Dr Jacqueline Rowarth: Junk food - why perception is not reality

New Zealand has developed a takeaway culture, Dr Jacqueline Rowarth writes. Photo / Caleb Oquendo / Pexels

Opinion: While fruit and vegetables may seem more expensive than junk food, perception is not reality when the latter’s impact on health and the environment is taken into account, Dr Jacqueline Rowarth writes.

Perception is not reality.

Repetition of the words doesn’t make them true.

Dr Jim Taylor (author, blogger and developer of Prime Performance System) has suggested that people say “perception is reality” when they want to persuade others to their point of view.

He uses the analogy of being beaten with a cudgel and states that the words are used to justify something “that may be objectively unjustifiable or just plain out of touch with reality”.

Taylor also explains that, although perception is not reality, perception can become a person’s reality (there is a difference) because perception has a major influence on how we look at reality.

In this light, the statement that “fruit and vegetables at the supermarket are so expensive now, processed and junk food actually works out cheaper” deserves examination.

The words came from a survey of 5+ a day by New Zealand-based company Research First.

But fruit and vegetables are not the same types of food as “processed and junk foods”.

Fruit and vegetables are valuable sources of energy, vitamins, minerals and fibre. There is also increasing evidence of additional benefits from the range of phytonutrients they contain.

In contrast, processed and junk food (henceforth termed PJF) tend to be high in fats, sugar and salt.

This makes a cost comparison difficult because the basis of the comparison is unclear – choosing vitamins or fats would result in a different answer.

The problem of how to compare has been addressed over the years through research. Most reports come to the same conclusions as the United States Department of Agriculture Economic Research Service.

For all metrics, except the price of food energy, healthy foods cost less than less-healthy foods (defined for the study as foods that are high in saturated fat, added sugar, and/or sodium, or that contribute little to meeting dietary recommendations).

The CSIRO (Australia’s equivalent to New Zealand’s Crown Research Institutes) has examined the typical Australian diet and come to similar conclusions about the cost of PJF but on the environment rather than the wallet.

Dr Jacqueline Rowarth. Photo / Supplied

Researchers estimated that discretionary foods (anything that isn’t an essential or necessary part of a healthy dietary pattern) were responsible for almost 30 per cent of the greenhouse gases (GHG) of an average Australian diet.

The average Australian consumes 6.2 servings of discretionary food a day, and a serving is defined as a 375 ml can of fizzy drink, 400 ml standard beer, 200 ml wine, 25g chocolate, one tablespoon of jam or honey, or 12 hot chips. A snack pack of chippies would be two servings.

Of the core food groups, the two smallest contributors to total dietary GHG were fruit (3.5 per cent) and vegetables (6.5 per cent).

The CSIRO researchers suggested that reducing discretionary food intake would allow for small increases in emissions from core foods, particularly vegetables (from 2.5 to 5.5 servings a day), dairy (from 1.5 to 2.5 servings), and grains (from 4.6 to 6 servings). The nutritional benefit would be achieved at a 3.6 per cent increase in GHG, which the authors described as “small”.

Another advantage of reducing discretionary food is a concurrent reduction in waste and rubbish. Too many roads on too many days show the remnants of somebody’s picnic - the quantity of fast food jettisoned, along with packaging, is depressing.

The National Litter Audit, published in 2019 by Keep New Zealand Beautiful, reported that 99 per cent of New Zealanders believe it is crucial for our country to maintain its clean, green image, with 93 per cent believing it is very important not to litter.

The 7 per cent who don’t are creating an extraordinary mess.

The audit found that the greatest volume of litter came from highways. Illegal dumping contributed the largest proportion to the total estimated litter volume (17.36 litres per 1,000 m2), and a significant volume was contributed by cups, food trays, food wrappers, takeaway and drink containers (7.91 litres per 1,000 m2), alcoholic and soft drink containers (5.05 litres per 1,000 m2).

Listen to Rowena Duncum interview Dr Jacqueline Rowarth on The Country below:

This is another cost on the environment.

It is also a cost to the taxpayer for cleaning up.

The reality is that New Zealanders are eating less home-prepared food than ever.

In 2020, StatsNZ calculated that the average New Zealander spent 27 per cent of the food budget on restaurants and ready-to-eat meals, including “things like burgers and takeaway coffee”.

In 2017 the proportion was 26 per cent and in 2000 it was 22 per cent.

In contrast, expenditure on fresh fruit and vegetables decreased from 15 per cent in 2017 to 13 per cent in 2020.

The 2017 StatsNZ release on the prevalence of eating out stated that New Zealanders spend slightly more proportionally than Australians on ready-to-eat food, but spend about half as much, proportionally, on restaurant meals.

New Zealand has developed a takeaway culture.

Although vegetables and fruit can be part of the meal, and some of the outlets are trying to make changes in the food and the packaging, the reality remains that increased fruit and vegetables and decreased fast food would be better for the environment as well as health.

For a New Year’s resolution for a better future, reality must trump perception.

- Dr Jacqueline Rowarth, Adjunct Professor Lincoln University, has a PhD in Soil Science (nutrient cycling) and is a Director of Ravensdown, DairyNZ and Deer Industry NZ. The analysis and conclusions above are her own. jsrowarth@gmail.com