Food is the oldest global carrier of culture. In fact, food has always been a driving force for globalization especially during early phases of European trade and colonial expansion. One significant growth in global culture is fast food restaurants, such as the all-too-famous McDonalds. Furthermore, restaurants which sell food such as French cuisines are also going global where people outside France are able to savour these cuisines internationally. However, whether this is a positive or negative phenomenon is debatable. In my opinion, there are in fact two sides to this issue. However, I feel that the global culture of food will result in more problems than benefits if people were to act irresponsibly.

The new global culture of food can be considered a positive thing whereby, people of different cultures and backgrounds share a common liking for fast food, thus, placing global culture in a positive light. However, as mentioned in the article, I agree that the average daily diet has undergone tremendous change, with all nations converging on a diet high in meat, dairy products, and processed sugars. This supports the statement made that the new “global diet” is not necessarily a beneficial trend, as it can increase the risk of obesity and diabetes. Furthermore, besides posing health risks, this new global culture of food is causing an increase in the lost of local cuisines.

McDonald’s has become the best-known fast food brand in the world, with 30,000 restaurants in 120 countries. As mentioned in the article, McDonald's has become a symbol of globalism for obvious reasons as on an average day in 2001, the company served nearly 45 million customers at more than 25,000 restaurants in 120 countries. Thus, it is a world wide restaurant known to many. In certain instances, travelers who are uncertain about local food would often turn to McDonalds, as most would be familiar with the food there. Fast food outlets globally provide much convenience for people, especially working parents. Due to the numerous number of outlets, fast food restaurants like McDonalds are also easily accessible to the public. Over half the US population lives within 3 minutes’ drive of a McDonald’s. Furthermore, “Give Mom a night off” was an early advertising slogan, so the meal out meant no cooking, serving and washing-up for her. Thus, as people in the world get busier by the day, more of them will turn to fast food as an alternative. This shows that the global culture of food can make the lives of people more convenient.

The article mentioned that our new global diet, consisting of much fast food, poses health problems such as obesity, which is viewed as a global health threat. Furthermore, it has been dubbed “globesity” by the World Health Organization. In my opinion, it is true that the global culture of food will indeed pose health problems as more and more people consume fast food. For example, my research shows that Americans spend $110 billion a year on fatty, sugary fast food, more than they do on films, videos, books, magazines, newspapers and music combined. Furthermore, nearly two thirds of Americans are now overweight, and the US Surgeon General says 300,000 Americans die each year of obesity. People grow fatter as fast food chains spread through countries. In 1995, the WHO estimates there were 200 million adults and another 18 million under-five children classified as overweight. By 2000 the number of obese adults had risen to 300 million. This is not just a problem in industrialized societies. In developing countries, says the WHO, over 115 million people suffer from obesity-related problems. These statistics that I found are indeed scary and shows that globalization can be threat to the world if it is not controlled. At the same time, I feel that globalization cannot be fully blamed for these problems. Individuals should practice self discipline and control their diets instead of putting the blame solely on globalization.

The global culture of food in the world causes the loss of local cuisines, national and ethnic identity. As mentioned in the article, we are what we eat, and when our diet changes, notions of national and ethnic identity is affected. I agree with the statement and that the spread of fast food undermines indigenous cuisines by forcing homogenization of world dietary preferences. For example, fast food causes many people to eat less of their local food. Furthermore, due to globalization, food from different cultures are being sold and eaten by people who are not of the same culture. For example, Italian food such as pizzas are not only eaten by the Italians but also by people all over the world, especially when more places such as Pizza Hut are being set up in many countries.

Then there is also the problem that globalization of fast food can influence public conduct. The article mentioned that fast-food chains have introduced practices that change consumer behaviours and preferences. I agree that the fast food do indeed cause this to occur such as the example that is given about Japan. However, one has to be practical in these situations. We cannot expect a Japanese to be eating a hamburger with a chopstick. Not only will this be a tedious thing to do but something that can be said to be impractical. Therefore, even though certain cultures and etiquettes such as that of the Japanese are facing changes due to globalization, we have to take into consideration that sometimes practicality should be taken into consideration in similar situations.

Thus, there are several effects of the growth in global culture. In this case, it concerns food. However, these changes may bring about both positive and negative outcomes, and individuals should take up the responsibility to ensure that the negative effects of globalization are kept to the minimum. Such actions will include watching over their own diet and staying committed to their local cuisines despite the numerous fast food outlets surrounding them.

Signing off,
Warda
Cultural Expert

Future Perfect; Cultural Expert 4:30 AM