Upon review, I’d call this a fairly typical example of
“Nudge-nudge, wink-wink . . . say no more,” to co-opt
the famous line from Monty Python’s Flying Circus.
Recently, one of President Obama’s largely behind
the-scenes advisers coauthored a book called Nudge,
which suggests that government’s role is to encourage
change with gentle pressure through small positive leg
islative initiatives (nudges) that will get the greater ball
of intended consequences moving in a positive direction.
Hence, we used to consume 3 servings and we have been “nudged” by 5- or
9- or 11-a-day programs to arrive at only 3.5 servings in 2010!
The Canadian program resulted in 4.964 servings a day in 2008, up from 4.277
ing the same period.
I wonder where we would be now if we had grasped
the nettle that science understood and began in 1974 with
a “9 A Day” program. As it now stands, we apparently
need to increase our consumption from 3.5 to 9–11
servings, which is at least a 300 percent increase. Th e con
sequences for such an increase could be interesting. For
example:
■ We would become substantially part
vegetarian. Meat (and its saturated fat lev
els) would fall by at least 50 percent, as they
have in my household.
■ Low-density lipoprotein (LDL) choles
terol levels would fall, along with triglycer
ides, and high-density lipoprotein (HDL)
levels would rise, reducing heart disease.
servings in 1974—almost 1⅔ servings more than the U.S. achievement dur
12 • GROWING AT THE SPEED OF LIFE