| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
|
|
|
|||||||
|
|||||||||
Department of Rural Sociology, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas
Address reprint requests to: Wm. Alex McIntosh, PhD, Department of Rural Sociology, 2125 TAMU, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77843-2125. Email: w-mcintosh{at}tamu.edu
 |
ABSTRACT |
|---|
 TOPFOOTNOTES ABSTRACT INTRODUCTIONBACKGROUNDMETHODSCONCLUSIONACKNOWLEDGMENTSREFERENCES |
|---|
Methods: Using the Reader’s Guide to Periodical Literature, the frequency of articles about eggs, dietary cholesterol and heart disease in popular magazines was obtained. A content analysis was performed on a random sample of these articles.
Results: The increased trend in magazine articles and public statements by groups such as the American Heart Association linking eggs, blood cholesterol and heart disease is associated with the downward trend in egg consumption.
Conclusions: Public exposure to negative messages about particular foods can contribute to a decline in their consumption. Exposure to more consistently positive messages about foods can bring about an increase in the consumption of those foods.
Key words: food scare, eggs, dietary cholesterol, heart disease
|
INTRODUCTION |
|---|
|
TOPFOOTNOTESABSTRACTINTRODUCTIONBACKGROUNDMETHODSCONCLUSIONACKNOWLEDGMENTSREFERENCES |
|---|
After more than 50 years of increase, U.S. per capita egg consumption began a 40-year decline, beginning in 1954. Many factors have contributed to this decline, but the main source may have began with a food scare that had its roots in the 1950’s, reaching full-bloom in the 1960’s. Unlike many food scares, the 1960s version not only lasted more than one decade, but it also had a significant impact on consumer behavior. This paper addresses food scares in general, and then attempts to demonstrate that the food scare that began in the 1960s in the United States helps explain this country’s rapid decline in egg consumption.
|
BACKGROUND |
|---|
|
TOPFOOTNOTESABSTRACTINTRODUCTIONBACKGROUNDMETHODSCONCLUSIONACKNOWLEDGMENTSREFERENCES |
|---|
Food scares usually involve what are known as food moralists. Food moralists are either individuals or groups that develop a concern or concerns about the food system. They harbor strong, unshakable beliefs and attempt to educate the public about the food scare and attempt to change the public’s behavior regarding food [1]. Food moralists frequently develop a vested interest in keeping the food scare alive in the public’s mind.
Food scares have characteristics similar to what sociologists have called fads. The fad is a form of collective behavior in which a sizable proportion of a population engages in widely imitated behaviors for a short period of time. Thus food scares may be associated with short-term changes in public perceptions of food and in food consumption. Unlike fads, however, food scares tend to take on characteristics of a social problem. Loftand [2] has argued that particular emotions drive involvement in collective behavior associated with social issues or problems. These emotions usually include fear, hostility or joy. In the case of social problems such as a food scare, fear and hostility towards others as well a objects are frequently involved.
Food Scares of the Past
As can be seen from Table 1, four food scares have taken place in the past 150 years [1]. In the first, the issue was adulterated flour. Food moralists led by Sylvester Graham claimed that food millers, bakers and shop keepers were engaged in ‘extending flour’ by adding foreign substances such as chalk or clay. The consequences of such adulteration included ‘lazy colon’ and the breakdown of trust in the community. The latter was the result of suspicion of those processing or selling flour by the rest of the community.
|
The food scares of the Great Depression and the 1960’s had several features in common. In both cases, consumers had come to believe that food processing robs food of many of its naturally occurring nutrients. During the 1930’s, several things resulted from these concerns. First, there was an effort on the part of the Consumers Union to get the food industry to label the content of its food products [3]; second, consumers increased substantially their intake of vitamin-mineral supplements [4]. The 1960’s food scare involved additional concerns regarding substances left behind in production and processing, namely pesticides, growth hormones, dyes and the like. During both of these food scares, food moralists perceived that processed food consumption caused chronic illnesses. Failure to thrive in children was also a concern. In the 1960’s, fears of food were connected to a general distrust of most social institutions, including food producers and processors. Even largely unprocessed foods such as eggs became objects of suspicion because of production practices [5].
The food scare of the 1960’s began with publications such as Rachel Carlson’s The Silent Spring, as well as the nutrition books of Adele Davis. Some segments of the public not only critiqued the food system, but also attempted to start food co-ops as pure alternatives to grocery store fare [6].
Eggs became a part of the 1960’s food scare as the public confronted an increase in claims that egg consumption raised dietary cholesterol, which in turn was said to raise blood cholesterol, a known risk factor for cardiovascular disease. The American Heart Association (AHA) contributed to eggs’ downfall through its strong and continued support for the hypothesis and argument that all Americans should reduce their consumption of eggs. It is fair to say that the AHA took the lead in promoting the eggs-cholesterol-heart disease connection.
Earlier food scares had little effect on consumer behavior [1]. However, the 1960s scare not only resulted in a number of changes in the eating habits of many, but in the behavior of the food industry as well. Furthermore, unlike earlier scares, the 1960s scare lasted for a much longer period of time. Part of the reason for the effectiveness of the 1960s scare and for its longevity is the role that science played in the process.
The Role of Science in Food Scares
Unlike most of the earlier food scares, the scientific community was highly involved in the 1960s food scare. Defenders of the food system used scientific findings in order to refute or at least downplay many of the attacks directed at food processing [3,7–8]. Detractors relied upon research findings to press home their concerns regarding the healthfulness and safety of the U.S. food supply. Others were involved in a more inadvertent manner through their debates over issues such as dietary cholesterol, saturated fats, blood cholesterol and heart disease. In particular, various individual scientists and scientific bodies weighed in with public statements about the eggs-cholesterol-heart disease hypothesis. Many of the articles published by the mass media featured quotations from leading cardiac researchers regarding their own research, the research of others or stances taken by professional organizations such as the American Heart Association.
Finally the food industry itself added fuel to the scare by promoting ‘low fat’ and ‘low cholesterol’ food products.
Getting the Message Out
In order for food scare concerns to reach the public, a means of conveyance is required. In the 19th century, newspapers printed portions of public addresses or summarized written statements made by food moralists. In the 20th century, Americans turned more to magazines as their primary source of news and information regarding health. During the 1960’s food scare, the press is said to have played an ambivalent role. It was critical of many of the ideas promoted by the counterculture, often applying ridicule in its articles. But since the press uses the frame of responsible capitalism in reporting, it was also willing to express criticisms of the food system when it perceived ‘irresponsible capitalism’ at work [9]. Belasco also has argued that news stories tended to reflect a ‘scare of the month’ over a long period of time, creating the impression of a food system ‘out of control.’ From this there arose the idea of Negative Nutrition, ‘a pervasive uncertainty that eating may not be good for you’ [9].
Eggs experienced increasing scrutiny by scientists searching for the causes of heart disease during the 1960’s. It is likely that the frequency and nature of mass media reportage on eggs differed in the 1960’s and beyond compared with the reportage from earlier decades. Furthermore, new and more frequent mass media coverage of eggs likely contributed to the decline in egg consumption that was underway during the 1960’s. In order to estimate mass media influence on the public’s perception and consumption of eggs, several pieces of information are required. First, the frequency of articles about eggs and related topics can be obtained through sources such as the Reader’s Guide to Periodical Literature. Second, samples of those articles can then be drawn in order to analyze the nature of statements made about eggs, cholesterol and heart disease in those articles.
|
METHODS |
|---|
|
TOPFOOTNOTESABSTRACTINTRODUCTIONBACKGROUNDMETHODSCONCLUSIONACKNOWLEDGMENTSREFERENCES |
|---|
The Reader’s Guide to Periodical Literature [10] was used to determine counts of articles about eggs. Other researchers have used this resource for obtaining frequencies of mass media messages regarding eggs [11]. Frequency counts of articles about eggs were drawn for the time period 1940–1999. Key terms such as eggs, cookery—eggs, omelets, soufflés, cholesterol, heart disease and the American Heart Association were used in obtaining this count.
Once a count was obtained, random samples of articles were drawn from each decade in order to develop examples of the content of the articles. These articles were assessed in terms of the rhetoric employed regarding the healthfulness of eggs; Ibara and Kitsuse [12] refer to this as the ‘rhetoric of endangerment’ employed in claims made about particular subjects.
Frequency of Messages
Fig. 1 shows trends in the frequency of articles published every five years since 1940. Topics included are general articles regarding eggs (these have to do with production issues, egg prices, Federal policies affecting egg production), egg cookery (i.e., articles about cooking eggs and recipes), heart disease (causes, treatment), cholesterol and the American Heart Association. It should be noted here that an article about heart disease may contain information regarding cholesterol, may mention eggs and may refer to the American Heart Association’s position on eggs, cholesterol and heart disease. Thus the counts are not mutually exclusive.
|
By contrast, articles concerning egg cookery have oscillated between seven and twenty a year since 1940, with no apparent trend. Nor has there been a discernable trend in reportage on eggs in general or the American Heart Association.
Correlations were calculated between the frequency of articles about heart disease, cholesterol and per capita egg consumption. The heart disease article-egg consumption relationship was negative and statistically significant (r=-.567;p<.051) as was the cholesterol article-egg consumption relationship (r=-.534; p<.058).
Article Content
While the frequency of articles about heart disease and cholesterol tend to trend along with egg consumption, the content of the articles should not be overlooked, for their messages are not necessarily consistent. In fact many of the articles tend to present conflicting information.
Table 2 shows that in the 1940’s,magazine articles said little about the healthfulness of eggs. Instead, news articles focused primarily on issues of supply and demand. Articles in service/women’s magazines emphasized either the versatility in cooking that eggs represented or the variety that eggs provided the consumer. By the 1950’s, news articles began to appear that suggested that dietary cholesterol was associated with heart disease. Some of the articles mentioned eggs as a major source of dietary cholesterol, but others did not. Nor did the articles always mention positions taken by groups such as the American Heart Association regarding diet and heart disease.
|
In decades in which few if any magazine articles mentioned eggs in connection with health, cookbooks served as a provider of such information. Cookbooks written from the 1940’s until recently either made no statements about the nutrient content of eggs or stated that eggs are significant sources of protein and many vitamins and minerals. However, the average proportion of recipes containing eggs was approximately 40%. This implicitly suggests that the authors perceived that eating eggs frequently was of little concern. The one exception to these generalizations is those cookbooks written especially to promote low fat, low cholesterol diets. These cookbooks tended to present no more than 15% of their recipes containing eggs and many of these called for egg whites only.
Other Sources of Information about Eggs
Magazines are not the only form of mass media carrying information about eggs. Cookbooks, health advice books and nutrition textbooks are all sources of such information. Table 3 contains a sample of statements found in these sources.
|
Nutrition textbooks written since the 1940’s also discussed eggs, generally in terms of their nutrient content. These descriptions normally included reference to the amount of cholesterol contained in a single egg, yet no recommendations were made with regard to eating more or fewer of them. However, nutrition textbooks written since the mid-1990’s have tended to mention the egg-cholesterol-heart disease connection as a scientific debate that has recently been resolved in eggs’ favor.
Trends in Policy Statements
A final source of information regarding dietary cholesterol and heart disease in particular that may have had some influence on public perception and behavior are statements made by task forces and consensus committees of health professionals. Table 4 contains examples of statements made by such professional bodies in the 1970’s and again in the 1990’s. Recommendations regarding dietary cholesterol in the 1970s were mixed. Some recommended consuming 300 or fewer milligrams of cholesterol daily, while others argued that it was premature to make any such recommendations. Furthermore, those making recommendations differed sharply over whether recommendations to lower percentage energy from fat, saturated fat or dietary cholesterol should be aimed at the general public or only at those considered at high risk of coronary heart disease because of elevated serum cholesterol.
|
|
CONCLUSION |
|---|
|
TOPFOOTNOTESABSTRACTINTRODUCTIONBACKGROUNDMETHODSCONCLUSIONACKNOWLEDGMENTSREFERENCES |
|---|
These findings might, thus, undercut the claim that health messages have contributed to the declining consumption of eggs since the 1950’s. However, other analyses suggest that this is the case [11]. Furthermore, it can be argued that once the public becomes aware of the egg-cholesterol-heart disease hypothesis, subsequent articles, even those that claim that the hypothesis is controversial and unproven, may simply remind the readers that there is a potential risk. Those inclined to avoid risks may continue to eat fewer eggs until the news is more positive. In fact, more consistently positive news began to appear in the mass media as early as 1989 and by 1995, egg consumption had begun to rise. Accompanying these increases in positive news and egg consumption is a decline in consumer perception of a dietary cholesterol-heart disease connection [52].
Another explanation regarding the recent increase in egg consumption is also available. The past decade represents one of relative prosperity, particularly compared with earlier decades. Thus, during some of the same decades in which consumers feared the foods they ate, they also had restricted their purchases of consumer goods in general because of tight budgets. With the growing prosperity of the past decade, consumers began to purchase more in an atmosphere of immediate gratification. In this context, they may have come to perceive a tremendous discontinuity between the view that food was one of life’s most important pleasures and the view that pleasurable food was to be avoided. These consumers may have grown tired of fearing their food; they may have become weary of fearing those things that they had long associated with enjoyment. In fact, most food scares end as consumers either cease to worry about a feared food or find substitutes to replace it [53–54]. The 1999 Healthfocus Trend Report [55] indicates, for example, that consumers are eating fewer reduced fat foods, and more report that they are less likely to ‘give up good taste’ for health benefits.
|
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS |
|---|
|
TOPFOOTNOTESABSTRACTINTRODUCTIONBACKGROUNDMETHODSCONCLUSIONACKNOWLEDGMENTSREFERENCES |
|---|
|
FOOTNOTES |
|---|
|
TOPFOOTNOTESABSTRACTINTRODUCTIONBACKGROUNDMETHODSCONCLUSIONACKNOWLEDGMENTSREFERENCES |
|---|
|
REFERENCES |
|---|
|
TOPFOOTNOTESABSTRACTINTRODUCTIONBACKGROUNDMETHODSCONCLUSIONACKNOWLEDGMENTSREFERENCES |
|---|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
