TED Conversations

Thomas Anderson

This conversation is closed. Start a new conversation
or join one »

Food Rationing would be more effective than using Supply and Demand.

I have an extra 30 pounds, cholesterol on the high side, and have to watch my blood pressure. I am not educated about Physics, Chemistry, BioChemistry, Genetics, advanced nutrition, or longevity.

It has been pointed out that 30% of the food on Earth is wasted.
I think all 7,000,000,000 people on the planet should get exactly what nutrition they need, in order to live the longest and healthiest.

No one should be hungry or malnourished!

Personally I would eat goop everyday, as long as it contained everything my body needed so that I could live until I was 1000.

Nutrition should be completely personalized, based on DNA, etc. If my body needed an extra milligram of Riboflavin, it would be there. Nutrition should be perfect for everyone.

Related Talks:
Topics: Longevity collaboration community eco sustainability environment food health innovation life social change
0
Share:
progress indicator

  • Comment deleted

    • thumb

      Thomas Anderson

      • 0
      Jan 9 2012: Oh no...no offense at all, I appreciate this forum and your comments. But, if you disagree with me, I'll make sure there is an American Fast food restaurant right under the Eiffel Tower, and every street corner in Lyon.. ha ha!

      I stayed overnight on (Rue Vaubecour?) in Lyon for 4 nights a long time ago...if you are from around there!

      For some reason, everyone speaks French over there!

  • Comment deleted

    • thumb

      Thomas Anderson

      • 0
      Jan 9 2012: Mais Oui, the French love their expensive restaurants. :) I'll eat goop and live long. :)

      • Comment deleted

  • Jean-François Thobie

    • 0
    Jan 8 2012: The idea of food rationing in not new. There have been varied past cultures who doled out food as per need. In the modern world, food has become an commodity and an investment and may not always have the nutrional value we would like. Globally we can feed even more than the current population though it is not in the best interest politically or for business. If there were responsible people heading this idea, there may be less famine and poverty.

  • Mary M. 50+

    • 0
    Jan 5 2012: I started to think about your question seriously, and wanted to share some reflections with you.

    There is a place where food is rationed daily here in the United States. This occurs in school cafeterias.
    Children line up and are given a ration of food.

    But as I have observed this throughout my professional life I have noticed the following:

    1. Some children get more than others when the server knows the child personally and what they like.
    2. Some children after being given their ration, proceed to exchange rations with their friends, each now enjoying double of what they like.
    3. Some children eat only what they liked of the ration, and throw the rest away.

    And, adult teachers are no different. If the server knows the teacher personally, that usually means an extra helping of whatever the teacher asks for....

    Like some have stated....if humans are in control of the distribution, there will always be violations. And even if that were not to happen, still exchanges would take place.

    Just a few thoughts I thought I'd share.
  • thumb

    Timothy Sallume

    • +1
    Jan 5 2012: Well, that's a tangle of ideas. Obesity is a complex issue and not even the experts agree how best to permanently reverse it. Some say diet and exercise, some say that it is more of a hormonal imbalance and genetic disposition. If we can engineer our diets to reverse obesity, and increasing longevity, then it shouldn't be too much harder to make food just as tasty and fulfilling as the food we eat now.

    We will probably have to give up raising animals for meat and instead grow meat artificially. If we did that, it would use 35 to 60 percent less energy, emit 80 to 95 percent less greenhouse gas, and use around 98 percent less land. We could then use that savings to increase food production for those who go hungry. (http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/11/11/us-science-meat-f-idUSTRE7AA30020111111)

    Rather than ration our food, I'd vote for food being so satisfying and so fulfilling that we stop naturally instead of having someone else prevent us from eating.
    • thumb

      Thomas Anderson

      • 0
      Jan 5 2012: Best idea so far...now how do we have it happen naturally? Growing meat! Yes! Thank you so much for your comment. Growing meat would be one of the BEST things Humanity could do for itself!

      (but I'm still from the side where a pill-a-day would make me happy, eating takes too much time)

      Mr. Sallume, thank you, for untangling the ideas.

  • Mary M. 50+

    • 0
    Jan 4 2012: Thomas, the 30 pounds you have extra is because.......of the supply and demand?
    Are you saying you would be thin and fit if food was rationed.

    Take a trip to Cuba, and tell me what you see. Their food is rationed. Well the poor citizen's food that is...the gov't still eats anything they fancy......You get arrested if you are caught killing a cow....I know, no they do not practice the Hindu faith.....it's the powers that be getting the best for themselves.

    I do like the idea of eating what your body personally needs...for example, if you have an iron defficiency then you would be able to supply the needed nutrients to compensate.

    But, all food is so delicious, why ration it?? Better to educate the consumer of foods and let them make their own choice.

    What would be awesome is if everyone on the planet had the same access to food, at a reasonable price. Oh well, I can dream, can't I?
    • thumb

      Thomas Anderson

      • 0
      Jan 5 2012: Yes, I have an extra 30 pounds because the supply is too high, and I have to sit around all day working to pay for the food. The Cuban government...well now, that would be a good TED question or debate.
      • thumb

        Krisztián Pintér 200+

        • +1
        TED Translator
        Jan 5 2012: actually no. you have extra 30 because you are too weak to say no to yourself.
        • thumb

          Thomas Anderson

          • +1
          Jan 5 2012: No, I saw a commercial on TV that showed a guy with a pizza, and that guy got into a party with a lot of rich looking and beautiful people. I figured if I ate that pizza, I'd be like him. So I ate the whole pizza because I hate wasting food. And I recycled the box.

          But alas, false advertising, because I never saw any party ! I want my money back, no fair!

          Ha ha....someday we'll have coffee, with extra cream and sugar !

      • Mary M. 50+

        • 0
        Jan 5 2012: Thomas, why do I get the idea that alot of your questions are tongue-in-cheek??

        But, alas, I do enjoy reading them and replying......and I always enjoy when Krisztian helps us understand ourselves a little bit better.

        Thank you both for making my morning cup of cuban coffee (expresso) with lots and lots of raw sugar, taste sweeter than ever.:)

  • Douglas Bell

    • 0
    Jan 4 2012: Hi Thomas,

    I support food rationing as long as I'm the one who is making the rationing decisions.

    Best wishes,
    Doug Bell
    • thumb

      Thomas Anderson

      • 0
      Jan 5 2012: If you were fair, I'd vote for you to head up the Rationing Department of Earth.

  • Luis Marin

    • 0
    Jan 3 2012: You mean YOU don't need coffee, chocolate or tequila... You missed the point. Rationing implies someone is controlling someone else's behavior based on what they assume is good, even if it is.

    If your argument has any change of making it into reality (NOT!) it will be easy to see where it would go next. For example, why not force people to procreate with the best DNA match possible for creating super babies or avoiding disease? After all we don't need unhealthy-looking Stephen Hawkings around, or maybe we do for the brains, but how do we know how they will turn out? Or maybe we can use our DNAs to find out who has propensity to catch a cold, that way we can restrict access to Telluride's awesome slopes for those people who don't need to be in the snow in the first place. Better yet, why don't we restrict access to sports only to those who have the actual motor skills to throw or kick a ball, oh wait, we humans don't really need that either... or travel or hiking or sailing or movies or books or driving or flying or going to the moon.

    Get the gist? In fact, you know what? I think I am going to combine coffee, tequila and chocolate and have a early morning satisfying cocktail, we can name it the Anderson Goo and I bet we'll make millions... oh wait money is not needed either....
    • thumb

      Thomas Anderson

      • 0
      Jan 5 2012: Wow keep going! and throw a few swear words in there, thats what I'm looking for.

      But, no, the movie Gattaca gives me the heeby jeebies; However, Stephen Hawkings should be cured! And you can't catch a cold from skiing, unless a virus is living in the snow.

      I want half the profits of Anderson Goo!

      • Luis Marin

        • 0
        Jan 5 2012: No need to swear... or ration. By the way, Gattaca is a good example of where things go when we meddle into individual decisions in the name of science, Stephen Hawking is pretty much incurable, yes you cannot catch a cold skiing, and no, Anderson Goo profits will be only mine, hopefully my commercials will make you drink a lot. See you around Neo.
        • thumb

          Thomas Anderson

          • 0
          Jan 6 2012: That's a bunch a bull about Hawking. We have the technology somewhere to cure him. If 100 scientists from around the world focused strictly on Hawking, he could be cured. No one should have to suffer unnecessarily.

          I at least want 10% of Anderson Goo profits.
  • thumb

    Krisztián Pintér 200+

    • 0
    TED Translator
    Jan 3 2012: what if someone disagrees to that? would you force feed him?

  • Luis Marin

    • 0
    Jan 3 2012: So if I want to eat a chocolate the food police would tell me no? How about a shot of tequila or a nice big bloody steak? Please, if we grew up to be perennial 3 year olds maybe we can all take the goop but that is as realistic as the one they show on the matrix movie. Plus, who would determine what is good for me and who would enforce it? DNA analysis and bureaucrats? Are you kidding me? Scientists are still debating the goodness/evils of coffee and you want them to regulate your diet?
    • thumb

      Thomas Anderson

      • 0
      Jan 3 2012: We don't need chocolate or tequila. We do need protein. We don't need police or bureaucrats, just information about the true effects of coffee. Do we really need coffee? For what chemical or mineral?


      Keep arguing with me, I appreciate it! Pretty soon we'll all being eating Matrix Goop that is good for us!

      We have millions of diet "experts" and nutritionists, but Biochemists are not really involved. Everything according to the government is "Recommended" and everything from Corporations are "soooo delicious"...please drink responsibly.
Showing all 25 comments