Mega M&M's Mega-Promoted to Land in Our Stomachs

Jumbo M&M's are conspiring to land in the stomachs of adults across America.

Of course I'm exaggerating, but would someone please explain to me:

• Why did Masterfoods USA, a division of Mars, feel compelled to unveil Mega M&M's targeted specifically to American adults, most of whom already are overweight or obese, and many of whom have diabetes and hypoglycemia?
• Why do each chocolate-covered, sugar-laden nut need to be a whopping 55 percent bigger?
• Why is a mega $10-million marketing blitz required to promote the rich, chocolate-covered nuts as "perfectly big"? (Couldn't that $10 million go to promote anti-obesity efforts instead?)
• Why would John O’Hurley -- from this summer's hot TV show, "Dancing with the Stars,” and best known for his role as J. Peterman on “Seinfeld” -- want to brand himself as a Mega M&M's spokesman?

Seriously, folks, why the heck do we need bigger-than-big M&M's?

Is the advent of the ogre-sized candies occurring because, as a New York Times editorial speculated, there's "a backlash against the idea that the food police are out to get you"?

Are people that narrow-minded that they'll place more value on their don't-you-dare-tell-me-what-to-eat attitude than their health?

Suffice it to say that I'm simply dumbfounded by this supersize-plus trend. As if supersized wasn't bad enough!!

Why would food manufacturers and fast-food chains deliberately, almost callously -- with no regard whatsoever to our nation's obesity and diabetes woes -- want to come out with obscenely big foods? Worse yet, why would they want to brand themselves as corporately irresponsible and insensitive?

Indeed, Mega M&M's are the latest in a line of extra jumbo products that sneer at nutritional correctness. (Think Monster Thickburger from Hardee's, the Full House XL from Pizza Hut and the Enormous Omelet Sandwich from Burger King, as Stuart Elliott of The New York Times pointed out.)

What's horrifying about this extra-supersizing trend is that recent studies show that folks eat whatever is put in front of them. In other words, even if they're already full, people won't pass up more.

Isn't it logical to conclude that if people eat more, bigger M&M's, they could get fat or even fatter? (After all, who needs more calories, sugar, and fat? As it is, a package of the regular size contains 250 calories, 13 grams of fat and 25 grams of sugar! Couldn't find any nutritional info for the humongous new candies.)

While, of course, Masterfoods USA takes issue with any suggestion that bigger M&M's can be linked to obesity, it's baffling to me how they can ignore the obvious.

Bonnie Liebman, nutrition director for the Center for Science in the Public Interest, has the right idea when she says, "The last thing we need is bigger candy."

Of course, Masterfood USA contends (or rationalizes) that M&M's "has always been a sharing brand, used for big gatherings."

Sure, I'll concede that maybe some of the time, these chocolate candies will get offered at family events and parties.

But, let me tell you, as a former major-league M&M's addict -- this was one of my favorite candies years ago -- sharing was the last thing I wanted to do when I sneakily purchased what were considered jumbo bags back then. (Now they'd be deemed normal-sized.)

Look, I'll confess (with great embarrassment): I coveted and scarfed all of these M&M's by myself -- and only occasionally (and probably reluctantly) gave some away to others.

While I don't agree with Liebman's statement that "Mega M&M's are aimed at making mega-Americans," I think the introduction of jumbo M&M's is horribly misguided.

And I suspect that these many people -- who are already overweight or who suffer from some kind of eating disorder -- will pig out on an entire bag all at once. In fact, I know this will happen.

Perhaps Masterfoods USA executives should take some nutrition classes on the dangers of eating too many sugary, fatty foods?

Speak out about this outrageous development. Join me in e-mailing Masterfoods USA to suggest that they yank these scandalously huge candies out of our nation's stores.

Comments

[Mike]

Excellent article, very good points.. One of the best books i've ever read is "diet for a new America" - talk about the truth being put forth!

[Deborah Liberatore]

I recently received a plea from a brother-in-law a sponsor him in a race for the Susan G. Komen RACE FOR THE CURE. His wife was said to have pre-cancer? Anyway, the next e-mail that I got was from someone telling me to buy the new M&M's that are PINK. The company will donate money to breast cancer research if I buy their candy. How about if the research discovers that eating sugar and non nutritious foods will raise your chance of cancer?

[Eddie Friedman]

Don't think about pink elephant ! This directive is familiar to many as an example of the nature of Mind. Unlike the delete key on a computer, the human mind can not order itself to forget a thought, it can only direct it's attention elsewhere which, with time, will fade the unwanted object of attention. A more positive way of stating this might be, "what you focus on expands." For those interested in optimum health and wellness, a good path, IMHO, would be to focus as much as possible on the desired behaviors and activities instead of the undesirable ones. I have not had refined sugar in years. ( I grew up in an apartment over a candy store owned by my parents, and was a fat kid, so I definitely experienced massive sugar intake, ie; candy, soda, etc.) I find that I never think about refined sugar, junk food, fast food, etc. anymore, mostly because I am almost always thinking about the positive things I want to do, be and move closer to. Although the early years of my life were spent binging on doughy treats and sugary sweets, that behavior is simply "not who I am" any longer. Eating a doughnut has no attraction to me, just as most people would have no difficulty saying, "I'm not an astronaut, so I don't mind that I have not been scheduled to be on the next space flight." O.K., so a candy company is looking for ways to market and sell more candy. Not very surprising. I don't believe rallying against it is as effective as putting that same energy into promoting positive alternatives. Since I love maxims, ( great material for healthy self-talk and "re-programming", ) here is one more that captures my feelings on this. "It is better to light a single candle than to curse the darkness." Stay strong, Eddie Friedman

[Tammi]

Personally, I dont think asking the company to recall a product will make any difference. It goes back to the simple economics law of supply and demand. As long as people want it there will always be a company to provide it. I feel that the medical community could be more supportive and give people proper and consistent information on nutrition so that people begin to demand healthier food. Once there is a demand, all of the companies will be there too because that is where the money will be. Just adding my two cents.

[Jimmy Moore]

This is not surprising, Connie. The move to bigger and bigger is happening everywhere and really started back in the early 1990's when McDonald's did a cross promotion with the movie "Jurassic Park." You might remember the "Dino"-sized meals they came out with, which started the whole value meal gimmick. After the movie promo was finished, the meals were such a great success that McDonald's and other copycat fast food joints made this the norm by offering bigger and bigger portions of food. Mega-M&M's are just the next step in this slippery slope we have ventured down. My wife loves M&M's and I bought her a bag of these things. They are insanely huge and very unnecessary, but the company that makes them will argue that they are meeting consumer demand. Oi! Are we ever going to make people realize sugar is responsible for many of their health ailments today? Keep up the great work, Connie! This fight isn't over yet. Jimmy Moore, "Livin' La Vida Low-Carb Man" http://livinlavidalocarb.blogspot.com livinlowcarbman@charter.net