The ancient satirist Juvenal observed that emperors needed just two things to tame the Roman masses: panem et circenses. The same recipe holds in today’s consumer society: shopping malls provide the bread, and show business takes the circus to the far-reaches of imagination. The masses have also evolved — becoming voracious consumers of goods, information and entertainment. And with the right to vote, they now have the power to change the rules of the game. People are waking up to the fact that quality of life depends on sound health and a clean, natural environment. Showbiz has capitalised on this trend with films such as the climate change disaster flick, The Day After Tomorrow. Some Greens have criticised the film for failing to suggest meaningful ways to avoid environmental Armageddon. They groaned at the official website’s suggestion that better shopping habits could combat climate change. “Buy products which will compensate for (‘neutralise’) every tonne of CO2 you produce,” the site suggests. “Or buy gifts which neutralise a friend’s CO2.” Despite these poorly considered ideas, the movie drew more attention to global warming than any environmental report ever has, scientists admit.

With fewer special effects and a much smaller budget, another film made a more convincing critique of contemporary consumerist behaviour. Super Size Me spotlighted one of today’s most vexing health-related problems: eating too much, too fast, and too unhealthily. Starting from the fact that in the United States, 37 percent of children and two out of three adults are overweight or obese, film producer Morgan Spurlock looked at the legal, financial and physical costs of America’s hunger for fast food.

A recent survey by Consumers International revealed that Europeans’ preference for cleaner, organic products is often abused by producers who dress up their goods with meaningless or fraudulent labels. Consumers should demand clear proof of a product’s environmental benefits and healthfulness, especially in Central and Eastern Europe, where norms and rules on eco-friendly labels are lacking, Consumers International warns.

“Green” labels often hide emulsifiers, preservatives, colourings, stabilisers, and taste enhancers. Ironically, these products don’t look or taste like real food. Beyond edible additives lurks the larger consumer market, which is crowded with chemically loaded goods whose effects on nature and human health remain unknown.

A draft directive on registration, evaluation, authorisation and restriction of chemicals (REACH) aims to reconcile the interests of human health, industry and environment. Scheduled for submission to the EU Parliament this autumn, REACH has scared the chemical industry with its potential trade implications. A heated argument rages in Brussels over expected costs of implementation, while criticism from the US and major EU traders was backed by the chairman of the European Parliament’s Environment Committee Karl-Heinz Florenz. REACH might not be put to a vote during its first reading at the end of 2005, Florenz said in the Environmental News Daily. Chemistry promises to be the first tough test for the newly nominated EU Environment Commissioner Stavros Dimas. European health depends on him receiving top marks.

Pavel P. Antonov