Sustainability champion BIRD accused of causing severe malnutrition amongst customers

Two deaths are also being investigated on suspicion that the skinnybird subscription might have been the cause. Furthermore, Bird and similar food service companies are accused of driving up the numbers of people with eating disorders. This number has risen by 20% compared to 2030. Bird is currently conducting an internal investigation, however categorically denying that the skinnybird subscription is not nutritionally sufficient and balanced to serve as a complete meal plan. Their in-house nutrition specialist, Christine Meyer, has repeatedly stated to the press that the skinnybird is a well-balanced diet designed to enable weight-loss in a safe, effective and pleasurable manner. However, according to whistle blower and previous employee at Bird, Daniel Hanson, the company has struggled with errors in the system that calculates the nutritional needs of customers. Furthermore, he contends that the use of synthetic taste enhancing “energy balls” in the meals are creating an illusion of satisfaction that camouflages the fact that the subscription does not deliver enough food.

This is the second major scandal that hits Bird hard this year. In March, another whistle blower exposed massive misconduct in the protection of intimate data sourced from Birds costumers in order to tailor their food subscriptions. Behind closed doors, governments had demanded access to the data in return for upholding regulatory backing for the operations of Bird and similar companies. Data concerning individual health, activity, and social interactions were used to detect false claims for social services. Governments are certainly not the only actors interested in these intimate data – every business selling something to consumers would of course know how to make use of it in order to tailor their products and marketing to the exact fit for every consumer. However, a recent survey amongst consumers in Europe and the US, shows a majority naming the insurance company the most feared actor getting a hold of their data. A growing concern of the risks involved in the accumulation of such a vast amount of intimate data is threatening the business concepts of Bird and other services.

Since the launch of Bird in 2034, and an explosion of similar services in the following years, we have witnessed a massive transformation of the way food is produced, distributed and consumed. This transformation has made the food system as a whole substantially more sustainable – if you measure sustainability by overall resource efficiency and GHG emissions. Food waste levels have been reduced by 75% in Europe, 63% in the US and 41% in China. The overall utilization of available nutrients has increased as a result of new production and processing technologies, and obesity numbers have dropped by about 50%. Furthermore, GHG emissions from the food sector have been reduced to about 2% of global emissions, compared to about 25 % in 2019. The impact Bird and similar services have had on the global food systems was unimaginable only a few decades ago, and has been marked a great success to environmentalism.

However, this success has cost us in more than one way. Bird has transformed our relationship with food, and consequently has had an enormous impact on our everyday lives, our culture and our personal relationships. More importantly, it has become an ubiquitous and somewhat discomforting element of our existence. Bird now knows our bodies better than we do ourselves. Actually, it knows our every move; besides from when and what we eat knows Bird knows who we are with, when we sleep, when we run, and when we watch TV on the couch. In return for us surrendering all this information, Bird promises to reduce our mental load and make us the best we can be – but are we really becoming the best we can be? And should Bird decide what that is?

Bird was founded by the Norwegian sus-tech entrepreneur Henny Dahl, and was rapidly franchised around the world. Today it holds a leading position in the global food service market, followed closely by companies such as Food Buddy, NutriLean and YoFo. Dahl has stated that her main motivation for creating Bird was to make the food system more sustainable. She realized however, that sustainability would not be sufficient as a motivator for consumers to make radical changes in how they go about food in their busy everyday lives. She secretly studied her friends and wider social network for years and found that what people did seem to be motivated by was much closer to home, much more tangible and instantly rewarding – their personal health, physical appearance, and management of time and money. The concept of Bird leverages this motivation to create a food service that is sustainable by default. Dahl’s startup was funded by a grant from the UN Innovation for Sustainability Fund, making her able to develop the concept and the technology that makes up Bird. Furthermore, it put her in the position to wheel in a number of large investors, enabling the launch of Bird in 2034.

In 2034, there was still great political and social resistance against the use of Big Data, and legal issues around privacy and surveillance were heavily debated worldwide. However, given the magnitude of the challenge of making global food systems more sustainable, and the pressure policy makers faced to do something about it, opened up a space where Bird managed to stretch the boundaries of what was considered to be acceptable both legally and socially. And now, Bird presents us with all the advantages of this streamlined, individually tailored, and automated solution, fusing the most innovative food technology with big data precision services – providing us with both a vision of the good life AND how to get there instantly. What we loose sight of in all the glitz are the risks involved in handing over all this power to commercial companies. Furthermore, what it means to sever the connection between the production and consumption of food in a way that people cannot relate to natural processes anymore. Food becomes something in a box, a means to obtaining a certain aesthetic ideal.

Since the aim of both regulators and the Bird founder was to reduce GHG emissions and waste, other rather important aspects of food consumption were overlooked, such as the role food plays not only in nurturing the body but also in nurturing the relationships between people. Furthermore, how food is a part of our cultural heritage where recipes and food traditions have been handed down for generations, and are now lost. Food is no longer something we gather around in order to enjoy both the food and the company – it is something we consume solely as a means to an end – which is personal augmentation and burden relief. Bird has in this way contributed to accelerate the individualism that has been fostered by marketeers since the early beginnings of consumer society. The catchy phrase “Because you are worth it”, introduced by Parisian beauty brand L’Oréal in 1971 contributed to legitimize the idea that a brand could deliver something more than a product – it could deliver self-worth and a better life. Now we think that Bird can deliver the same by transforming our bodies with food, and clearing our schedules of food related tasks. But we are not questioning what Bird asks of us in return – and we should.