41 Plus Nutritional and Mind Opening Quotes

41 Plus Nutritional and Mind Opening Quotes – Marion Nestle Quotes

Marion Nestle Quotes – This woman of great prestige and insight is definitely one that is worth mentioning.  Marion Nestle has made and is still making some great contributions to this country and she never seems to have a heart that fails in making a difference. One way of demonstrating her difference and beliefs is through her words (quotes) and we shall take a journey into her mind but before we do so we will have a look at what she is all about.

Marion Nestle Biography (Bio)

Marion Nestle, Ph.D, M.P.H. (born 1936) is the Paulette Goddard Professor of Nutrition, Food Studies, and Public Health at New York University. Her degrees include a PhD in molecular biology and an MPH in public health nutrition, both from the University of California, Berkeley. She is also a teacher of Sociology at NYU and a visiting teacher of Nutritional Sciences at Cornell University. Nestle got her BA from UC Berkeley, Phi Beta Kappa, after going to school there from 1954-1959. Her degrees include a Ph.D in molecular biology and an M.P.H. in public health nutrition, both from the University of California, Berkeley. As discussed, She is the Paulette Goddard Professor in the department of nutrition, food research studies, and public health at New York University, which she chaired from 1988-2003.marion nestle Sayings

Her first faculty position was in the department of biology at Brandeis University. From 1976-86 she was associate dean of the University of California San Francisco (UCSF) School of Medicine, where she taught nutrition to medical trainees, residents, and practicing physicians, and directed a nutrition education center sponsored by the American Cancer Society. From 1986-1988, she was senior nutrition policy advisor in the Department of Health and Human Services and managing editor of the 1988 Surgeon General’s Report on Nutrition and Health. She has actually belonged to the FDA Food Advisory Committee and Science Board, the USDA/DHHS 1995 Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee, and American Cancer Society committees that provide dietary guidelines for cancer avoidance.

Her research study focuses on the analysis of scientific, social, cultural, and financial elements that influence dietary recommendations and practices. She is the author of Food Politics: How the Food Industry Influences Nutrition and Health (2002) and Safe Food: Bacteria, Biotechnology, and Bioterrorism (2003)
.

She is the author of six prize-winning books:

  1.  Food Politics: How the Food Industry Influences Nutrition and Health;
  2. Safe Food: The Politics of Food Safety
  3. An Illustrated Guide to Food Politics; and Soda Politics: Taking on Big Soda (and Winning)
  4. Why Calories Count: From Science to Politics (with Dr. Malden Nesheim);
  5. Eat, Drink, Vote: An Illustrated Guide to Food Politics
  6. Soda Politics: Taking on Big Soda (and Winning).

 

Other books she wrote about pet food

  1. Pet Food Politics: The Chihuahua in the Coal Mine
  2. Feed Your Pet Right (also with Dr. Nesheim)
  3. Her latest book, What to Eat, was published in May 2006.

 

She has received many awards and honors.

  1.  In 2003, Food Politics won awards from the Association for American Publishers (outstanding professional and scholarly title in nursing and allied health)
  2. James Beard Foundation (literary)
  3. World Hunger Year (Harry Chapin media)
  4. Safe Food won the Steinhardt School of Education’s Griffiths Research Award in 2004
  5. She received the John Dewey Award for Distinguished Public Service from Bard College in 2010.
  6. In 2011, the University of California School of Public Health at Berkeley named her as Public Health Hero
  7. Also in 2011, Michael Pollan ranked her as the #2 most powerful foodie in America (after Michelle Obama)
  8. Mark Bittman ranked her #1 in his list of foodies to be thankful for
  9. She received the James Beard Leadership Award in 2013
  10.  In 2014 the U.S. Healthful Food Council’s Innovator of the Year Award
  11. The Public Health Association of New York City’s Media Award,
  12.  In 2016, Soda Politics won literary awards from the James Beard Foundation and the International Association of Culinary Professionals.

 

Marion Nestle is among the country’s most hysterical anti-food-industry fanatics. The New York University nutrition professor is the author of Food Politics: How the Food Industry Influences Nutrition and Health, where she writes: “Sellers of foodstuff do not bring in the same type of attention as purveyors of drugs or tobacco. They should.”

Nestle’s vision of a brave new food world consists of the infamous “Twinkie Tax,” federal cost controls on high-calorie foods and beverages, restricted food advertising, print advertisements that alert customers of calorie content, and nutritional labeling on snack bar plans. She believes that “food is too low-cost in this nation.”

To achieve her extreme goals, Nestle has dealt with the Center for Science in the general public Interest, the uncontested leader amongst America’s dietary scolds. When a recruiter asked Nestle if CSPI is her “hidden ally,” she responded:
” Overt is more like it. I was on CSPI’s board for 5 years, then slipped off quietly, but I’m a big supporter of what they do. By and big, they’re the major game in the area.”

Speaking to the New York Times in 1996, Nestle made it very clear that her primary program is not pro-nutrition, however rather anti-corporate: “I like it better when Mike [Jacobson of CSPI] takes on the huge corporations like McDonald’s,” she said. “I like it less well when he takes on mommy and pop outfits like Chinese dining establishments.”

Nestle is so consumed with blaming corporations that she does not think moms and dads can work out duty over their children’s diet plans or that adults have the ability to manage their weight. When Nestle said she shunned such good sense on CNN, an incredulous Kristin Nolt of the National Restaurant Association asked her, “You don’t support workout, moderation and balance?” Nestle reacted, “Only in theory. Just in theory.”

In 2003, Nestle attended to an occasion sponsored by the Socialist Caucus of the American Public Health Association (yes, the APHA has a “Socialist Caucus”). She also spoke at the 2003 “Socialist Scholars Conference.” And she was a keynote speaker at the June 2003 trial-lawyers’ conference “intended to support and encourage litigation versus the food industry.”

Nestle’s attacks on the food market have actually recently branched out to include scare-mongering about food security. In her book Safe Food: Bacteria, Biotechnology, and Bioterrorism,. she took brazen advantage of an isolated mad-cow case to call for a boycott of US beef.

Nestle’s zeal would even squash free speech rights. An Albany Law School professor cautioned in 2010 that a straight-out restriction on health claims or front-of-package nutrition labels on food, promoted by Nestle, would break the First Amendment.

What was Nestle’s action? Sue ’em till you win. “We hope that legal scholars will take a look at current food marketing practices in the light of the First Amendment and establish a firm legal basis for bringing this issue back to court,” Nestle and co-author David Ludwig responded. Her beef is that marketing specific foods do not “promote the general public interest,” in part.

But it would appear that Nestle has no qualms about other food labels, even obligatory ones– so long as they support her program. Nestle is a huge fan of obligatory labels on foods that utilize genetically modified ingredients– although these foods are not inherently materially various from non-bioengineered foods and have no unfavorable health impacts.

Even more, Nestle has attacked food business’ proposed front-of-package labels that inform consumers exactly what’s “good” in their foods (like omega-3 content). Rather, ever the anti-pleasure nutritional expert, Nestle prefers an excessively simple “traffic signal” labeling system that appoints red, yellow, and thumbs-ups to foods — one that highlights exactly what’s “bad” in food. You may think Ph.D. would know much better than to promote dumbing down food and nutrition to a couple of colors, but you do not know Dr. Nestle’s opinion of the average Joe. “Ordinary mortals can not count, see, taste, odor or feel a calorie,” she informed the Chicago Tribune in 2010. Translation: You’re dumb, and you require “betters” like Nestle to tell you what to consume.

 

Marion Nestle Quotes

The best way to eat is to eat lots of different kinds of foods. Except for breast milk, no one food is perfect.

I am not a vegetarian. I subscribe to my own mantra: eat less, move more, eat plenty of fruits and vegetables, don’t eat too much junk food, and enjoy what you eat. Or, to summarise: eat less, eat better, move more, and get political.

Healthy, sustainable food production methods give us food that is nutritionally better and with fewer pesticides, antibiotics, and hormones.
How we grow food has enormous effects on the environment – climate change as well as pollution of air, water, and soil.

It’s time to get the FDA to reverse its 1994 decision not to label GM foods.

I follow my own advice: eat less, move more, eat lots of fruits, vegetables, and grains, and don’t eat too much junk food. It leaves plenty of flexibility for eating an occasional junk food.

I have a generally optimistic temperament and am thrilled by what I see as a rapidly growing food movement, especially among young people who care about how food is produced and what it does to their health and the environment.

“Fat is mainstream, which is why everyone has become complacent. What used to be considered pudgy before isn’t even worthy of a comment today.”

“These days the biggest issue is how many calories you consume. So all of this stuff distracts people from thinking about calories.”

“It’s a tremendous way of getting people to buy more at lower cost to the producer. There’s no question that that’s an incentive to buy. Everybody loves a bargain.”

“The general public believes that if a health claim is on the label the government backs that up, … This sells food products, no question.”

“Unbelievable as it may seem, one-third of all vegetables consumed in the United States come from just three sources: french fries, potato chips, and iceberg lettuce.”

“To speak only of food inspections: the United States currently imports 80% of its seafood, 32% of its fruits and nuts, 13% of its vegetables, and 10% of its meats. In 2007, these foods arrived in 25,000 shipments a day from about 100 countries. The FDA was able to inspect about 1% of these shipments, down from 8% in 1992. In contrast, the USDA is able to inspect 16% of the foods under its purview. By one assessment, the FDA has become so short-staffed that it would take the agency 1,900 years to inspect every foreign plant that exports food to the United States.”

“Fat is mainstream, which is why everyone has become complacent. What used to be considered pudgy before isn’t even worthy of a comment today.”
“The chef has kids complaining to their parents the food they get in school is better than what they get at home. He’s turned this group of kids into curious, adventurous eaters.”

“If you like eating meat but want to eat ethically, this is the book for you. From the hard-headed, clear-eyed, and sympathetic perspective of butchers who care deeply about the animals whose parts they sell, the customers who buy their meats, and the pleasures of eating, this book has much to teach. It’s an instant classic, making it clear why meat is part of the food revolution. I see it as the new Bible of meat aficionados and worth reading by all food lovers, meat-eating and not.”

“The trans fat label has been an enormous incentive for food companies to take trans fat out of their products.”

The standard four food groups are based on American agricultural lobbies. Why do we have a milk group? Because we have a National Dairy Council. Why do we have a meat group? Because we have an extremely powerful meat lobby.

The problem with nutrient-by-nutrient nutrition science is that it takes the nutrient out the context of the food, the food out of the context of the diet, and the diet out of the context of the lifestyle.

The real reason for health claims is well established: health claims sell food products.

FDA, which regulates the safety of vegetables, doesn’t have those kinds of rules because Congress doesn’t want it to. It’s not that the vegetables themselves have anything wrong with them; it’s that they’re contaminated with animal manure. One of the rationales for a single food safety agency is that you can’t separate animals from vegetables.
What we know about diets hasn’t changed. It still makes sense to eat lots of fruits and vegetables, balance calories from other foods, and keep calories under control. That, however, does not make front-page news.

BASICS OF DIET AND HEALTH The basic principles of good diets are so simple that I can summarize them in just ten words: eat less, move more, eat lots of fruits and vegetables. For additional clarification, a five-word modifier helps: go easy on junk foods.
Unbelievable as it may seem, one-third of all vegetables consumed in the United States come from just three sources: french fries, potato chips, and iceberg lettuce.

One way in which we can encourage the Chinese government to take more vigorous action to control food safety in their country is by just saying we’re not going to buy Chinese foods until they get their system cleaned up. Admittedly it’s a difficult system to get under control because an astonishing percentage – maybe 80 percent – of the foods in China are produced in small backyard operations.

Here we have the great irony of modern nutrition: at a time when hundreds of millions of people do not have enough to eat, hundreds of millions more are eating too much and are overweight or obese.

There’s no question that largely vegetarian diets are as healthy as you can get. The evidence is so strong and overwhelming and produced over such a long period of time that it’s no longer debatable.

Eat less, move more, eat lots of fruits and vegetables, go easy on junk foods.

We don’t really have any that protect the food supply from farm to table. We have a food safety system that’s piecemeal, largely divided between two agencies that don’t talk to each other very much. Neither agency can enforce regulations from the farm to the table.
I would require every producer of food to follow and have enforced a standard safety plan. We know how to produce safe food. It has a horrible name; it’s called HACCP – Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point – and this was a food safety system that was developed for NASA so that astronauts wouldn’t get sick in outer space. If you just think about what it might be like to have food poison under conditions of zero gravity, you don’t even want to think about it.

We don’t have a farm-to-table food safety system. I keep saying this. It came as a big surprise to the FDA that tomatoes were being grown in the United States, sent to Mexico for packing, and then sent back. I mean, they had no idea that our food chain worked like this.

…the key dietary messages are stunningly simple: Eat less, move more, eat more fruits and vegetables, and don’t eat too much junk food. It’s no more complicated than that.

If we have a food supply that we can’t trust, that has enormous implications for the way we view government, for the way we trust business, and for our international trade relations.

Restaurants that have health-conscious consumers will pay attention to this.

These days the biggest issue is how many calories you consume. So all of this stuff distracts people from thinking about calories.

It’s a completely reasonable diet — heavy on fruits and vegetables and fresh, seasonal foods. I’m totally for it. It’s common sense in a nice package.
The Centers for Disease Control says that there are 76 million cases of food poisoning in the United States every year, 350,000 hospitalizations, and 5,000 deaths. Is that a lot or a little? Well, it depends on how you look at it.

To speak only of food inspections: the United States currently imports 80% of its seafood, 32% of its fruits and nuts, 13% of its vegetables, and 10% of its meats. In 2007, these foods arrived in 25,000 shipments a day from about 100 countries. The FDA was able to inspect about 1% of these shipments, down from 8% in 1992. In contrast, the USDA is able to inspect 16% of the foods under its purview. By one assessment, the FDA has become so short-staffed that it would take the agency 1,900 years to inspect every foreign plant that exports food to the United States.

They (food companies) are putting $36 billion into directing those choices. And their methods are very effective.

Consumers have to understand that the purpose of these claims is to get them to buy the product.

Food safety oversight is largely, but not exclusively, divided between two agencies, the FDA and the USDA. The USDA mostly oversees meat and poultry; the FDA mostly handles everything else, including pet food and animal feed. Although this division of responsibility means that the FDA is responsible for 80% of the food supply, it only gets 20% of the federal budget for this purpose. In contrast, the USDA gets 80% of the budget for 20% of the foods. This uneven distribution is the result of a little history and a lot of politics.

One can only be in awe of the creativity of chocolate marketers. My take is that if there is a health benefit, it is small.

“Here we have the great irony of modern nutrition: at a time when hundreds of millions of people do not have enough to eat, hundreds of millions more are eating too much and are overweight or obese.”

“It’s a completely reasonable diet — heavy on fruits and vegetables and fresh, seasonal foods. I’m totally for it. It’s common sense in a nice package.”

“What we know about diets hasn’t changed. It still makes sense to eat lots of fruits and vegetables, balance calories from other foods, and keep calories under control. That, however, does not make front-page news.”

“They (food companies) are putting $36 billion into directing those choices. And their methods are very effective.”

“Consumers have to understand that the purpose of these claims is to get them to buy the product.”

“One can only be in awe of the creativity of chocolate marketers. My take is that if there is a health benefit, it is small.”

Marion Nestle Quotes – These Quotes are some of the best you will come across on the web and as you can see they spake for themselves. We hoped you enjoyed these sayings as mus as we did.

Marion Nestle Picture