On November 27, 1978, disgruntled former Supervisor Dan White shot and killed Mayor George Moscone and Supervisor Harvey Milk in San Francisco’s City Hall. He fled the building, surrendering to the authorities a short time later. The murders shocked the nation.

Dan White’s trial drew the national media. The verdict—that White was guilty not of first-degree murder but rather of voluntary manslaughter, which carried a much lighter sentence, sent shockwaves through the media. As reported in the papers, a key argument of the defense was that White had consumed massive amounts of sugary foods, which had contributed to his “diminished capacity,” which in turn led to his killing spree.

A reporter infamously dubbed it “the Twinkie Defense.”

The vortex of debate and discussion that followed resulted in a changing of California laws and new scientific studies on the relationship between unhealthy food and crime. Is it possible, clinicians asked, that junk food could cause a person to lose their moral compass, to become violent?

In a series of studies conducted on juvenile offenders by criminologist Dr. Stephen J. Schoenthaler, high sugar and high fat foods were swapped out with healthier foods. He’d later summarize his findings thus: “There was a 47% reduction in documented offenses, infractions, and other indicators of antisocial behavior. These included reductions in overt violence, acts of theft, verbal

© Psychology Today