Selling With Nothing

I was walking around a health-food store yesterday and I realized that the primary marketing device being used on products was pointing out what it didn’t contain.
“Aluminum free”
“Dairy Free”
“Does not contain glutamates, carbohydrates, trans fats, saturated fats.”
“Now without carbs/arsenic/french fries.”

It’s peculiar that an item can be touted as superior, based on its lack of ingredients. Especially when we really shouldn’t be thanking the producer for its sense of responsibility, when the product shouldn’t contain the offending ingredient in the first place.

I’ve seen apples that are advertised as “Trans Fat free” when apples don’t contain it to begin with. Or sugar-free gum that uses aspartame as an alternative. Bread that contains sugar but is then low-sodium.

And I’m further dismayed to the extent that advertisers will patronize their various demographics, by selling a product minus some chemical additive, that produces no adverse effects, and that the manufacturer knows is truly unnecessary to remove anyway, by relying on the gullibility of the consumer to not look into the details.

I’ve always considered health food, or even regular food that is promoted as healthy, to be something of a niche sell, purchased by those who are more interested in the identity that the use of these types of products provides, instead of looking into the statistical evidence that proves that exercise and common sense with food is by far the best option one has to living longer and healthier. Vitamins, minerals, the absence of this and that, are only contributing factors at best, and in reality play very little part in ones sense of well-being (beyond the placebo effect of course).