But only in the short term, right? Once you figured out what products are healthy and switched to them, you can rely on prior memory. It's not like you have to look at the labels of every item you're buying for years.
I eat pretty healthy, though I also like cheeseburgers so I'm not thin. But I make a very healthy income and have the time, and the resources, and the education to actually have the time and executive function to have an opinion about ingredients in food. It is difficult for me to know these things, let alone to in all cases exert the self-control to act on them--and I make north of five times the median personal income of the United States with which to do it.
I mean, let's think for a second. Blame an Amazon picker or a Wal-Mart cashier or blame the corporate entity with a marketing department designed to overwhelm your attention and to induce the specific action they test and refine for?
Gosh. I wonder.
Are the nutrition content for staples (eg. milk, bread, eggs, apples) likely going to change any time soon? As for the processed foods, they might change from time to time, but I doubt they undergo drastic changes that the nutrition profile is entirely different. On the off chance that it does happen, you'll likely notice it on your tongue, and can update your brain accordingly. If you do any sort of research, you'll probably start to notice such processed foods aren't healthy, so you shouldn't be buying them in the first place.
>Or the time in your day you have to prepare food may suddenly shrink; do you then have the time and spare cognitive cycles to make a good decision under stress? (You probably don't. Not, like, you specifically, but in aggregate.)
>[...]
>It is difficult for me to know these things, let alone to in all cases exert the self-control to act on them
People aren't getting diabetes because they accidentally ate mcdonalds one time. It's from bad diet over a long period of time. For that reason your objection doesn't really make sense.
Perhaps those of us who benefit inordinately from the output of the perpetually stretched class can show some grace in life and not second-guess the folks picking and delivering our consumer goods.
It probably is gradually done, but I recommend looking at the amount of sugar each brand of bread has next time you're at a supermarket. Or milk, lemonade. Or other common groceries. It really is crazy to see just how much of -everything- has added sugar. Including products that are branded as "healthy". AFAIK Naked juice is a great example of this.
As a remote worker with a great schedule, I have the time to do such research. But not everyone is in that situation, particularly if they have a job and have kids, etc. Brands can essentially lie through their teeth and get away with labeling as the regulation can be quite loose.
Many people "know" processed food isn't healthy, but to what extent it's bad for them, maybe not. And it comes down to time and cost. Also, some people don't really grow up knowing what "healthy" food is like.
> It's from bad diet over a long period of time.
It doesn't help that healthy foods are more expensive than food that's absolutely terrible for you.
I think Mexico's new laws around food labeling is the way to go, but time will tell if that's actually effective or not.
Ethical consumerism is a constant treadmill. Even knowing which brands are owned by which corporations is an absolutely exhausting affair.
You honestly expect people to keep up with this? It's as bad as a software dependency chart.
As mentioned in a sibling comment, while this is theoretically an issue, it doesn't happen often enough in practice that it causes a burden
>Ethical consumerism is a constant treadmill. Even knowing which brands are owned by which corporations is an absolutely exhausting affair.
Why are you mixing ethics into this? We were talking about making healthy purchasing decisions, not boycotting [insert brand here] because they punch kittens or whatever.