Exhibit shows government’s role in U.S. diet; book details drug firms’ influence

Eating Well: Exhibit revisits time when butter was a food group and other historical points
“What’s Cooking, Uncle Sam?” (National Archives)

A 1945 government food guide included a butter group and told readers that “in addition to the basic 7 [food groups], eat any other foods you want.” What a rich-food-eater’s heaven, especially compared with the new USDA-recommended Food Plate crammed with vegetables and whole grains. That old poster is one of more than 100 documents and images, as well as government videos, in the National Archives’ exhibition “What’s Cooking, Uncle Sam?” about the government’s influence on the American diet. Visitors will get to examine Lady Bird Johnson’s chili recipe (a recipe that she said was “almost as popular as the government pamphlet on the care and feeding of children”), posters promoting victory gardens during wartime and what can only be described as one company’s misguided attempt to market “Vitamin Donuts.” The exhibit is on view at the Archives through Jan. 3.

Muckraking: The influence of drug companies
The American Scholar, Summer issue

Some aspects of the chummy relationship between pharmaceutical companies and doctors are easy to see, whether it’s an Abilify pen or a Nexium notepad. In a long, muckraking feature in the American Scholar, the magazine of the Phi Beta Kappa Society, Harriet Washington exposes how “the $310 billion pharmaceutical industry quietly buys something far more influential: the contents of medical journals and, all too often, the trajectory of medical research itself.” Washington writes about how drugmakers suppress negative studies, use advertising dollars to bully publications and hire ghostwriters to pen journal articles that support the companies’ marketing messages. The crookedness, Washington writes, permeates the most pristine publishers, such as in 2003 when Elsevier put out a look-alike of its medical journal The Lancet that was paid for by Merck. Unsurprisingly, it “lavished unalloyed praise on Merck drugs, such as its troubled painkiller Vioxx. There was no disclosure of Merck’s sponsorship.”

The American Scholar, summer issue (The American Scholar)

Rachel Saslow

national

health-science

Success! Check your inbox for details. You might also like:

Please enter a valid email address

See all newsletters

Comments
Show Comments

Sign up for email updates from the "Confronting the Caliphate" series.

You have signed up for the "Confronting the Caliphate" series.

Thank you for signing up
You'll receive e-mail when new stories are published in this series.
Most Read National

national

health-science

Success! Check your inbox for details.

See all newsletters

To keep reading, please enter your email address.

You’ll also receive from The Washington Post:
  • A free 6-week digital subscription
  • Our daily newsletter in your inbox

Please enter a valid email address

I have read and agree to the Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.

Please indicate agreement.

Thank you.

Check your inbox. We’ve sent an email explaining how to set up an account and activate your free digital subscription.