For those of you who listened to President Obama's State of the Union address on January 27th, you likely heard him introduce his wife's initiative to tackle childhood obesity.

Marion Nestle, author of “Food Politics,” “Safe Food,” and “What to Eat” and professor in the nutrition, food studies and public health department at New York University was recently interviewed by the San Fracisco Chronicle about her food prediction trends for 2010.  I highly recommend checking out Nestle’s blog for a ton of really reliable/non-biased nutrition information.  But in the mean time, here are Nestle’s Top 10 predictions with regards food, nutrition, and diet.

Q: What do you think will happen with food and nutrition in 2010?

A: I wish I could read the leaves while I drink tea, but the best I can do is tell you which issues I'm going to be watching closely this year. Hunter Public Relations recently asked 1,000 Americans which food-related issues they thought were most important in 2009. The top three? Food safety, hunger and food prices. For the decade, the winner was childhood obesity.

I have my own top 10 list of hot-button issues for 2010, and here they are:

Hunger: More than 35 million Americans get benefits to which they are entitled under the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (formerly, food stamps). The economy may be improving, but not quickly enough for millions who have lost jobs, health care and housing. Will Congress do anything this year to strengthen the safety net for the poor? It needs to.

Childhood obesity: Rates of childhood obesity may have stabilized, but we all want to figure out how to prevent kids from gaining so much weight that they develop adult chronic diseases. I expect to see more efforts to improve school food and make neighborhoods more conducive to walking to school, riding bikes and playing outside.

Food safety regulation: Congress is sitting on a bill to give the Food and Drug Administration some real authority for food safety. The bill does not do what is most needed - establish a single food-safety agency - but is a reasonable step in the right direction. Let's hope Congress gets to it soon.

Food advertising and labels: The long-dormant FDA and Federal Trade Commission are getting busy at last. In the wake of the Smart Choices fiasco (go to sfgate.com/ZIZT), the FDA is working to make package labels less misleading and easier to understand.

The agencies have proposed nutrition standards for products marketed to children. These voluntary standards fall far short of my preference - an outright ban on marketing junk foods to kids - but puts food companies on notice that their products are under scrutiny.

The FDA is also working on designs for front-of-package labels. I'm hoping it chooses a "traffic-light" system that marks foods with a green (any time), yellow (sometimes) or red (hardly ever) dot. Expect plenty of opposition from the makers of red-dotted products.

Meat: The meat industry has been under fire for raising food animals under inhumane conditions, using unnecessary hormones and antibiotics, mistreating immigrant labor, and polluting soil and water. Now it is also under fire for contributing to climate change.

Recent films like "Food, Inc." and "Fresh" and books such as Jonathan Safran Foer's "Eating Animals" are encouraging people to become vegetarians or to eat less meat to promote the health of people and the planet. I'll bet the meat industry pushes back hard on this one.

Sustainable agriculture: The back-to-the land movement has loads of people buying local food, choosing foods produced under more sustainable conditions and growing their own food. The number of small farms in America increased last year for the first time in a century. Seed companies cannot keep up with the demand. It will be fun to follow what happens with this trend.

Genetically modified (GM) foods: My book, "Safe Food," comes out in a new edition this year, so I am paying especially close attention to debates about GM foods. The FDA's 1994 decision to prohibit labeling of GM foods continues to haunt the food biotechnology industry. By now, nearly all American soybeans and sugar beets (95 percent) are GM, as is most corn (60 percent). But when the U.S. Department of Agriculture approved GM sugar beets in 2005, it neglected to perform the required environmental impact assessment. On that basis, environmental groups want to ban further planting of GM sugar beets. The dispute is now in the courts.

Chemical contaminants: The FDA has yet to release its report on the safety of bisphenol A, the plastic chemical that acts as an endocrine disrupter. Shouldn't it be banned? The bottling industry says no. Watch for fierce arguments over this one.

Salt: Nutrition standards allow 480 mg sodium (the equivalent of more than 1 gram of salt) per serving. A half cup of canned soup provides that much. A whole cup gives you 4 grams and the whole can gives you 8 grams - much more than anyone needs. Nearly 80 percent of salt in American diets comes from processed and restaurant foods. Companies are under pressure to cut down on salt. Will they? Only if they have to.

Dietary advice: The new edition of Dietary Guidelines for Americans, which the government publishes every five years, is due this year. What will it say? I can't wait to find out.

Those are the issues I am tracking these days. My one crystal-ball prediction? We will be hearing a lot more about them this year.

As I a dietitian who is constantly thinking about food and nutrition, I have some ideas about what will be hot topics this year.  What are your predictions?

I recently blogged about Ralph Lauren and the fashion industry’s constant stream of messages and images which negatively affect women’s self-esteem and feelings of self-worth. And unfortunately, the glorification of a thin body is so pervasive in our society; it’s becoming more and more difficult to question its validity. I’m currently in the middle of reading one of the most fascinating and thoughtful books on the topic “The Religion of Thinness” by Michelle Lelwica. I hope to write a brief book review when I finish it, as I feel like it’s a book every woman ought to read, regardless of her weight, feelings about her body, or her relationship with food.

But at the end of the second chapter, Lelwica cites three awesome organizations whose mission is to promote positive media messages. Check them out. 

**Mind on the Media: a national organization dedicated to “inspiring independent thinking and fostering critical analysis of media messages.” Through their “Turn Beauty Inside Out” program, they empower boys and girls to begin grassroots discussion, and sponsor events in their communities to increase awareness of the media’s influence on girls’ development.

**Girls, Women + Media Project: sponsors “I-CAN” (Involved Consumers Action Network) which offers information about consumer issues related to women and girls, and suggestions on how to take action.

**New Moon Girls: is an online community and print magazine targeted to girls ages 8-14 and designed to build positive body image and self-esteem through chatting, poetry, artwork, videos, and more. It is a phenomenal resource amidst the barrage of negative messages targeted to this vulnerable age group. Rather than telling our young women they need change, re-shape, and mold their body to some phony standard, they need to hear that they are intelligent, capable, and acceptable just as they are.

I’m currently working part-time as a dietitian/nutritionist in Somerville at a day treatment program for eating disorders called Laurel Hill Inn. As I grapple with the complex reasons that so many women (and increasingly more men) suffer from disordered eating and severe body image disturbance, I can appreciate the fact that the media is one very powerful aspect of this multi-factorial problem. I try to advocate for and promote any organization which strives counter the negative messages which permeate our society. If you know of any other positive resources or websites, please post them! 

So did any of you hear about the Ralph Lauren photoshopping debacle?  Poor Filippa Hamilton.  Her waist was made to look smaller than her head after some editing that went seriously wrong!  The picture, shown below, is so ludicrous.  But I think it makes for an excellent reminder that the images we see in mainstream media simply do not reflect real life. 

To add to the flames which sparked from the photoshopping nightmare- the 8 year model of Ralph Lauren, spoke out to reveal the shocking truth that she was fired from the company for being too fat to fit into their sample clothing. Ralph Lauren released a statement to the Daily News stating that Filippa is "a beautiful and healthy" woman, but their relationship ended "as a result of her inability to meet the obligations under her contract with us."  Hard to believe that 120 lbs is enough weight to get you fired.  Yikes.

So if you are as disgusted with Ralph Lauren and an industry which permeates our society with distorted ideas and images of what women ough to look like- then join the Facebook boycott of Ralph Lauren.  The creators of "America the Beautiful" (a documentary on the pressures women feel related to beauty in the States) are attempting to recruit 10,000 people to sign their petition.

As a dietitian in Cambridge, I spend most of my day working with women who suffer from eating disorders, disordred eating, and body image problems.  I'd love to see more women banding together to support a cause we could all benefit from.  Rather than obsessing about what we eat and how much we weigh- wouldn't it be great if we could contribute our intellect and energy in more productive ways?

Believe it or not, one of the things I'm most frequently asked about is my opinion on NBC's "The Biggest Loser" reality show.  And fans are getting geared up for the show's 8th season!  Simply put: The Biggest Loser is a TV show and TV shows are meant to entertain.  As a result, contestants are put through rigorous and unsustainable workout regimes and dietary restrictions.  So, the audience gets exactly what it's looking for, jaw dropping transformations that seem beyond human!

I actually had the opportunity to listen to the dietitian and medical physician who created the program for The Biggest Loser at a nutrition conference nearly two years ago.  They gave us all of the details for the contestants' diet and exercise regimen.  Yes, it certainly was jaw dropping.  I was so stunned to see so much exercise and so little food.  I was convinced, that this show was a recipe for disaster.

It's a pretty well known fact that restrictive eating and overexercising often lead to binge eating.  While all of these contestants would benefit from a healthier lifestyle, I just can't advocate such an extreme method.  While it may create the immediate desired result (weight loss) I have a hard time believing it can lead to the ultimate goal (permanent weight loss).  One of the reasons is that the show isn't getting to the root of the problem, but that must be dealt with in another blog post.

An excellent article by Time magazine summed up my feelings rather well.  While some people may find the show to be inspiring, the premise is so extreme, so unhealthy, and so unsustainable I cannot advocate it for anyone. 

Ryan Benson, the winner of the first season claims that after the show he gained back "32 pounds in 5 days simply by drinking water."  And another contestant, Kai Hibbard, consumed only sugar-free Jello and asparagus for several days along with jumping in and out of a sauna for six hours prior to the final weigh-in."  That folks, is what the producers don't tell you.  And that sounds like an eating disorder to me!

If you are interested, the Today show has a "Where Are They Now" slideshow.  It's a bit dated, but you'll notice the general trend- weight gain after the show.  And the sad thing, is that losing so much weight then gaining it back is extremely detrimental to a person's self-esteem and feelings of self-worth.

So, it's no surprise.  I am not among the millions of fans that support The Biggest Loser.  While making dramatic changes is pretty alluring, the consequences can be pretty damaging.  So rather than going round and round in circles (losing weight and gaining it back), why not slow down and find a healthy way of living that can last a lifetime?  Sounds like a boring TV show.  But hey who said the personal gratification of creating sustainable habits can't be every bit as rewarding?

I had the opportunity to go see Food, Inc. last night.  If you care at all about the food you feed yourself and/or your family please go see it!  It's essentially "Fast Food Nation" and "Omnivore's Dilemma" rolled into a well-research, eye-opening, and entertaining 90 minute film which traces our food supply from farm to plate.  In short, the American food system is extremely disfunctional.  It wreaks havoc on our environment, local economies, and heavily subsidizes the food that is making America sick.  While it's discouraging to see how far off the mark we are, the film ends with a host of simple ways we can start changing the system.  You are voting with every dollar you spend on food.  So starting spending wisely!  Buy less processed food, buy fewer animal products, eat more local produce and buy it locally if you can, join a CSA, buy organic if you can afford it, support organizations which promote sustainable living.  I'd encourage all of you to see the film, read through the website, and take a look at what you can do support a healthier food system here in America.  There is power in the almighty dollar!

Here's a link to the website which is a fantastic resource to learn about the issues, watch the film's trailer, sign petitions which support a healthy food system, and gather resources from reading lists and blogs.  I highly recommend it.

Here's a link to movie reviews

Here's the movie trailer