food pyramid is her biggest example. She outlines how lobbyists directly impact the ways that Americans are advised by the government about nutrition. Similarly, she questions how the USDA can maintain integrity as an agency that both educates the public on nutrition and protects the agriculture industry.

Then, in part two, Nestle takes on documenting the many ways business influences food policies in the United States. She uncovers how often food lobbyists make significant campaign donations to politicians who are writing food policy. She critiques the ways in which food research and the study of nutrition have been touched by agricultural industry. She even considers how academia (including her own work) is often funded or underwritten by companies.

In part three, Nestle considers how marketing and advertising lead to false nutritional information. She argues that food companies specifically target young audiences with sugary ads.

In part four, Nestle tracks the loss of regulations on dietary supplements. The government has left it entirely up to the consumer to determine the effectiveness of supplemental products. Marketing campaigns have taken it upon themselves to capitalize on the lack of information present and greatly influence consumer understandings of safety.

Food Politics by Marion Nestle is divided into five sections. The first part highlights the interference federal health officials experience from Congress whenever they try to give dietary recommendations. The second section looks at how the food industry has made financial investments to influence Congress and form alliances with nutritional agencies. Nestle notes that the food industry has funded research studies, which publicize results that are favorable to huge corporations in the sector.

The third section of the book offers examples of market practices by food industry leaders, such as the use of children in advertisements and how the use of schools as platforms for selling foods that do not have much nutritional value. The fourth part looks at how political processes are influenced by the supplements industry so that the latter can have a market that is independent of government supervision. Finally, the fifth section explains the strategies the food industry uses to market unhealthy foods.

Nestle's text can be broken down into three main sections, all of which support her main argument: that the food industry insidiously affects consumers' health and well-being by regulating and influencing the food supply. 

Part One provides an overview of food advice in the United States with respect to how lobbyists and the USDA have encouraged Americans to eat more in order to prevent disease, then in an effort to fight obesity, the government has advised consumers to eat less. Nestle then focuses on how lobbyists created the food pyramid to suit the needs of manufacturers (namely dairy and meat producers). By the same token, the USDA is called into question, as their role in developing and legitimizing the Food Pyramid further points to the idea that the food industry concerns itself more with profit over health.

In Part Two, Nestle explores how various companies in the food industry influence government policy on food. To illustrate this, Nestle discusses the Banana Wars (between Chiquita and the EU), as well as sugarcane production in the South. In both of these scenarios, lobbying and campaigning contributions figured prominently into the equation. Nestle sums up these findings by exploring how these practices actually influence what the public eats. 

The third section of the text analyzes the ways in which advertising campaigns have negatively influenced the eating practices of children, namely the availability of sugary, carbohydrate laden foods at schools. 

The final section of the text offers several case studies which illustrate how the deregulation of dietary supplements has influenced American health habits. Continuing in the same vein, Nestle devotes three chapters to designer foods and their subsequent impact on American health. Overall, this discussion provides a valuable reiteration of Nestle's main argument.