Addiction Commonality

Alcohol, Opiates, Fat and Sugar are all Addictive Substances: this blog is about that "addiction sameness".

Butter Pig Family

* A butter sculpture of a sow and her piglets

Monday, August 5, 2013

Top 5 Anti-Inflammatory Foods




Inflammation. While the word itself sounds daunting, inflammation is actually a natural response by your body to a stressful situation. Inflammation is the first response as your immune system protects your body from infections, irritation and allergies. Even good sources of stress—such as exercise—can increase inflammation in your body. Unfortunately the swelling, redness, and pain that inflammation can cause is not always wanted, and chronic inflammation can cause more serious illnesses. Help your body protect itself by adding foods that promote health, while reducing unnecessary inflammation. Here are 5 anti-inflammatory foods to add to your grocery list today:

1. Spinach

Want to reduce inflammation after exercise? Popeye knew what he was doing with his spinach consumption! Spinach contains antioxidants vitamin C, and E, as well as carotenoids and flavonoids—all which fight against inflammation. If you’re already eating spinach salads, try adding a handful to your Vega One[http://myvega.com/product/vega-one-nutritional-shake/] smoothie for an extra green boost!
2. Tart Cherries or Tart Cherry Juice

Tart cherries contain compounds called anthocyanins, which can block inflammation while helping to prevent muscle damage.(1) Add tart cherry juice to your post-workout drink to gain benefits, or eat a couple as an after-dinner treat.

3. Garlic

It’s no wonder that garlic is loved by many countries around the world—it’s rich in anti-inflammatory compounds diallyl sulfide (DAS) and thiacremonone.(2) Just one clove of garlic offers many compounds that are known to help lower inflammation and increase circulation, such as phosphorus, selenium, zinc, polyphenols, arginine and vitamins B6 and C.

4. Omega-3 Fatty Acids

When you consume Omega-3s, your body makes resolvins. Resolvins help fight inflammation by inhibiting the production and regulating the movement of inflammatory chemicals.(3)Top plant-based sources of Omega-3s include flaxseeds, pumpkin seeds, hemp seeds, SaviSeeds (sacha inchi)[http://myvega.com/product/vega-saviseeds/], and walnuts.
5. Kimchi, sauerkraut, and kombucha

Fermented foods such as kimchi, sauerkraut, and kombucha contain probiotics that help to support your immune system and fight inflammation.(4) Probiotics help to support immune system by nourishing your good gut bacteria while crowding out of bad bacteria.

Looking for more ways to reduce inflammation? Check out Thrive Forward for recipes and nutrition tips through a personalized lesson plan relevant to you, including more anti-inflammatory foods: thriveforward.com

References
Connolly, DA et al. (2006).Efficacy of a tart cherry juice blend in preventing the symptoms of muscle damage. British Journal of Sports Medicine. 40(8):679-83. Accessed 7/1/13 from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2579450/
Ban JO, et al. (2009). Anti-inflammatory and arthritic effects of thiacremonone, a novel sulfur compound isolated from garlic via inhibition of NF-kappaB. Arthritis Research and Therapy. 11(5):R145. Accessed 7/1/13 fromhttp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2787296/
Serhan, Charles N. and Petasis, Nicos A. (2011) Resolvins and Protectins in Inflammation-Resolution. Chemical Reviews, October 12; 111(10): 5922–5943. Accessed 7/1/13 from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3192290/
Jirillo E, Jirillo F, Magrone T. (2012). Healthy effects exerted by prebiotics, probiotics, and symbiotics with special reference to their impact on the immune system.) International Journal of Vitamin and Nutrition Research. 200-8




How Bad Science and Big Business Created the Obesity Epidemic


Published on Feb 1, 2013


David Diamond, Ph.D., of the University of South Florida College of Arts and Sciences shares his personal story about his battle with obesity. 

Diamond shows how he lost weight and reduced his triglycerides by eating red meat, eggs and butter.

You can download Dr. Diamond's PowerPoint and the iTunes U podcast here: http://www.cas.usf.edu/news/s/169/#VI...




Link: http://youtu.be/Cf-tnVZtPgU




"The Trouble with Fructose: a Darwinian Perspective" by Robert Lustig, MD



Published on Jun 9, 2012
SLIDES: http://www.slideshare.net/ancestralhe...

ABSTRACT: Rates of fructose consumption continue to rise worldwide, and have been linked to rising rates of obesity, type-2 diabetes mellitus, and metabolic syndrome. Elucidation of fructose metabolism in liver and fructose action in brain demonstrate three parallelisms with ethanol. 

First, hepatic fructose metabolism is similar to ethanol in that by accelerating the process of de novo lipogenesis, both promote hepatic insulin resistance, dyslipidemia, and hepatic steatosis. 

Second, fructosylation of proteins with resultant superoxide formation can result in inflammation similar to acetaldehyde, an intermediary metabolite of ethanol.

Lastly, by stimulating the "hedonic pathway" of the brain both directly and indirectly, fructose creates habituation, and possibly dependence; also paralleling ethanol. 

On a societal level, the treatment of fructose as a commodity on the open market exhibits similarities to ethanol. Fructose induces alterations in both hepatic metabolism and central nervous system energy signaling, leading to a "vicious cycle" of excessive consumption and disease consistent with metabolic syndrome. These dose-dependent actions of fructose on the liver and on the hedonic pathway of the brain recapitulate the effects of ethanol.

Released by The Ancestral Health Symposiumhttp://ancestryfoundation.org/ under the Creative Commons licensehttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/b...





Link:  http://youtu.be/Yh4JBXaKnmA





Asia’s Pastry Pirates Crack the Cronut Code

 
By Josephine Cuneta and Eric Bellman

Wildflour Cafe + BakeryA croissant doughnut from the Wildflour Cafe + Bakery in Manila.
Born just a few months ago, the cronut — the New York pastry phenomenon — is already being pirated across Asia.

This doughnut-meets-croissant treat invented by Dominique Ansel in May is an over-the-top pastry made of croissant dough that is deep fried, then injected with cream or jam and topped with icing.
 

It has New Yorkers —including cronut scalpers — lining up at 3 a.m. at Mr. Ansel’s bakery in SoHo to snatch up the few made each day before they sell out.

Ana Lorenzana-De Ocampo knew she had to have it in her high-end Manila eatery, the Wildflour Cafe + Bakery, the minute she heard about the food craze.


She sent her brother, who works in New York, to stand in line and investigate. He waited for two hours to get some allotted cronuts, and then flew one over from New York to Manila.
 

Ms. De Ocampo reverse-engineered the flaky, flavor-packed pastries and came up with her own version. She decided to generically name them croissant doughnuts, to avoid any trademark infringement.


Thanks to her extended global network of Filipino friends and family, Ms. De Ocampo figures she may be the first to bring a cronut knockoff to Asia.


While cronut creator Mr. Ansel has says he is flattered by the imitation, few consumers or even pastry pirates know how close their Asian versions are to the original cronut, so it is bound to evolve into a sort of croissant-frying free-for-all. 

Whether the fad fades like the Harlem Shake videos or sticks around like gourmet cupcakes remains to be seen.


 





 

Sunday, August 4, 2013

Sugar: The Bitter Truth


Uploaded on Jul 30, 2009


Watch "The Skinny on Obesity" with Dr. Lustig: http://www.uctv.tv/skinny-on-obesity
Robert H. Lustig, MD, UCSF Professor of Pediatrics in the Division of Endocrinology, explores the damage caused by sugary foods. He argues that fructose (too much) and fiber (not enough) appear to be cornerstones of the obesity epidemic through their effects on insulin. Series: UCSF Mini Medical School for the Public [7/2009] [Health and Medicine] [Show ID: 16717]

More UCTV videos about sugar: http://www.uctv.tv/sugar
Dr. Lustig's book (comes out Dec 27, 2012), "Fat Chance: Beating the Odds Against Sugar, Processed Food, Obesity, and Disease": http://www.amazon.com/Fat-Chance-Beat...


Category - Education
License - Standard YouTube License



Link: http://youtu.be/dBnniua6-oM




Parents are warned to steer clear of sugar-filled 'healthy' drinks


Parents' efforts on healthy eating 'undermined' by marketing campaigns and lack of government interest.


Nutritionists and health campaigners are calling on parents to avoid supposedly "healthy" fruit drinks during the hot summer – asking them to give thirsty children plain water or milk instead.
The calls come as new health research puts sugary drinks, and particularly the fructose in them, at the heart of the "diabesity" epidemic affecting young people in Britain. Some 67 health charities, medical royal colleges and public health bodies are asking the government to consider a health tax on sugary drinks, along the lines of those already successfully introduced in France and four other European countries.
But the campaign group Sustain, which leads a consortium of organisations campaigning for legislative action on children and sugar, told the Observer that the government had shown no interest. The Treasury refused to comment on Sustain's January report, which set out the case for taxation of added sugar in food and drink, while the Department of Health merely referred its copy on to the Treasury, saying the issue was "not within its remit".
"Parents' best efforts to encourage their families to eat healthily are undermined by cynical multimillion-pound marketing strategies that present sugary drinks as fun and fashionable," said Sustain campaigns director Charlie Powell.

"As government chooses to ignore the science that clearly classifies sugar as toxic, it's no surprise that public health policies fail to protect children."



Many ‘healthy’ drinks for children contain nearly as much sugar as Coca-Cola. 
Many "healthy" drinks, such as Robinson's My-5 Fruit Shoot, especially targeted at parents and children, contain nearly as much sugar as Coca-Cola. The 200 ml Fruit Shoot bottle provides 40% of total sugar a child under the age of six should consume in 24 hours. Yet labeling calls the drink "healthy" and provides only adult dosage guidelines. 

Manufacturer Britvic says the labeling complies with current regulations.
"What's wrong with water?" asks Annie Anderson, professor of public health nutrition at Dundee University. "We need to promote water drinking … it's cool, refreshing, thirst-quenching and healthy."
Children in Scotland consume more sugar than anyone else in Europe: the equivalent of 287 cans of sugary drink a year. Scottish GPs report that diabetes rates in young people are doubling, while 30% of under-15s are overweight.
But, said nutritionist Dr Helen Crawley, the arguments are hard to sell to parents. 
"They think giving water is 'mean'. 
Children 'don't like' water, so parents are tempted by 'healthy alternatives'." 
She recommends that, between meals, children should drink only milk or water.
Manufacturers reject any link between sugary drinks and obesity, saying the answer lies in exercise and education. The British Soft Drinks Association said a tax would not address the problem: "Soft drinks, which contribute just 2% of the total calories in the average diet, will not help address it. Over the past 10 years, the consumption of soft drinks containing added sugar has fallen by 9%, while the incidence of obesity has increased by 15%."
However, the political tide may be moving towards action on sugary drinks. A tax of seven cents per litre (about 6p) introduced in January 2012 in France has reduced consumption by 3.3%. Influential MPs including Ben Bradshaw and Keith Vaz, have called for such a tax, while last year's Liberal Democrat conference passed a motion in favour of it.

New research in the US has prompted 15 state legislatures to consider taking some kind of action on soft drinks (though last week New York City's attempt to ban "super-size" soda servings was ruled unconstitutional).

"There's no question that political action on sugary drinks is on its way," said Powell. 

"The science and the public health pressures continue to mount."





Parents are warned to steer clear of sugar-filled 'healthy' drinks | Life and style | The Observer

LINK: http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2013/aug/04/sugar-drinks-health-policy-tax?CMP=twt_fd





Saturday, August 3, 2013

Astounding increase in antidepressant use by Americans



Peter Wehrwein, Contributor, Harvard Health



Remember when the best-selling book 'Listening to Prozac' came out almost 20 years ago?

Now Americans aren’t just reading about Prozac. They are taking it and other antidepressants (Celexa, Effexor, Paxil, Zoloft, to name just a few) in astounding numbers.

According to a report released yesterday by the National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS), the rate of antidepressant use in this country among teens and adults (people ages 12 and older) increased by almost 400% between 1988–1994 and 2005–2008.

The federal government’s health statisticians figure that about one in every 10 Americans takes an antidepressant. And by their reckoning, antidepressants were the third most common prescription medication taken by Americans in 2005–2008, the latest period during which the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) collected data on prescription drug use.

Here are a few other stand-out statistics from the report on antidepressants:

i) 23% of women in their 40s and 50s take antidepressants, a higher percentage than any other group (by age or sex)

ii) Women are 2½ times more likely to be taking an antidepressant than men (click here to read a May 2011 article in the Harvard Mental Health Letter about women and depression)

iii) 14% of non-Hispanic white people take antidepressants compared with just 4% of non-Hispanic blacks and 3% of Mexican Americans

iv) Less than a third of Americans who are taking a single antidepressants (as opposed to two or more) have seen a mental health professional in the past year

v) Antidepressant use does not vary by income status.

So is it a good thing that so many more Americans are taking antidepressants? 

A. Many (perhaps most) mental health professionals would say, yes, because depression has been under-treated and because antidepressants are effective.

B. But there are also plenty of critics, as shown by this review in the New York Review of Books, who say the benefits have been overstated and that pharmaceutical company marketing is responsible for the surge in prescriptions.

C. Of course there’s a middle ground that combines—some might say muddles—these two points of view: depression was neglected and sometimes antidepressants are the remedy, but there is some overuse and has been a major factor in the 400% increase.

What do you think?

Has an antidepressant worked for you?

Have the benefits been exaggerated and the side effects downplayed?




Related Information: Understanding Depression






Note:  The trend remains in place although this article is a about 2 years old...

Astounding increase in antidepressant use by Americans POSTED OCTOBER 20, 2011,

Monday, July 29, 2013

Documentary: Addicted to Pleasure - Opium (BBC Documentary Series)


Published on Apr 17, 2013

Brian Cox learns the origins and history of modern-day opium addiction.

Actor Brian Cox reveals the rich and controversial past of sugar, alcohol, tobacco and opium to uncover how the commercial exploitation of these products hooked the world.









Link: http://youtu.be/DTQWc6G3vwo



Sunday, July 28, 2013

Smokers' Choice.

Smokers tend to resist antismoking efforts that rely on “rational” approaches such as taxes, and researchers have pointed to confounding influences, including social factors and addiction. But differences in smokers’ decision-making processes may also be at play.
A recent study from the Baylor College of Medicine found that smokers and nonsmokers react differently to news of how much they could have made in a stock-market game. The feedback was purely incidental: it offered no financial incentive to adjust one’s investment strategy, yet nonsmokers were swayed by what might have been and changed their tactics. Smokers ignored the input, even though they processed the information in the same part of the brain as their nonsmoking peers did.
The study does not address whether smokers’ behavior is a cause or an effect of their addictions but rather adds to a growing list of ways in which human beings sometimes ignore reason when it comes to decision making. In the book Predictably Irrational (HarperCollins, 2008), behavioral economist Dan Ariely of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology catalogues a bevy of errors, biases and otherwise illogical human behavior. Other behavioral economists are doing the same on the premise that these absurdities are understand­able, and they are just beginning to team up with neuroscientists to try to tease out the roots of decision-making biases in the brain.
The hope is that this knowledge will one day inform policy. To combat smoking, for example, policymakers could “use evidence of what brain areas are active during the [decision-making] process to design other strategies” more nuanced than taxation, says behavioral economist Colin Camerer of the California Institute of Technology.
The field of neuroeconomics is in its infancy, however. Neuroscientists agree with behavioral economists that in the future it will be possible to use our irrationalities to our advantage, but as for whether their work could soon steer policy, “I think it’s just too early” to make a decision, Ariely says.

Link: http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=smokers-choice





How to Avoid the Temptations of Immediate Gratification (complete)


You know you want me.Image: iStock/Debbi Smirnoff


How to Avoid the Temptations of Immediate Gratification


Neuroscience hints at the power of imagining the future



By Melanie Bauer


You cannot resist the small, sweet reward of a cookie even though the larger, delayed reward of a healthier body is ultimately more desirable.
 
What leads some of us to give in to our immediate urges, while others are able to endure the wait for bigger and better outcomes?
Neurologists are investigating the brain to answer this question. They are interested in comparing the brain activity of individuals who act impulsively—those who choose rewards now over later—to that of patient folks.

Traditionally, the assumption of researchers in this field, and the related field of behavioral economics, has been that impulsive people choose immediate rewards simply because they dislike waiting. In these prior studies, when presented with a hypothetical choice between, say, $50 now or $100 in a year, impulsive individuals went for the $50. Additionally, they showed a greater brain response to the immediate $50 reward—in the part of the brain that represents how much you are enjoying a reward (the ventral striatum)—than did patient people.

Researchers interpreted this brain response as the impulsive individuals’ preference for immediacy. 

So while impulsive individuals would claim “carpe diem” and “strike while the iron is hot” as their life mantras, the less quoted “carpent tua poma nepotes” and “good things come to those who wait” are patient individuals’ words to live by.


However, impulsivity may not simply be due to how long people are willing to wait for gratification. A recent study by a team of researchers at Washington University in St. Louis found that when people waited for a reward, patient people were seen—through the lens of a functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) machine—imagining the future. In more patient people, the researchers observed increased activity in the region of the brain that helps you think about the future (the anterior prefrontal cortex).
The patient individuals, it seems, devoted more energy to imagining receiving their reward later.What sets this Washington University study apart from previous studies is that researchers have never before focused on the brain responses of individuals after they make a decision and are waiting for their reward. 

Instead, researchers have typically measured brain activity while people are making their choices. Prior researchers likely disregarded the waiting period because their studies used hypothetical rewards over long delays. Because people weren’t actually waiting in real time to receive a real reward, the researchers could not monitor the brain during this waiting period. 

This new study presented people with real rewards in the form of squirts of juice either immediately or at a delay of up to a minute. In fact, the researchers squirted the juice straight into the mouths of study subjects, in much the same way that animals have been rewarded in similar studies.


This future thinking, which is associated with the anterior prefrontal cortex (aPFC), has also been found in neuropsychological studies that focus on two different, but related phenomena:

1.   prospective memory—remembering to do something in the future, like fill up your gas tank on the way home from work—and 

2. episodic future thought—thinking about the future, such as imagining what you’ll cook for dinner later tonight. 

Now, one more phenomenon can be added to the list of contexts in which people imagine a future outcome and activate their a PFC:

3. imagining future rewards.

One problem with the future is its vagueness.
While you are able to imagine in your mind going to the gas station or cooking dinner in general, the exact details of these activities are not clear. You don’t know which pump you’ll use at the gas station, or precisely what time you’ll remove the pizza from the oven. In this way, the future is fuzzy. This fuzziness can make the future less appealing. 

Remember the marshmallow experiment that tested the willpower of children to resist the temptation to eat a marshmallow placed on a table in front of them, so they could receive two marshmallows after they waited? 

Research* suggests that if that one marshmallow was made more abstract—such as hiding it from view or just showing a picture of it—the reward would become less appealing and more similar in appeal to receiving two marshmallows at a future time. On the flip side, making the future less fuzzy by focusing on the details—eating double the marshmallows currently being presented—could also make the future marshmallows more attractive than the present singular marshmallow. In this way kids would have an easier time resisting the one marshmallow now in exchange for the two marshmallows in the future.

Perhaps a combination of this fuzziness research (i.e., delay of gratification research) with recent neuroeconomics research—linking impulsivity with a lack of future thinking—could be useful for clinicians who are developing treatment plans for impulsive individuals. Because the future is fuzzy and impulsive people have an especially hard time imagining it, clinical treatments could involve de-emphasizing the present, making it more abstract, and building a concrete image of the future. 

For example, while it may be quicker, easier, and cheaper to buy fast food for dinner—immediate rewards that are all very desirable—people could learn to visualize larger future rewards when deciding what to eat, such as avoiding ailments like obesity and Type-2 diabetes. 

They could also avoid driving past their favorite fast food restaurants and only stock their cupboards with nutritious foods so the most visually salient meal options are healthy ones. This could help shift the attractive light from being cast on the present desire for fast food to instead being on the future desire for a healthy body.

For impulsive individuals who repeatedly make decisions that satisfy their current desires at the expense of their future needs, the negative effects on their health can be significant.
 

Given the host of public health issues that involve impulsivity, research in neuroeconomics could prove important. Future research could measure the effects of an intervention on the brain. Can we get impulsive people to produce activity in their brain that shows they’re thinking about the future in a concrete way, making them look and act more patiently in the laboratory? Do these interventions lead to real-life choices to invest in the future and not give in to present impulses? Not to mention, could adapting the mindset that the future is worth waiting for help the rest of us keep some of our New Year’s resolutions?


Link: http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=how-to-avoid-the-temptations-of-immediate-gratification



ABOUT THE AUTHOR(S)



Melanie Bauer
is a graduate student in psychology at Washington University in St. Louis studying cognitive aging. She will write her dissertation on informal science education, and has also contributed to The Open Notebook. Connect with Melanie

on Twitter 
A characteristic marker of impulsive decision making is the discounting of delayed rewards, demonstrated via choice preferences and choice-related brain activity. However, delay discounting may also arise from how subjective reward value is dynamically represented in the brain when anticipating an upcoming chosen reward. In the current study, brain activity was continuously monitored as human participants freely selected an immediate or delayed primary liquid reward and then waited for the specified delay before consuming it. The ventromedial prefrontal cortex (vmPFC) exhibited a characteristic pattern of activity dynamics during the delay period, as well as modulation during choice, that is consistent with the time-discounted coding of subjective value. The ventral striatum (VS) exhibited a similar activity pattern, but preferentially in impulsive individuals. A contrasting profile of delay-related and choice activation was observed in the anterior PFC (aPFC), but selectively in patient individuals. Functional connectivity analyses indicated that both vmPFC and aPFC exerted modulatory, but opposite, influences on VS activation. These results link behavioral impulsivity and self-control to dynamically evolving neural representations of future reward value, not just during choice, but also during postchoice delay periods.
  • Received February 26, 2012.
  • Revision received November 5, 2012.
  • Accepted November 7, 2012.





More Than an Apple a Day: Preventing Our Most Common Diseases



Note: 
Dr. Greger builds a strong case for switching to a plant-based diet for the health of it.  He talks about the benefits to people suffering from autoimmune diseases like m.s.

This would help the planet by reducing cattle production.




Published on Jul 15, 2013

Subscribe for free to Dr. Greger's videos at:
http://bit.ly/nutritionfactsupdates

DESCRIPTION: Dr. Greger has scoured the world's scholarly literature on clinical nutrition and developed this brand-new live presentation on the latest in cutting-edge research on how a healthy diet can affect some of our most common medical conditions.

In my annual nutrition review last year, Uprooting the Leading Causes of Death (http://nutritionfacts.org/video/uproo...), I explored the role diet may play in preventing, arresting, and even reversing our top 15 killers. Actually, if you recall, the top 16. Since side effects from prescription drugs kill an estimated 100,000 Americans a year, the sixth leading cause of death may actually be doctors.
And that's just from adverse drug reactions. Add in medical mistakes (which the Institute of Medicine estimates kills at least 44,000 Americans) and that brings "health"care up to our country's third leading cause of death. Throw in hospital-acquired infections, and we're talking maybe 187,000 Americans dead every year (and millions injured) by medical care.

The best way to avoid the adverse effects of medical and surgical tests and treatments is not to avoid doctors, but to avoid getting sick in the first place. This year I thought I'd run through the top dozen reasons people visit their doctors to highlight some of the latest research in hopes of moving my colleagues and me lower down the list of common killers.

So you can more easily navigate through the menu of diseases I cover, this presentation is also available on DVD through my website (http://www.drgreger.org/DVDs) or Amazon (http://www.amazon.com/s/?_encoding=UT...). If you want to share copies with others I have a five for $40 (http://www.drgreger.org/DVDs) special. All proceeds from the sales of all my books, DVDs, and presentations all go to charity.

Have a question for Dr. Greger about this video? Leave it in the comment section at http://nutritionfacts.org/video/more-... and he'll try to answer it!








































Link:
http://youtu.be/qyyHsb6WGgY




Monday, July 22, 2013

The 300 Billionth Burger



Economix - Explaining the Science of Everyday Life
JULY 22, 2013
By NANCY FOLBRE



In his autobiography, “Grinding It Out: The Making of McDonald’s,” Ray Kroc described the company he built as “my personal monument to capitalism.”

The monument is a towering one. Only ballpark estimates are available, because McDonald’s stopped posting estimates of its cumulative burger sales when they reached 99 billion in 1994. But the company is on track to hit the 300 billion mark in the near future, if it hasn’t already.

With total revenue that exceeds the gross domestic product of Ecuador, McDonald’s is virtually a culinary country of its own. Not surprisingly, it has become a recurrent focus of political contention.

This year’s protests against the low pay of its employees reflect: 

- larger concerns about the decline of good jobs in the United States, and

- the company’s recently published personal budgeting advice reflects remarkably widespread disregard for people trying to get by on poverty-level wages.

A company that can sell 300 billion burgers clearly knows how to respond to consumer concerns. As Eric Schlosser explains in “Fast Food Nation,” McDonald’s moved relatively quickly to improve standards of humane treatment for the (nonhuman) animals in its supply chain. 

In the wake of bad publicity from Morgan Spurlock’s film “Supersize Me,” the company made significant efforts to improve the nutritional value of its menu. Last year, the company took the lead in a commitment to post calorie counts for every item.

Of course, the company’s nutritional impact is influenced by policies over which it has little direct control. In the United States, Big Macs cost less than a salad largely because our agricultural policies subsidize the price of meat far more generously than the prices of fresh vegetables and fruits.

The low wages the company pays its workers also reflect the economic environment. In this country they average less than $8 an hour, reflecting a federal minimum wage that has been stuck at $7.25 an hour for four years. If the minimum wage were adjusted to correct for inflation, its 1968 peak would amount to about $9.42 today.

More than 88 percent of those who would benefit from a higher minimum are over the age of 20.

Global comparisons demonstrate that macroeconomic conditions and government regulation — not individual skill or effort — determine the level of company wages relative to prices.  

In 2005, the now-defunct Asian Labour News estimated that it took:

- workers in America at McDonald’s took about 30 minutes to earn enough to buy a Big Mac. 

- workers in China, it took workers behind the counter about 3 hours 58 minutes; 

- workers in India, 8 hours 34 minutes.

The relative bargaining power of low-wage workers has a far greater impact on burger prices than differences in efficiency. 

Underlying differences in labor markets — as well as factors influencing international exchange rates — help explain why Big Macs are relatively expensive in dollar terms in high-wage countries such as Norway and Switzerland and relatively cheap in low-wage ones like India and China.

Americans whose top priority is minimizing burger costs should perhaps shop overseas. 
Low-price fast food offers some quick visible benefits. 

But consumers who are also workers need to consider its long-run implications for their own wages and living standards. Happy Meals don’t necessarily lead to happy families.

Wage trends in fast food are not simply a result of impersonal market forces. Corporate policy matters. According to Bloomberg News, the disparity between the pay of McDonald’s fast-food workers and its chief executive officer has doubled in the last 10 years, while the company lobbied against minimum wage increases and discouraged unionization.

The budgeting advice that the company management recently offered employees — effectively lampooned in a video posted by the group Low Pay Is Not Okay — reveals a management that is out of touch with the experience of its workers.  It includes estimates for rent and utilities, but it does not mention food, clothing, gas, or child care. It presumes that they will hold a second job and find health insurance costing only $20 a month.

The sample budget assumes hourly gross pay of about $15 an hour (assuming a 40-hour workweek), far more than most McDonald’s employees will ever earn. In other words, the company’s own calculations suggest that it fails to offer a living wage.

It is hard to imagine Ray Kroc, a self-made businessman who started out selling milkshake machines, ever patronizing his employees in such a careless way.

According to a recent Gallup Poll, more than two-thirds of Americans support an increase in the minimum wage, and some restaurant owners are also on board.

McDonald’s could put a living wage on its menu. You could ask for it the next time you hit the takeout window.

Or you could just drive past the golden arches in search of a better monument to your ideals.




Nancy Folbre is an economics professor at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst.

Link: http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/07/22/the-300-billionth-burger/?partner=rss&emc=rss&utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter