Working in IT I get to see a lot of strange things on and around peoples desks when I go to help them. What follows isn’t the strangest or funniest thing (by a long shot!) but it did make me roll my eyes just a little bit. See if you can guess why.
What you’re seeing is a bottle of Trader Joe’s vitamins. It’s cranberry concentrate, which I’ve been assured contains tons of vitamin C. What gets me is the brand tag line, “For the Survival of the Fittest.” This is the most ironic thing I’ve seen in quite a while. If you were -evolutionarily speaking, of course- “the fittest” person and most worthy of passing your genes on to improve the species then you wouldn’t need vitamins. You would need vitamins if you were not genetically superior, though. The fittest don’t need help (unless they want it). The less fittest need help (unless they want to die out).
This is yet another fine example of marketers doing what they do best… Creating an image that distorts reality. For truth in advertising the tag line should read, “For the Survival of the Not-Quite-Fittest.”
You can follow responses with a RSS 2.0 feed or via email using the checkbox below. Both comments and pings are currently closed.
3 Responses to “Consumer Darwinism”
- Pedro says (February 12th, 2008 at 07:59:00 )
Actually, not true. The fittest person in the world would consistently have a balanced diet which would contain all the nutrients, vitamins and minerals they need. They could use the supplements to obtain those vitamins they need. Remember the rule of conservation of mass. When a body is using mass and converting it to energy, it must resupply this mass with the vitamins or wither away. good thought though!!!
- douglas says (February 12th, 2008 at 08:12:38 )
I can understand what you mean, but these things should come naturally through your diet, not in the form of a pill. That’s the problem with the human species… We’re no longer on Darwinian (natural) evolutionary paths. We’re on artificial (as in human made and not natural) evolutionary paths. There’s very few people on this planet left, especially in first world countries, that would be here if we had to survive in nature without medicine and technology.
I’m not saying it’s a bad thing (I can’t say I’m not one of those people) but the marketing is wrong.
- Mookee says (February 14th, 2008 at 19:47:09 )
Fittest … I would think that would technically mean assuming all things were equal, they would be in the best “shape.” This would assume everyone ate the same thing. Some people metabolize things differently, I’ll have to agree with Doug…granted, it’s splitting hairs, but ultimately, the fittest would need the least additional supplements.
But then again I’m not a doctor, so what the hell do I know.