Eric Schlosser Quotes

Fast food may appear to be cheap food and, in the literal sense it often is, but that is because huge social and environmental costs are being excluded from the calculations.

Fast food is popular because it's convenient, it's cheap, and it tastes good. But the real cost of eating fast food never appears on the menu.

Really, the only way to face the biggest problems we have is for the government to change the way they subsidize food. The way we subsidize food makes it cheaper to go to McDonald's and get a hamburger than a salad, and that's insane.

Just because you eat doesn't mean you eat smart. It's hard to beat a $1.99 wing pack of three at a fast-food restaurant - it's so cheap - but that wing pack isn't feeding anyone, it's just pushing hunger back an hour.

Many people still believe that 'green' solutions are too expensive, but they are actually much cheaper when all of the costs to public health, social services, and waste handling are factored into the same equation.

When you go to the grocery store, you find that the cheapest calories are the ones that are going to make you the fattest - the added sugars and fats in processed foods.

Usually, cheap food is not nutritious. You're feeding people, but you're not really feeding people something that is good for them.

I don't know too many parents that want to feed their kids soda, but high-fructose corn syrup is cheap. The price of soda in 20 years has gone down 40 percent while the price of whole foods, fruits and vegetables, has gone up 40 percent and obesity goes up right along that curve.

I'm not keen on the English way of eating outside, on the street. I want food that is clean, not impregnated with toxic fumes.

There's nothing more I love than McDonald's dollar menu. With just the change I find between my couch cushions, I can eat something with the nutritional value of a couch cushion.

Fast food may appear to be cheap food and, in the literal sense it often is, but that is because huge social and environmental costs are being excluded from the calculations. Any analysis of the real cost would have to look at such things as the rise in food-borne illnesses, the advent of new pathogens, antibiotic resistance from the overuse of drugs in animal feed, extensive water pollution from intensive agricultural systems and many other factors. These costs are not reflected in the price of fast food.

Food is at the core of our lives in ways we don't always think about - how it affects our environment, how it affects our health and well-being, how it affects the expense of society, the expense of government.

I'm not a greasy food guy. I don't eat like that.

People are simply screwing up when they go out and buy beefsteak, which is killing them with cancer and heart troubles. The stuff costs a fortune, too. You could feed a thousand people with lentil soup for the cost of half a dozen filets.

There is nothing wrong with eating sweets, fried foods, pastries, even drinking soda every now and then, but food manufacturers have made eating these formerly expensive and hard-to-make treats so cheap and easy that we're eating them every day.

I hate eating vegetables. The only vegetables I eat are lettuce on a burger.

I'm a healthy eater, but I don't consider Chick-fil-A fast food.

I have a tremendous platform and responsibility to talk to people about these issues about sustainability and about health and wellness when it comes to food.

A lot of stuff, all the fast food, the cheap food, the dollar menu - I had to cut all that off.

I cannot digest too much junk food. I just have it once in a blue moon.

Political perspective and the Cannes festival are linked almost as inextricably as fast-food consumption and detrimental effects on health.

I think it's good to eat a bit of everything, but when you eat too much junk food, it's bad for you and for your brain. You don't understand why, but you feel sad. It's because of the junk food!

The fossil fuel industry for too long has shifted enormous costs of carbon pollution onto the public.

There is a warning love sends and the cost of it is never written till long afterward.

Is it just a coincidence that as the portion of our income spent on food has declined, spending on health care has soared? In 1960 Americans spent 17.5 percent of their income on food and 5.2 percent of national income on health care. Since then, those numbers have flipped: Spending on food has fallen to 9.9 percent, while spending on heath care has climbed to 16 percent of national income. I have to think that by spending a little more on healthier food we could reduce the amount we have to spend on heath care.