On Climate Change, the Public May Not Support Changing Their Own Diet, But Would They Support Programs to Change Society's Diet?

In reaction to our BMC Public Health study published this month that examined the potential to re-frame climate change in terms of health, reader Stephanie Parent had this astute observation, one worth testing in follow up research.

I was jazzed to read your article "Maibach et al., Reframing climate change as a public health issue: an exploratory study of public reactions BMC Public Health 2010, 10:299" and learn of the Center for Climate Change Communication.

The discussion regarding Figures 4 and 5 struck an idea regarding how people did not respond well to the sentence about increasing consumption of fruits and vegetables and reducing meat consumption. In comparing this sentence with the others, I noticed that the other sentences are societal or governmental actions to change land use or offer services, while the food consumption sentence is based on changing personal behavior, which people tend to be reluctant to change and feel their personal way of life and liberty is being attacked. While not quite the same, what if you reframe the sentence in a way that sounds more like a societal change rather than a personal behavior change to "Increasing the availability of fruits and vegetables and healthy food options to help people maintain a healthy weight, will help prevent heart disease and cancer, and will play an important role in limiting global warming."

It is food for thought.

The open access study is the second most read article at BMC Public Health over the past 30 days and has sparked some interesting debate and valuable feedback.

What do readers think? Should we hold off on emphasizing personal changes to diet until more engagement is done on the public health implications of climate change? Or are you (and the public) likely open to suggestions about societal changes in food availability and costs that lead to healthier diets and cut down on greenhouse gas emissions from food production?

More like this

Changing the conversation about climate change: Graduate students from American and George Mason Universities prepare interview tent on the National Mall. WASHINGTON, DC -- How do Americans respond when they are asked to reflect on the public health risks of climate change and the benefits to…
George Mason University's Center for Climate Change Communication has relaunched its Web site with among the new features a discussion forum. They also have a section devoted to updating readers with the latest journal articles, news articles, and open access research on climate change…
There's been an interesting edit in Marc Bittman's sugar post, as he has now changed his tune on the PLoS one sugar study, now Bittman acknowledges obesity too is important. That was big of him, it is after all, the most important factor. Maybe my angry letter to the editor had an effect, but he'…
by Kim Krisberg When it comes to public health law, it seems the least coercive path may also be the one of least resistance. In a new study published this month in Health Affairs, researchers found that the public does, indeed, support legal interventions aimed at curbing noncommunicable diseases…

I will eat as much meat as I choose. Any fascist dictator that says otherwise, can politley kiss my hairy celtic ass.

No fruitcake marxist is going to control my life in the name of a scam like global warming. I'll use whatever kind of light bulbs I choose and eat whatever I want.

Far left marxists can go to hell, while I eat my steak.

By Veggie denouncer (not verified) on 27 Jul 2010 #permalink

It is the need of the hour to turn vegetarian, otherwise the day is not far off when we'll have to face the dire consequences of being a non-vegetarian.
Revolution E-Cigarette

By Tyler Diaz (not verified) on 28 Jul 2010 #permalink