Exit Interview is an audio series produced by the Princeton School of Public and International Affairs. Co-hosts David Mayorga, associate dean of public affairs and communications, and Ambreen Ali, senior communications and media strategist, speak with graduating students who won prizes for their senior theses, which are the culmination of a year’s worth of research, interviews, and analysis on a policy topic.

Lina Singh won the Lieutenant John A. Larkin Memorial Prize, awarded to the senior who writes the best thesis in the field of political economy or on a broadly interdisciplinary subject in which economics plays the most important part, for her thesis on ultra-processed foods.

Listen now:
 

The transcript below was auto-generated.

Intro: This is Ambreen Ali and this is David Mayorga. You're listening to Exit Interview, a conversation with Princeton SPIA graduates about their senior year research.

Lina Singh: My name is Lina Singh. I am from Westport, Connecticut, and at Princeton, I studied SPIA and public policy.

Ambreen Ali: So Lina, can you just tell me about your thesis in your own words?

LS: Sure. My thesis examines the state of food regulation in the U.S. through something that is emerging called ultra-processed foods. These are products, think Twinkies, potato chips, anything that has been industrially altered to enhance texture, shelf life, and convenience. These foods now make up the majority of the U.S. food supply and have been increasingly linked to a host of mental and physical ailments such as obesity, diabetes, anxiety, and depression. I explore how current regulatory frameworks in the U.S., primarily overseen by the Food and Drug Administration and the U.S. Department of Agriculture, are ill equipped to address these ultra-processed foods, and so through some international case studies, expert interviews, and a national survey, I make a set of policy recommendations at the federal, state, private, and grassroots level.

AA: That's amazing. It's such a relevant topic and also, having gone through your thesis, I was really impressed by the breadth of research that you did and the types of research you conducted, like a national survey, and you did some site visits, went to the World Food Forum, and conducted interviews. So it's really impressive what went into it. I guess I'm just curious, what drew you to this topic? It sounds like you're pretty dedicated to the world of food policy. You've worked at the Department of Agriculture and the Farmlink Project. Where did all of this start? 

LS: Yeah, so I would say, just from a really young age. I love to cook. My mom has always been an amazing cook, and so she taught me this love for food. But she's also a diabetic, so she's very health-conscious and always promoted cooking whole, fresh foods and avoiding eating out as much as possible. On the other hand, my dad is very much, you know, he always was working and always favored the convenient option, so would eat fast food quite often, and he's struggling with obesity. So seeing how my parents had these different relationships with food, and how their relationship with food was directly linked to their health, was something I was really interested in. So from there, you know, I always was a big foodie, loved cooking. And then in high school, one day in my English class, we watched a documentary called “Food Inc.,” and that really exposed a lot of the flaws of the U.S. food industry, and that made me more intrigued to learn about these systemic issues, and so I wrote a high school research paper on obesity. And then from there, I realized that food was something that was linked to so many things I cared about, whether it was public health or environmental sustainability, animal welfare. And so coming to Princeton, where I wanted to study public policy, I decided to kind of make food the focal point and focus my studies on that area.

AA: That's amazing. It's so interesting hearing about your journey. So as I mentioned, you know, I was really impressed by the amount of research that went into your thesis. How did each of the different types of research you did, how did they end up informing your thesis? Again, you had the survey and you had academic research that you did, but also interviews and site visits. So how did it all come together?

LS: From the outset, I was just actually planning to take a qualitative approach and do a series of expert interviews, and also go to the World Food Forum in Rome, which was an amazing experience. And there I got to speak with people from different countries and learn about international approaches to food policy. And so I was going to take strictly a qualitative approach. And then one day, I saw there was an email to do a national survey through the Princeton Survey Research Center. So I decided to look into that and conduct a survey. And through that, I was able to gain a lot of quantitative insights into public opinion about ultra-processed foods, food labeling. And so I decided to integrate some of those insights in parallel with the insights I got from different experts to kind of have more robust analysis of some of the things I was talking about. So in the start of my thesis, for example, I begin with a literature review that's a bit more on the technical scientific side, and so that's where insights from epidemiologists I spoke with was really insightful. And then toward the end where I make my policy recommendations, that's where insights from different policymakers and people who work at the international organizations. That's where that was really relevant. And then the insights I gained from the survey, you know, I was able to kind of quantify something. So for example, one of the insights that I learned about was the nutrition facts panel that we currently see on a lot of different products are not serving the needs of many customers. So through the regression analysis I ran, it actually seems that regardless of income or education level, perceived clarity and usefulness of these labels is quite low. So I was able to make that argument because of that quantitative data that I had. So I think, in sum, it helped make my analysis more robust. 

AA: Absolutely, for the interviews that you did, how do you feel like that sort of enhanced what you learned through either the quantitative methods or your academic research? Was there anything that surprised you from what you learned and how did you balance varying perspectives?

LS: Yeah, one anecdote in particular really resonated with me. I spoke with someone named Jerold Mande. He formerly worked at the FDA, and he was actually the lead designer of the nutrition facts panel, and he also worked on tobacco regulation. And one of the things he talked about was how there's a lot of parallels between the issues we saw with Big Tobacco as there are now with Big Food and this, you know, rising phenomenon of ultra-processed foods. So it was really cool to hear that coming from someone who, quote, unquote, worked on the inside in government. So that was a really compelling perspective. And then speaking with people in Italy, that was also interesting, because they seem to be a bit more reluctant to act on ultra-processed foods, and I think that's because a lot of their exports, like prosciutto and olive oil, would technically be qualified as you know, ultra processed and high in fat and sodium. And so there's a bit more pushback on regulating by this ultra processing mechanism that was developed in Brazil. But I think that I got a range of perspectives. I think it was very useful to interview people from a range of industries. So I learned a lot about the nutritional aspect from people in that space, researchers, and then also I learned a bit about AI and some of the new developments there. So I got to speak with AI developers and then policymakers, of course. And so I tried my best to kind of synthesize everything they said into a cohesive narrative and chart a path forward for policymakers.

AA: So in the end, you make some recommendations. You know, policy recommendations based off of everything that you've learned, and it spans both regulations and things that the government can do, but also what the grassroots and how public opinion can be shaped through education and things like that. I was wondering, given all the thought you've given to the changes that can be made, do you plan to do anything with your thesis to get it in front of people who could do something about this?

LS: Definitely, actually, I'm working right now with Dr. Nicole Avena, who's a visiting professor here. She teaches health psychology, and she's one of the pioneer researchers on food addiction. And she was a critical interviewee for my thesis about the scientific side of ultra-processed foods, looking into the health risks. And she's been quite helpful in working with me to see if we can get this out to some news media outlets, and we're trying to co-publish an op-ed together. So that's currently in the works. But I definitely think that because of how relevant and timely this topic is, I would hate for it to die in the archives. And so this summer, my plan is to work on getting my thesis research out there to whoever would be receptive of it. But yes, definitely want to push this into D.C., journalists, that's kind of where I hope to see this go.

AA: And then has working on your thesis kind of changed the way you think about what you want to do next?

LS: Definitely. I mean, for one personally, it's definitely made me more conscious about what I eat. And I think I have almost like, ultra-processed goggles on when I go to the supermarket, and I'm more aware of things. And even just talking to friends and family, I'm hoping to just share fun facts about different foods and labeling things. But beyond that, I am planning to pursue a master in world food studies at the University of Gastronomic Sciences in Pollenzo, Italy. That's through the Fulbright-Casten Award that I just found out about two weeks ago. So I'm really excited about that, and that'll be a 10-month master's program where I'll take classes related to food. It takes an interdisciplinary approach, similar to my thesis, and then that'll be followed by a three-month internship related to food, which I've yet to figure out. So yeah, and then, in the long term, definitely want to do something related to helping improve the U.S. food system. In what capacity, I'm not exactly sure. I really like policy, but also the private sector plays a huge role, and increasingly, now, journalism, so I'm keeping my options open, but hoping to make it change in that space in some way.

AA: That's so exciting. Congratulations on the Fulbright. That's fantastic. Given everything that you've done as part of this work, I'm just curious, what would you say you're most proud of in terms of either something you learned or something that you produced in your thesis, or an experience that you had? Is there anything that kind of stands out? 

LS: I think it really felt like a culmination of many years of studying different issues related to food. And I think it blended my SPIA major with my cognitive science minor quite well. And I think that just how relevant and timely it is, you know, I get excited every time I see a New York Times article about ultra-processed foods, or because it seems like it's very much, you know, something that the current administration is talking about, and, you know, is quite controversial. But I think in some ways controversy can be good, because it draws attention to things, and I think it's also interesting, because I don't think that food should be a partisan issue. And I think in a lot of ways, there is and should be bipartisan agreement, but right now, with how polarized the U.S. is, everything seems to be controversial. So I'm hoping that, you know, we can find ways to bridge different perspectives and ideas to advance a healthier population, better nutrition, because I think at the end of the day, that's universally desired, and something that I hope we can work toward. 

AA: Absolutely, yeah. Okay, last question: You are almost done. You're graduating in a few days, but there are, you know, incoming seniors who are going to be starting their theses in the fall. So what advice would you give to someone who's kind of at the beginning of this process and about to embark on their thesis, given that you've gone through this now and get how it works?

LS: So I'm quite a detailed planner, and I think I spent a lot of time initially trying to map out exactly the structure and argument I was trying to make with my thesis, but honestly, a huge portion of my thesis kind of developed throughout the course of the year. I had a whole section just looking at the contemporary political landscape with Trump and RFK. And that's something I could not have predicted at the onset of this process. And you know, I mentioned the survey as well. That was something that I just decided to add on in December. And so I would say the biggest piece of advice is to be flexible and open-minded with your methods, different ideas that you might want to incorporate. And also, just by interviewing more and more people, I learned about different things and came up with new ideas for how I'd want to structure my thesis and what I wanted to emphasize. So I would say to be open-minded and initially, just read as much as you can about the topic. Just try and absorb as much information, and it will come together. But you just have to have patience. 

AA: Yeah, that's great advice. All right. Lena, thank you so much for your time and again, congratulations on completing your thesis, on graduating, and on what you're doing next. 

LS: Thank you so much for having me.