Marketing Vs. Real Health Benefits

“If people are going to spend their money for health benefits,” Mr. Vladeck says, “they ought to get them.”

Agreed!

Coming from someone who received both a B.S. in Marketing and certification in Health Counseling, I understand both sides of the story posted by the NY Times on May 14th. 

With good marketing, one can show the positive side of any product/item.  

Finding one nutritious ingredient in something can bring in so much more profit, and that's what companies are seeking. They are not marketing in an attempt to deceive or manipulate potential customers into buying something, but they may exaggerate the findings a bit. Example: Fiber found! Let's say it helps with digestion!

As customers, we want to trust the claims of the brands we buy. "Natural" should mean "healthy" in other terms. "Organic" should mean that the foods in the product are grown organically, not 70% organically, needing the "USDA Organic" labeling as well. Honestly, we shouldn't even need the word "Organic" since we shouldn't be growing / eating foods with hormones, antibiotics, and pesticides in them. 

Food should just be FOOD!

“'LET food be thy medicine, and medicine be thy food,' Hippocrates said 2,500 years ago. We’ve always known that some foods are better for us than others. But it took a little science and a lot of marketing to turn the concept into a global, multi billion-dollar industry." (NYT)