Different Consumer Roles in Processed Food Intake

The prevalence of toxins in processed food manifests itself differently among wealthier and marginalized citizens, calling into question informed choices and the limitations of choice. The unchecked spread of toxic pollutions is a product of larger social structures and institutions, mainly a consumerist and free-market mentality.

In pursuit of higher crop yields and increased industrial profits, one billion pounds of pesticides are used each year despite known increases in asthma and cancer rates since the onset of pesticide use following World War II. The profit driven industry sits comfortably by delegating public health concerns to the government, evidenced by Monsanto’s director of corporate communications Phil Angell. "Our interest is in selling as much of it [biotech food] as possible. Assuring its safety is the FDA's job"

Through marketing techniques, industry is able to create a demand in order to facilitate the sale of toxins manifested in the form of processed and convenience foods. Convenience foods, or commercially prepared foods, come in many forms such as hot, ready-to-eat dishes; shelf-stable products; frozen products, or dry mixes that require minimal preparation. More than 10,000 chemical solvents, emulsifiers and preservatives are used in processed and convenience foods, and over 3,000 chemicals are added directly to the food supply. Complex chemicals known as “natural” and “artificial” flavor are responsible for the tastes associated with processed food, but have created vast amounts of toxic pollution and health complications. Despite this, industries have the recourses to engage in aggressive and capital-intensive market campaigns, using careful representation to achieve increased sales at an increased rate.

Growing distrust does not necessarily translate into action because values come into play, and risks are weighed against development and the convenience toxins have provided. Food industries capitalize on society’s sentiments associated with the family dinner by creating advertisement that depicts processed food as a way to participate in and strengthen the traditional nuclear family, as well as create a means to achieve the craft and “timeless human activity” despite emerging time constraints. American families are willing to invest in convenience foods as the only means to achieve this the benefits associated with the family dinner ideal, which outweighs the risks associated with processed food. The irony, however, is that processed foods that are potentially harmful to children are considered a necessary means for achieving the family dinner which is viewed as important for the family. The consumers, educated Americans with disposable incomes and reported concern for the environment, acknowledge the risks associated with processed food but do not change their behavior because of the values that come into play when evaluating risk.

The sustained use of processed food in the low-income population of American society is a result of different factors, calling into question aspects of environmental justice. Among low-income American families, mobilizing resources and educating individuals on the dangers presented by toxic processed foods does not translate into behavior changes because this population is acting within the “parameters of choice” set by larger social, larger social, political and ecological actors. Processed food serves as the cheapest source of calories and therefore the continued consumption provides some necessary benefits despite known costs. For this reason, low-income reliance on processed foods is intertwined with aspects of environmental justice including exclusionary decision-making and biased processes of risk assessment. 


The risk of processed foods is also attenuated because of the belief that the consumption of processed foods is voluntary and controllable. Among low-income families dependent on cheap calories, this is not the case. An accurate assessment of risk, identifying and rectifying attenuation in the instance of toxins in processed foods, will facilitate a more a more effective response, promote lasting resiliency, and ensure outcome equity.