The latest food scare story had some real meat to it.
In fact, meat was the dish of the day.
New guidancefrom the World Health Organisation (WHO) says that processed meats like sausages and bacon can cause cancer.
Even worse for carnivores, it said red meats of all sorts maybe just a hearty Sunday roast probably does cause cancer, too.
As youd expect, debate ensued and many people said the risks (or at least the medias coverage of the risks) were being exaggerated.
Ill leave that to you, Google, and your own dining habits.
Whats interesting to me is how such swings in taste might affect our long-term investments.
More than lip service
Take a company like the US burrito chain Chipotle Mexican Grill.
Its no exaggeration to say that among my US colleagues at The Motley Fool this company is beloved.
No wonder, if you look at the share price up 1,400% since it came to market in 2006.
And many of our US newsletter services have been along for at least part of that ride.
But its not just the financial performance that impresses us Fools.
The company treats staff well, for example, at least by the standards of the hospitality industry. Its well-paid managers often worked their way up from the humblest starter positions.
Chipotle has also raised the bar far above standard fast food fare when it comes to ingredients and quality.
Where possible it sources locally produced organic foods and its trying to eliminate genetically modified stuff from its menus, too.
As for the meat that stuffs its burritos, Chipotle looksfor pasture raised dairy and responsibly raised livestock.
And this is not just lip service.
When Chipotle became concerned about the animal welfare credentials of one of its suppliers early this year, it yanked pork carnitas off its menu in many stores a significant move given the little snacks make up about 6% of its revenues.
It was just another example of the sort of conscientious capitalism that drew Foolish investors to the company in the first place.
Will things look so rosy if it turns out Chipotle has been helping its young and passionate millennial customers to get cancer?
No more than McDonalds or the local steakhouse have, of course, but just going on the logic of those new WHO recommendations.
It sounds fanciful. But health stories invariably do in the early days.
For a comparison, in the 1930s and 40s cigarette makers could still get doctors to endorse their deadly products in advertising.
Cigarettes were known to cause coughing, but it would take decades for everyone to believe the solid link to cancer.
As late as 1960s, only one-third of doctors thought fags were the smoking gun that had caused lung cancer rates to skyrocket.
Trick or treat?
It seems unlikely to me that red meat eating will ever be spoken about in the same wheezy breath as smoking, but thats not the point.
And Im no doctor, anyway but luckily youre not reading me for medical advice.
The point Im making is that even the most beloved products and brands of one era can look very different from a subsequent vantage point, when new knowledge comes to light.
For another example one that lies somewhere between cigarettes and this sausage scare in terms of the evolving story look at sugar.
Virtually everyone now understands that too much sugar makes you fat, and that this can contribute to a range of grim illnesses, from diabetes to heart disease.
More recently, a link between sugar and cancerhas emerged, too.
Where does this leave a company like The Coca-Cola Company, whose brand was once as bright and wholesome as apple pie?
Or, closer to home, A.G. Barr, the manufacturer of the marmite-y Scottish drink Irn-Bru, which could conceivably face a sugar tax in the UK if celebrity chef Jamie Oliver gets his way?
Even a modern globe-spanning titan like Starbucks Corporation could be hit if you consider the sheer volume of sugar that augments its coffee, or resides in the treats that it sends out the door.
Again, Starbucks is a beloved stock among US Fools, who laud its staff-friendly policies and its customer-centric business model.
But what if?
The wages of sin
Legendary money man Warren Buffett has often said he loves his big investment in Coca-Cola because he is highly confident that more people will be drinking more Coke in the future especially compared to how much less certain he can be about the earnings of, say, a technology company or a mining outfit.
And Buffett is surely right.
Even if sugar does come to be seen as a public health hazard, it will be decades if ever before it completely drops off the menu.
People still smoke and drink in their billions, after all.
But its fascinating to me that even these companies whose products are often considered bombproof could face existential threats.
Note, though, that doesnt mean theyll necessarily be bad investments, even if public attitudes do change.
Academics have found so-called sin stocks like tobacco companies have handily beatenthe market in the past.
One theory is that some squeamish investors (like me) refuse to put their money into cigarette manufacturers for non-financial reasons, which gives those who do the chance to outperform.
Will the same be true of sausage makers like Cranswickand sugar treat purveyors Patisserie Holdingssome day?
Yes, we’re in it for the long haulhere at the Motley Fool, andwe focus on investing in great businesses for years rather than months. It’s over that kind of time horizon that we can make sensible judgments on how a business is likely to perform, and whether the price is right.
If you’d like to see what I’m talking about, thisinvestment dossierfrom our top Fools may be of interest to you.
It’s called ‘The Fool’s Five Shares To Retire On‘, and it’s currently free to view. It contains the five shares which we believe could be perfect for building a long-term portfolio. If you’re looking for investment ideas, which you can act on right away, this would be an ideal place to start.
Click hereto get instant access without any obligations whatsoever!
Owain owns shares in A.G. Barr. The Motley Fool UK has no interest in any of the shares mentioned.