We don't need to re-engineer food. We need to de-engineer it - rebalance it in favour of nutritional quality, and away from prioritising yield mindlessly.
We already have an obesity crisis. We know that our over-reliance on carbs and demonising of fat is contributing to it, or outright fueling it. We know that our food is poor in vitamins, so basically all urban dwellers must take vitamin supplements.
Part of why our Western diets are so calorie-rich and nutrient-poor (while being allergenic for many people) is because we've mindlessly pursued food yield, rather than food yield balanced with nutrition. Most food items are processed or contain processed ingredients, or junk ingredients that bulk up the volume/substitute for more expensive ones. A lot of people are catching up to that and trying to compensate, but it's a nearly-vertical uphill struggle while you're not well off, because good food tends to be more expensive.
We need to stop that. We need to bring back affordable, healthy food for the masses.
Moreover, a large part of re-engineering food is re-engineering food supply chains. 'Tasty' and 'cheap' generally implies 'fresh', and getting fresh food onto the tables of millions of households requires a change of mindset from both industry and consumer.
Stop trying to invent a startup for every problem. There are so much more dimensions and ideas to "solve" obesity.
For starters, look at the vast differences between national food cultures and their varying success in battling obesity.
There is healthy food which is tasty and cheap, right now, in abundance. They are societal, regulatory, cultural and individual ways to get people to eat it. On the other hand, we are not even remotely close to understanding nutrition well enough to "re-engineer" a significant portion of the populace's food w/o some serious first and second order consequences.
Comments
Realistically obesity is going to be solved by the re-engineering of food to be healthier while still being tasty and cheap.
Anything other than that requires behavioral changes which are difficult to implement and extremely difficult to maintain.
We don't need to re-engineer food. We need to de-engineer it - rebalance it in favour of nutritional quality, and away from prioritising yield mindlessly.
We already have an obesity crisis. We know that our over-reliance on carbs and demonising of fat is contributing to it, or outright fueling it. We know that our food is poor in vitamins, so basically all urban dwellers must take vitamin supplements.
Part of why our Western diets are so calorie-rich and nutrient-poor (while being allergenic for many people) is because we've mindlessly pursued food yield, rather than food yield balanced with nutrition. Most food items are processed or contain processed ingredients, or junk ingredients that bulk up the volume/substitute for more expensive ones. A lot of people are catching up to that and trying to compensate, but it's a nearly-vertical uphill struggle while you're not well off, because good food tends to be more expensive.
We need to stop that. We need to bring back affordable, healthy food for the masses.
Moreover, a large part of re-engineering food is re-engineering food supply chains. 'Tasty' and 'cheap' generally implies 'fresh', and getting fresh food onto the tables of millions of households requires a change of mindset from both industry and consumer.
Indeed. And preparation. You can't make a salad by microwaving it.
Stop trying to invent a startup for every problem. There are so much more dimensions and ideas to "solve" obesity.
For starters, look at the vast differences between national food cultures and their varying success in battling obesity.
There is healthy food which is tasty and cheap, right now, in abundance. They are societal, regulatory, cultural and individual ways to get people to eat it. On the other hand, we are not even remotely close to understanding nutrition well enough to "re-engineer" a significant portion of the populace's food w/o some serious first and second order consequences.