Despite the shifting awareness about natural health, public attitude to food, health and nutrition, alongside the motivations and tactics of the food corporations we so heavily rely upon. Many will comfortably claim the title of ‘health conscious individual’, yet a few basic questions will show that they are concerned with either the short-term effects of diet or the aesthetic results, rather than being healthy for the rest of their lives.
Speak to a stranger on the street about GMO and you will likely find that few know what the term stands for, let alone the shocking long-term effects of such products on their body and the permanent detriment to the planet. Some may still believe the official hype that GMO is a benefit, due to lack of enquiry; a little digging would uncover that GMO foods are also dangerous to the environment.
Despite the vast range of accessible information on the internet, ‘healthy eating’ is a loosely defined term. Buying into supermarkets’ antioxidant tea marketing and cutting out a few detrimental fats from the diet, as well as opting for that same supermarket’s lean chicken (without any consideration of where that chicken came from, what it went through, what additives it contains, and why) gives people a false sense of security.
Corporation motivation is spelling us out for us
Supermarkets are giving us some major clues as to what their motives are. We look to one so-called authority after another, placing blind faith in branding and marketing, seemingly unwilling to ‘follow the money’ or take many risks. The irony is that by not choosing and learning from our own experiences, we are taking risks with something we all too often fail to make our top priority – our long-term health.
Many of us should by now recognise that disease is big business. Perhaps we do not because over the last seven centuries we have been encouraged to regard the curing and healing of disease as a perplexing and complicated science, best left in the hands of medical practitioners. We are supplied with synthetic drugs that alleviate only the symptoms and the pain of diseases, but rarely cure (and often harm). In blindly trusting ‘authority’, we take extraordinary risks with our health and have come to regard sickness as acceptable, or “just the way it is”.
This has never been more apparent than it is now, with so many babies and young children ill with colds, viruses, and miscellaneous physiological and mental conditions. Doctors themselves are not ‘out to get us’; they just only learned about synthetic treatments for symptoms of actual and impending diseases, rather than their prevention. Arguably, it is for reasons of profit that the industry refuses to consider the real issues of nutrition and toxicity.
How fair is fair trade really?
Nutrition is also big business and the supermarket corporations are just as guilty of not having our best interests at heart when it comes to health. They like to appear ethical by offering ranges such as ‘fair trade.’ Depending on how you look at it, ‘fair trade’ could be an excuse for the very rich to exploit the very poor by giving them work for the lowest possible reward, then taking their products to the West to sell for maximum profits.
Although there are bigger ranges on offer now, you only need to look at the limited range of ‘organic’ products on the shelves compared to the rest of the store to know what the priorities are. Besides, here ‘organic’ is a loose term. It should not even be a necessary one. It really means ‘not tampered with’. Shouldn’t that be standard?
Anyone who grows or buys genuine organic food from a local farm will know that there is no comparison in terms of flavour and general constitution. Also, the shelf life of these products is far less than those in the supermarket, which is a good sign that what you are eating is as close to its natural state as it should get. Supermarket labelling and branding is at best confusing and misleading.
Why are toxic foods are aggressively marketed?
Should we not question why we are bombarded with options (and adverts) for fattening, refined sugar ‘treats’ and junk food? These are often low nutritional value foods and the marketing of them is more prolific than any other type of food. What is most worrying is that it is frequently aimed at our children.
When the inevitable overload of chemicals and additives cause a change in children’s behaviour, they are diagnosed as having ADHD. If these corporations had any genuine concern with public health, surely what we would see on the shelves would be something more than a sparse and extortionately priced, token ‘Free From’ section? Yes, the options are getting better, it can’t be denied, but this is more about supply and demand than genuine concern for health. When there is a majority of healthy foods, and marketing for these things rather than unhealthy junk food, the ethics can be said to have shifted.
You are your own best Doctor
The bottom line when approaching the above is common sense; natural over synthetic is best in every case. We live in a natural world full of natural resources, yet these are suppressed in favour of synthetic products that do not resonate with our bodies. This much is plain to see for anyone who cares to look.
We either choose or are unwittingly subjected to synthetics and processed junk on a daily basis in the name of convenience, widely through lack of education on the often simpler and healthier options. Given that convenience food is unlikely to be replaced due to modern-day hectic lifestyles, it is a shame that there are not more genuine organic food providers offering convenient organic meal preparations as a healthy alternative to fast food.
The sad truth is that choosing healthy food is a minefield of misleading claims, and more efforts are needed by those in the know to bring this information to the forefront. We must look past the self-proclaimed ‘authority’ of these corporations and recognise that we are the only authority; our own best doctors. Our bodies tell us what they need, if only we will listen, and nature has the solutions. We don’t have any more time to waste.