revision of the Dietary Guidelines will be a little less staid than usual.