Recent reporting from The New York Times describes childhood obesity as “complicated,” and the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) defines obesity as a “complex disease” that can be impacted by “social determinants of health,” like racism and climate change.
With caveats that genetics must play a part and it is definitely more difficult for…
Recent reporting from The New York Times describes childhood obesity as “complicated,” and the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) defines obesity as a “complex disease” that can be impacted by “social determinants of health,” like racism and climate change.
With caveats that genetics must play a part and it is definitely more difficult for some than others, how can it in any way be professional (and based on what evidence) to remove (or seriously downplay) personal responsibility (including parental responsibility to children) from the equation in how to maintain a healthy weight with good diet and exercise?
I long ago gave up the belief that any government agency (or the NYT) is concerned with truth and reason. But I flit between pity and disdain for those who listen to and believe these charlatans.
Personal responsibility and accountability are out. People want to be the perpetual victim now and claiming obesity is due to "racism and climate change" are another way to shift the blame.
These poor kids don't stand a chance if they're going up being told there's nothing they can do about their weight.
So weary of excuses. Yes the morons did burn out businesses and now their mothers and grandmothers have to go miles to shop. Stupidity and criminality has consequences.
Food deserts have been in existence for a long, long time. For WHITE people as well, Bruce. Shouldn't that be addressed also?
Of course the news video lied. That's the ENTIRE premise of this comment board, isn't it? Nothing the media says can be trusted. All left-wing/leftist bias lies, right?
If you have 10,100 apples, but 570 are rotten, do you have mostly good apples?
If you have 570 rotten apples looting and burning down supermarkets, and the 9,530 good people do nothing about it, and excuse their mayhem, then everyone suffers. Food deserts are just desserts. Oh and desserts are eligible to be purchased with SNAP cards. Notwithstanding that they contribute to obesity and other diseases.
No one lives in rural areas without reliable transportation. No one (at least no one reasonable) expects there to be grocery stores every square mile in rural areas. People who live in rural areas expect to have to drive to the grocery store. So the "food desert" excuse for poor eating choices does not apply in these areas. Not to mention rural people aren't stupid enough to burn down their own supermarkets.
Well, you clearly have little experience with rural areas, as the lack of quality food is quite real, as most places are Dollar Generals and/or D&G Markets and transportation is/can be an issue.
Now, by "rural people" you mean "white?" Because "rural people" come in all types. Or as this more of the "white working class" framing?
Yes, I have plenty of experience with rural areas. So the definition of a food desert is when food is less available? Or "quality" food - as you define it - is less available? Yes, transportation "can be an issue" anywhere, but if you don't have reliable transportation out in the country then you have much bigger problems than food quality.
How on earth do you imagine the human race survived when almost all areas were rural? And how come there weren't fat people out in the country back then? People don't get fat when food is scarce - it is quite the reverse.
When I was in grade school we had three recesses per day: morning, lunchtime, and early afternoon. The noon recess was a bit longer so we could eat our lunches and still have full time to play-off that childish energy. Only one (girl) in my class was obese in the least. After recess we were all able to focus on our studies without a problem. Now many schools have eliminated recess period; a high percentage of students are obese and/or on ADHD drugs. How very foolish.
My one daughter is a teacher and I was appalled when I read the studies about how children need multiple recesses to learn optimally. There was a ton of data to back that up, but the schools ignore it. Even worse, they teach it and then ignore it.
Where were the genetics before 1980 when the "fat kid" in school was the outlier and not the norm? Why since then the proliferation of health clubs, when before that the only people who felt the need to go to gyms were professional athletes and knuckleheads? Why is it that when you look at candid photos and films of people before 1980 on the street or at the beach or in your back yard, you're hard pressed to find anyone under 50 noticeably overweight? Who altered our genetics after 1980?
Even the "fat kid" back then wasn't really all that fat compared to kids today. We were super-active back then, spending most of our time outside when we could. Fast food, candy and soda were treats, not something we consumed every day.
Up until a few years ago - I regularly made business trips to Japan. One thing that always astounded me was that outside of the dohyō (Sumo ring) - it was a very rare sight to see anyone in Japan who was obese. Maybe it's genetics - but taking the train either north or south out of Tokyo - is was rare to see more than a few cars - and hundreds of bicycles at every train station. Lots of biking and walking - and virtually no processed foods in the typical Japanese diet. Doesn't seem like rocket science to me.
It is only to a point. I had horses and some you had to feed a ton and some you barely had to feed to maintain a healthy weight. We called the latter "easy keepers". I had a woman who was helping me with my diet say that there are people who are able to eat anything they want and not gain a pound but if I'm with her, I'm not in that club :-) We all have things about us that make life easier and some that make it harder, easy weight gain is just one variable and once you know you gain it easily you have to modify your behavior. The victim language about genetics being destiny is ridiculous.
A person can't even walk the streets or go up a subway staircase without getting stuck behind one of these cretins creeping along, ambling to and fro with their face stuck in their device. Or up their behind. I wonder how many of these clowns have been harvested by the grim reaper trying to cross the street. We need a new category of Darwin Awards for distracted walking.
In my college physical education course, we had one homework assignment I recall where it showed that adopting one household convenience, in my case, an electric can opener, would lead to weight gain over the course of a year if no other changes in habits occurred. It wasn’t a large number for that small item, but consider how drastically lifestyles have changed since preWWll.
Here's an easy refutation of all this bs. Take a look at the old films of GIs training at the beginning of WW II. Not a tubby among them. Why? They ate real food and got plenty of exercise. What made Americans fat? One cause was the moronic "Food Pyramid" pushed by our government. Another the high carb low fat mania pushed by the food conglomerates. "Snackwells, anyone?" And then there are the gallons of sugared waters we consume and, worse, allow our children to drink.
I would be interested in hearing/reading more surrounding sugar. Is "Big Food" a thing like "Big Pharma"? Do they work together? Sugar is added to almost every processed food, even savory foods that don't need it for any reason (Non sweet bacon and ketchup!). The reason is to keep everyone addicted, like a low level drip, and wanting more food...leading to poor physical and mental health. When I talk to people about it their eyes glaze over and no one wants to hear or give thought to it. I sound like a nut, but I know it's true. I lost 30 lbs myself after checking labels carefully and avoiding anything with sugar or fake sugar (stevia is the exception), and have kept it off for a couple of years. 2 to 3 times a week I'll go out for ice cream with mix ins or some other fabulous, totally worth it dessert, or pancakes or something. Otherwise, I stick with meats, fruits, and veggies. It's not difficult, and no scary side effects to worry about. I hate that more attention surrounding the American food supply and what is let in and why isn't being sounded from the mountain tops. Too many people profit, I guess. Probably people that have "science is real", and "kindness wins" as their mantras.
Congratulations on doing it right! Find the diet that works for you, stick to it.
I don’t think food companies are rubbing their hands together, scheming to addict people to their products by adding more sugar. Food companies run consumer tests to determine what people like. It would be cheaper to make catsup without sugar, but if their consumers say they prefer a version, and that version had some sugar added, the company will probably add some sugar and market that version. Same with salt.
I used to think that way, too, Maureen. But given some of the data that Dr. Lustig has assembled about the deliberate machinations of some of the "food" conglomerates, I'm far less certain of that now. https://robertlustig.com/
I read a Twitter story from a man claiming that he was a consultant for Coke about a decade ago, and that they were paying the NAACP millions to publicly label politicians as racists if they supported a tax on sugar. The media subsequently portrayed it as a tax on the minority poor, and the measure failed.
The Sugar Cartel is killing millions and laughing all the way to the bank. Let’s not forget that it is the government, because of prodding $$$ by Big Corn, that regulates the food chain from where and how corn is grown all the way to the grocery store shelves. Corn is in everything.
You forgot to mention the ethanol hoax that has been perpetrated on the US people. It was started by the first Bush. You may remember ethanol was to replace gasoline. Under Trump we were oil independent and no longer needed ethanol but the powerful corn lobby support it and its subsidies.
Ethanol is far less efficient (less miles to the gallon) than gasoline and will destroy the engines of older cars.
You're right, Bruce. Just take a look at most supermarket shelves and see all the processed and canned food. Tons of salt, tons of sugar, and more than enough fat.
But I look at another metric, as well - fast food. Count the burger and pizza joints etc.. now and compare it to the early '70's. A ten fold increase at least, probably more. Americans are addicted to eating out at all the wrong places.
There's nothing really wrong with the food pyramid if portion sizes are kept in check.
What kept (and keeps) portion sizes in check for most of human history in most of the world? The cost of food.
Obesity is a direct result of abundant and (comparatively) inexpensive food. There were few tubbies in the past because most people couldn't afford enough food to get fat.
Don't believe me? Look at the size of dishes and glassware over the years. Even 50 years ago they were much, much smaller than they are today. A juice glass was 4-6 ounces. Now people pour orange juice into 20 oz tumblers. Of course our waistlines are going to be affected by that magnitude of change.
The problem isn't the food pyramid, it's people considering a full pound of cooked pasta or rice to be one serving of grains.
To your point, Missy, many decades ago my dad worked in Germany. This is not that long after WW II. He said that having a belly there, being overweight, carried prestige, because it meant you had enough wealth to have access to enough food to gain weight. This was in a country that was still in ruins and recovering from the war. I'd forgotten about that until your comment.
Anyone who has written a term paper knows you can pick a premise and defend it, any premise. You can back it up with quotes from "experts" and make the premise sound valid.
That is what happened about 30 years ago. Some "expert" said fats were bad for you and showed his research to prove it. Well it turned out that before he started his "research" he thought fats were bad for you and he set out to prove it and guess what? He did and the rest of the world took his "research" to be true.
It has since been proven that this guy was full of crap.
Fat is and has been forever been an essential nutrient. Your body generates cholesterol whether you eat fats or not. Being a diabetic I don't eat simple carbs, nothing white like bread, rice or potatoes. I eat a high protein, high fat diet and my cholesterol is spot on.
On the subject of women's figures, the standards (and women set those standards) of what a woman's figure should look like has changed with time. If you have ever been to an art museum and looked at the paintings of women from centuries past. You will see that most of the women are zaftig. If you are a prude don't watch this video on famous nude paintings of beautiful plump women:
When these were painted these women were consider the standard for beauty.
With the exception of some hormonal imbalance being fat is not a disease. Because everybody is a victim nobody is responsible for self control. You are not an overeater you are sick.
According to statistics 50% of our population is overweight. This wasn't so 50 years ago. What happened? Well to the over sensitive, caring left said, we all got sick. It is not the lack of will power. It's an illness.
I see more and more people morbidly overweight. When I was a kid I never saw anybody morbidly overweight. I'm sure there were some but I don't remember seeing them. Do you?
Thanks for the link - very interesting. Any thoughts on why women were rarely portrayed with armpit or pubic hair, even 500 yrs ago? I think I saw one 'wit' (as they say in Philly:)))
And on the topic of "I want something to be so"....that is the reason blinded placebo controlled studies are essential, because the mind can heal if really motivated, and doctors doing the studies are very very eager to prove their theory!
Nope. Fat kids were definitely an anomaly (Chubbsy Ubbsey?)
To your video - Last year we were in Rome with my younger daughter and her family. After a long day in the August sun, we visited the Villa Borghese. My 9-year old granddaughter - completely done in and bored - looked at us with disgust and announced "this is nothing but an Italian porn palace!" We still laugh at that one.
Yes the standard of beauty has changed. But the women depicted in your link are much to be preferred to Tom Wolfe's "social X-rays," don't you agree?
Interesting video, but I wouldn't call any of those women "plump" except for one or two who were in that period were the tried to make them look three months pregnant. Nothing truly "Rubenesque" and none of the truly plump Boucher paintings. Seems this harem was cherry picked against fatness. I don't think this video makes your case.
You're right, it did. Painters models started putting on weight not long after Europe developed a huge appetite for cane sugar (the market for which launched the beginning of the slave trade to the new world we're the sugar was grown).
Similarly, our food pyramid changed in the eighties corresponding to massive lobbying from sugar growers in America that it's fat that is the big problem causing heart disease.
Your movie of the nudes through history should be required viewing in junior high school. Note however, that these are young women, very proportional, and there are no big muffin tops... 😉
Anyone who says the "science is settled" is an ignoramus. The science is never settled. It is and always should be questioned. That is called the scientific method.
Einstein's theory of relativity is being questioned as are Newton's laws of gravity.
Bruce, the food pyramid and dietary guidelines are informed by the so called experts in academia. Nutrition is like climate science. A lot of experts who like to rush the data and make pronouncements for all of us to obey, before the data have ripened. Lots of consulting fees and recognition, lots of big egos. When trans fats were the latest bogeyman, a MD from Tufts asked me why all foods could not have their hydrogenated oil removed and replaced with healthy olive oil. This “expert” had no concept of the supply of food oils or food functionality. I had a hard time not laughing in his face.
Yep. Take a look at what informed the proscription against salt in the diet. Dumb people making pronouncements for the rest of us is not ok. The reasons not to trust our government just keep mounting up.
Here’s a dirty little secret---there were data suggesting too little salt raised BP in some people. But the academic food nannies squelched them. Didn’t fit their narrative.
A lot of poor people live in areas where they don't have access to fresh, healthy food. They get their food at fast food restaurants and convenience stores. It's hard to be healthy eating the CircleK donut for breakfast every day.
Fast food restaurants & convenience stores actually have great options for fresh, healthy food. The truth is that some folks, poor or rich, just choose junk food over healthy food.
When I grocery shop, my cart is mostly vegetables, fruits, meat, fish, a bit of pasta/bread, a few treats. Mostly fresh stuff. I observe people in front of me in the checkout lane, on Public Aid (SNAP Cards) & they buy overpriced, expensive, really garbagey nasty food like flaming cheetos and twinkies. They actually blow a lot of money on this crap.
As a physician, I do advise poor folks to buy cheaper, healthier food, such as: canned veggies, frozen veggies, beans, rice, fresh bananas, fresh carrots, oranges, potatoes, onions, canned tuna, fresh pork, etc. as these are all cheap options. But I can't force people to make healthy choices. If they choose to waste money, throw money into the toilet by gambling, buying lottery tickets, buying alcohol, buying tobacco, buying expensive junk food, that's out of my control.
I saw a lot of this when I was a kid, too. Even when food stamps were restricted to healthy options, people found a way around it to buy junk food and beer.
Yes you can. You can eat healthy on a low budget & many folks do. There are a lot of families that cook & eat quite healthy without spending much at all.
Some people just choose to blow all their Public Aid money on lottery tickets, tobacco, alcohol, soft drinks, & expensive garbagy junk food.
You’re right. There’s plenty of manipulating and abusing the system. The comment above about Walmart is also accurate. Personal responsibility matters. I was pointing out the challenges that many face to find good food. It’s easy for me; there is a supermarket within a mile of my house and a half dozen within five, including Whole Foods and Walmart.
Another commenter mentioned a geographic connection between obesity and food deserts. There is a correlation for sure. There are obese people in food oases as well. No doubt personal responsibility plays a role.
My purpose in pointing out the challenges was merely to suggest the complexity of the social problem of obesity.
I wonder why the “food deserts” are in low income areas? Is San Francisco now considered a “pharmacy desert” because Walgreens and CVS closed so many of their stores? Why did the stores close? Personal responsibility is 99% the issue. Personal responsibility for every choice we make has an impact on the direction of our lives.
Have you tried it? It’s not just about the money, but also about the availability of real food. Drive through the poorest part of any city and count the supermarkets. Then count the convenience stores. Do the same in the wealthy parts of the same city and the suburbs. It’s astonishing.
By this logic we should see an obvious geographic distribution of obesity and the obese would only live in the so-called food deserts. But we don't see that. Many obese people only shop at supermarkets with large produce sections. Look at all the fat people/Walmart memes.
It depends where you live. For some people it really is a challenge because they don't have transportation and the nearest big grocery store or farmer's market is miles away. I'm just talking about people living in poverty, mind you, not the majority.
Junk food is cheap and filling. Healthy food gets expensive fast and it’s not shelf stable. Food banks get donations of garbage that might keep people from starving to death, but how can anyone provide good healthy food to anyone for pennies? One place to start is schools-- offer both breakfast and lunch to all students, but make it actual food. It will cost more, but maybe the health savings later will balance it out?
Children don't eat food they don't like. Offer the kind of food you're talking about to kids in schools and it may make people feel virtuous but most of it will go in the trash.
Healthy food has lots of calories, too, if you serve it in huge portions.
What has happened is that in affluent Western societies, the "poor" (who are actually quite well off by the standards of most of the world and most of human history) can afford more food of all kinds - healthy and unhealthy - than they ever could in the past. So can almost everyone else in those societies.
People in tribal societies in arid parts of the world are eating a low proportion of fresh vegetables and meat and a high proportion of carbs, as have poor people throughout history. They are thin because they don't eat enough of those high-calorie/high-carb foods to get fat. And because they exercise, of course. But mostly because of scarcity.
Recent reporting from The New York Times describes childhood obesity as “complicated,” and the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) defines obesity as a “complex disease” that can be impacted by “social determinants of health,” like racism and climate change.
With caveats that genetics must play a part and it is definitely more difficult for some than others, how can it in any way be professional (and based on what evidence) to remove (or seriously downplay) personal responsibility (including parental responsibility to children) from the equation in how to maintain a healthy weight with good diet and exercise?
I long ago gave up the belief that any government agency (or the NYT) is concerned with truth and reason. But I flit between pity and disdain for those who listen to and believe these charlatans.
Personal responsibility and accountability are out. People want to be the perpetual victim now and claiming obesity is due to "racism and climate change" are another way to shift the blame.
These poor kids don't stand a chance if they're going up being told there's nothing they can do about their weight.
Food deserts. Real thing.
Because the miscreants burned out the supermarkets.
Truth hurts, Prof.
Compote is a troll. Please do not feed it.
No. The "celebrants" ;)
did not burn out the supermarkets. Food deserts also exist in poor white/rural areas as well, Bruce.
Everything is racial/blame the blacks with you.
Oh so the news videos lied?
Oh, wait, the arson was "mostly peaceful"
So weary of excuses. Yes the morons did burn out businesses and now their mothers and grandmothers have to go miles to shop. Stupidity and criminality has consequences.
Let's stick with "celebrants."
Food deserts have been in existence for a long, long time. For WHITE people as well, Bruce. Shouldn't that be addressed also?
Of course the news video lied. That's the ENTIRE premise of this comment board, isn't it? Nothing the media says can be trusted. All left-wing/leftist bias lies, right?
If you have 10,100 apples, but 570 are rotten, do you have mostly good apples?
If you have 570 rotten apples looting and burning down supermarkets, and the 9,530 good people do nothing about it, and excuse their mayhem, then everyone suffers. Food deserts are just desserts. Oh and desserts are eligible to be purchased with SNAP cards. Notwithstanding that they contribute to obesity and other diseases.
If you have 10, 100 appples. 570 are rotten. Do you have mostly good apples? Yes or No?
Oh....so now 9,530 of the other "celebrants" are in on it too and aren't doing enough personally to stop things?
Poor white people deal with food deserts too, Bruce. What about them? What should we do to help?
No one lives in rural areas without reliable transportation. No one (at least no one reasonable) expects there to be grocery stores every square mile in rural areas. People who live in rural areas expect to have to drive to the grocery store. So the "food desert" excuse for poor eating choices does not apply in these areas. Not to mention rural people aren't stupid enough to burn down their own supermarkets.
Well, you clearly have little experience with rural areas, as the lack of quality food is quite real, as most places are Dollar Generals and/or D&G Markets and transportation is/can be an issue.
Now, by "rural people" you mean "white?" Because "rural people" come in all types. Or as this more of the "white working class" framing?
Yes, I have plenty of experience with rural areas. So the definition of a food desert is when food is less available? Or "quality" food - as you define it - is less available? Yes, transportation "can be an issue" anywhere, but if you don't have reliable transportation out in the country then you have much bigger problems than food quality.
How on earth do you imagine the human race survived when almost all areas were rural? And how come there weren't fat people out in the country back then? People don't get fat when food is scarce - it is quite the reverse.
Who said anything about race? Only you.
Now run along as I answered your insipid little query.
No. Will not be running along anywere. Not the 1950s anymore. You actually haven't answered. This is a quantitative issue.
If you have 10,100 apples and 570 are rotten. Do you have "mostly good" apples?
Yes or no?
I figured you would have learned by now with your "it was a mistake" i.e. navigational error self-own....but you keep trying.
The racism / climate change thing is a lie.
When I was in grade school we had three recesses per day: morning, lunchtime, and early afternoon. The noon recess was a bit longer so we could eat our lunches and still have full time to play-off that childish energy. Only one (girl) in my class was obese in the least. After recess we were all able to focus on our studies without a problem. Now many schools have eliminated recess period; a high percentage of students are obese and/or on ADHD drugs. How very foolish.
My one daughter is a teacher and I was appalled when I read the studies about how children need multiple recesses to learn optimally. There was a ton of data to back that up, but the schools ignore it. Even worse, they teach it and then ignore it.
"Even worse, they teach it and then ignore it."
So true and so infuriating.
Hey, we can't keep having recess, that would mean less time to teach woke BS.
I think tons of people are on prescription speed.
Where were the genetics before 1980 when the "fat kid" in school was the outlier and not the norm? Why since then the proliferation of health clubs, when before that the only people who felt the need to go to gyms were professional athletes and knuckleheads? Why is it that when you look at candid photos and films of people before 1980 on the street or at the beach or in your back yard, you're hard pressed to find anyone under 50 noticeably overweight? Who altered our genetics after 1980?
Even the "fat kid" back then wasn't really all that fat compared to kids today. We were super-active back then, spending most of our time outside when we could. Fast food, candy and soda were treats, not something we consumed every day.
Up until a few years ago - I regularly made business trips to Japan. One thing that always astounded me was that outside of the dohyō (Sumo ring) - it was a very rare sight to see anyone in Japan who was obese. Maybe it's genetics - but taking the train either north or south out of Tokyo - is was rare to see more than a few cars - and hundreds of bicycles at every train station. Lots of biking and walking - and virtually no processed foods in the typical Japanese diet. Doesn't seem like rocket science to me.
The genetic thing is a lie.
It is only to a point. I had horses and some you had to feed a ton and some you barely had to feed to maintain a healthy weight. We called the latter "easy keepers". I had a woman who was helping me with my diet say that there are people who are able to eat anything they want and not gain a pound but if I'm with her, I'm not in that club :-) We all have things about us that make life easier and some that make it harder, easy weight gain is just one variable and once you know you gain it easily you have to modify your behavior. The victim language about genetics being destiny is ridiculous.
Because we walked to school and played at recess. We played outside after school. We didn’t have screens and tiktok.
A person can't even walk the streets or go up a subway staircase without getting stuck behind one of these cretins creeping along, ambling to and fro with their face stuck in their device. Or up their behind. I wonder how many of these clowns have been harvested by the grim reaper trying to cross the street. We need a new category of Darwin Awards for distracted walking.
In my college physical education course, we had one homework assignment I recall where it showed that adopting one household convenience, in my case, an electric can opener, would lead to weight gain over the course of a year if no other changes in habits occurred. It wasn’t a large number for that small item, but consider how drastically lifestyles have changed since preWWll.
Here's an easy refutation of all this bs. Take a look at the old films of GIs training at the beginning of WW II. Not a tubby among them. Why? They ate real food and got plenty of exercise. What made Americans fat? One cause was the moronic "Food Pyramid" pushed by our government. Another the high carb low fat mania pushed by the food conglomerates. "Snackwells, anyone?" And then there are the gallons of sugared waters we consume and, worse, allow our children to drink.
I would be interested in hearing/reading more surrounding sugar. Is "Big Food" a thing like "Big Pharma"? Do they work together? Sugar is added to almost every processed food, even savory foods that don't need it for any reason (Non sweet bacon and ketchup!). The reason is to keep everyone addicted, like a low level drip, and wanting more food...leading to poor physical and mental health. When I talk to people about it their eyes glaze over and no one wants to hear or give thought to it. I sound like a nut, but I know it's true. I lost 30 lbs myself after checking labels carefully and avoiding anything with sugar or fake sugar (stevia is the exception), and have kept it off for a couple of years. 2 to 3 times a week I'll go out for ice cream with mix ins or some other fabulous, totally worth it dessert, or pancakes or something. Otherwise, I stick with meats, fruits, and veggies. It's not difficult, and no scary side effects to worry about. I hate that more attention surrounding the American food supply and what is let in and why isn't being sounded from the mountain tops. Too many people profit, I guess. Probably people that have "science is real", and "kindness wins" as their mantras.
Congratulations on doing it right! Find the diet that works for you, stick to it.
I don’t think food companies are rubbing their hands together, scheming to addict people to their products by adding more sugar. Food companies run consumer tests to determine what people like. It would be cheaper to make catsup without sugar, but if their consumers say they prefer a version, and that version had some sugar added, the company will probably add some sugar and market that version. Same with salt.
I used to think that way, too, Maureen. But given some of the data that Dr. Lustig has assembled about the deliberate machinations of some of the "food" conglomerates, I'm far less certain of that now. https://robertlustig.com/
I read a Twitter story from a man claiming that he was a consultant for Coke about a decade ago, and that they were paying the NAACP millions to publicly label politicians as racists if they supported a tax on sugar. The media subsequently portrayed it as a tax on the minority poor, and the measure failed.
And meanwhile the poor benighted souls get fatter and sicker by the day. Racist, indeed.
You're not a nut and you're not wrong.
Dr. Robert Lustig has written extensively on the dangers of sugar and the complicity of the food conglomerates and government.
https://robertlustig.com/
Thank you!
The Sugar Cartel is killing millions and laughing all the way to the bank. Let’s not forget that it is the government, because of prodding $$$ by Big Corn, that regulates the food chain from where and how corn is grown all the way to the grocery store shelves. Corn is in everything.
You forgot to mention the ethanol hoax that has been perpetrated on the US people. It was started by the first Bush. You may remember ethanol was to replace gasoline. Under Trump we were oil independent and no longer needed ethanol but the powerful corn lobby support it and its subsidies.
Ethanol is far less efficient (less miles to the gallon) than gasoline and will destroy the engines of older cars.
Yes, very true.
No one can dislodge the ethanol subsidies. It's politically impossible. Wish it weren't the case, but it is.
True, but still underscores my original point: people are fatter than ever before because food is more abundant and cheaper than ever before.
Yes, and food is cheaper and more abundant because of Big Corn.
It's cheaper and more abundant for many reasons, Big Corn being but one of them. Also, no one is forced to eat sugar or corn.
I agree.
You're right, Bruce. Just take a look at most supermarket shelves and see all the processed and canned food. Tons of salt, tons of sugar, and more than enough fat.
But I look at another metric, as well - fast food. Count the burger and pizza joints etc.. now and compare it to the early '70's. A ten fold increase at least, probably more. Americans are addicted to eating out at all the wrong places.
There's nothing really wrong with the food pyramid if portion sizes are kept in check.
What kept (and keeps) portion sizes in check for most of human history in most of the world? The cost of food.
Obesity is a direct result of abundant and (comparatively) inexpensive food. There were few tubbies in the past because most people couldn't afford enough food to get fat.
Don't believe me? Look at the size of dishes and glassware over the years. Even 50 years ago they were much, much smaller than they are today. A juice glass was 4-6 ounces. Now people pour orange juice into 20 oz tumblers. Of course our waistlines are going to be affected by that magnitude of change.
The problem isn't the food pyramid, it's people considering a full pound of cooked pasta or rice to be one serving of grains.
You are absolutely correct, Missy.
To your point, Missy, many decades ago my dad worked in Germany. This is not that long after WW II. He said that having a belly there, being overweight, carried prestige, because it meant you had enough wealth to have access to enough food to gain weight. This was in a country that was still in ruins and recovering from the war. I'd forgotten about that until your comment.
It is much heavier on carbohydrates than I think it should be. Other people's opinions vary.
Kids back then also didn’t spend hours a day watching TV, playing video games and living vicariously on social media.
When I was growing up, I was outside with my friends all the time.
But I've also noticed those GIs aren't muscular and bulky with gorgeous abs. They're largely thin, wiry, and tough with a pretty typical belly.
Anyone who has written a term paper knows you can pick a premise and defend it, any premise. You can back it up with quotes from "experts" and make the premise sound valid.
That is what happened about 30 years ago. Some "expert" said fats were bad for you and showed his research to prove it. Well it turned out that before he started his "research" he thought fats were bad for you and he set out to prove it and guess what? He did and the rest of the world took his "research" to be true.
It has since been proven that this guy was full of crap.
Fat is and has been forever been an essential nutrient. Your body generates cholesterol whether you eat fats or not. Being a diabetic I don't eat simple carbs, nothing white like bread, rice or potatoes. I eat a high protein, high fat diet and my cholesterol is spot on.
On the subject of women's figures, the standards (and women set those standards) of what a woman's figure should look like has changed with time. If you have ever been to an art museum and looked at the paintings of women from centuries past. You will see that most of the women are zaftig. If you are a prude don't watch this video on famous nude paintings of beautiful plump women:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e8pseLz2tuM
When these were painted these women were consider the standard for beauty.
With the exception of some hormonal imbalance being fat is not a disease. Because everybody is a victim nobody is responsible for self control. You are not an overeater you are sick.
According to statistics 50% of our population is overweight. This wasn't so 50 years ago. What happened? Well to the over sensitive, caring left said, we all got sick. It is not the lack of will power. It's an illness.
I see more and more people morbidly overweight. When I was a kid I never saw anybody morbidly overweight. I'm sure there were some but I don't remember seeing them. Do you?
All of a sudden, they got sick. Give me strength!
Thanks for the link - very interesting. Any thoughts on why women were rarely portrayed with armpit or pubic hair, even 500 yrs ago? I think I saw one 'wit' (as they say in Philly:)))
And on the topic of "I want something to be so"....that is the reason blinded placebo controlled studies are essential, because the mind can heal if really motivated, and doctors doing the studies are very very eager to prove their theory!
Nope. Fat kids were definitely an anomaly (Chubbsy Ubbsey?)
To your video - Last year we were in Rome with my younger daughter and her family. After a long day in the August sun, we visited the Villa Borghese. My 9-year old granddaughter - completely done in and bored - looked at us with disgust and announced "this is nothing but an Italian porn palace!" We still laugh at that one.
Yes the standard of beauty has changed. But the women depicted in your link are much to be preferred to Tom Wolfe's "social X-rays," don't you agree?
I agree and laughed at you grandson's remark. Bravo!
Granddaughter, my mistake. Thanks, comprof
Granddaughter, apparently.
Thanks, my mistake but it is was still a funny remark by his granddaughter. Where do kids come up with things like that.
Priceless!
9 year old talking about "porn palaces?"
Interesting video, but I wouldn't call any of those women "plump" except for one or two who were in that period were the tried to make them look three months pregnant. Nothing truly "Rubenesque" and none of the truly plump Boucher paintings. Seems this harem was cherry picked against fatness. I don't think this video makes your case.
I disagree, Jeff. By today's standards, I think they are plump.
Well, Cat, standards, yes. But in reality the women of today make the women in the video seem malnourished
I was talking about the "gorgeous" people who set the standards of beauty.
The food supply changed.
Lynne just nutshelled it for us, ladies and gents.
Consumption of highly processed foods = unhealthy humans.
You're right, it did. Painters models started putting on weight not long after Europe developed a huge appetite for cane sugar (the market for which launched the beginning of the slave trade to the new world we're the sugar was grown).
Similarly, our food pyramid changed in the eighties corresponding to massive lobbying from sugar growers in America that it's fat that is the big problem causing heart disease.
Add to that corporate farming and lots and lots of additives.
Your movie of the nudes through history should be required viewing in junior high school. Note however, that these are young women, very proportional, and there are no big muffin tops... 😉
Anyone who says the "science is settled" is an ignoramus. The science is never settled. It is and always should be questioned. That is called the scientific method.
Einstein's theory of relativity is being questioned as are Newton's laws of gravity.
And a largely sedentary lifestyle in the car or at a screen interrupted only by an hour or so of manic movement, if at all.
Bruce, the food pyramid and dietary guidelines are informed by the so called experts in academia. Nutrition is like climate science. A lot of experts who like to rush the data and make pronouncements for all of us to obey, before the data have ripened. Lots of consulting fees and recognition, lots of big egos. When trans fats were the latest bogeyman, a MD from Tufts asked me why all foods could not have their hydrogenated oil removed and replaced with healthy olive oil. This “expert” had no concept of the supply of food oils or food functionality. I had a hard time not laughing in his face.
Yep. Take a look at what informed the proscription against salt in the diet. Dumb people making pronouncements for the rest of us is not ok. The reasons not to trust our government just keep mounting up.
Here’s a dirty little secret---there were data suggesting too little salt raised BP in some people. But the academic food nannies squelched them. Didn’t fit their narrative.
I blame the politician running the agriculture department who pushed for cheap food back in the ‘60s. We sure got it, didn’t we!
I want to say Wilbur Mills, but I think he’s another kind of contemptible.
Ah, someone who remembers the tidal pool incident.......
A lot of poor people live in areas where they don't have access to fresh, healthy food. They get their food at fast food restaurants and convenience stores. It's hard to be healthy eating the CircleK donut for breakfast every day.
Fast food restaurants & convenience stores actually have great options for fresh, healthy food. The truth is that some folks, poor or rich, just choose junk food over healthy food.
When I grocery shop, my cart is mostly vegetables, fruits, meat, fish, a bit of pasta/bread, a few treats. Mostly fresh stuff. I observe people in front of me in the checkout lane, on Public Aid (SNAP Cards) & they buy overpriced, expensive, really garbagey nasty food like flaming cheetos and twinkies. They actually blow a lot of money on this crap.
As a physician, I do advise poor folks to buy cheaper, healthier food, such as: canned veggies, frozen veggies, beans, rice, fresh bananas, fresh carrots, oranges, potatoes, onions, canned tuna, fresh pork, etc. as these are all cheap options. But I can't force people to make healthy choices. If they choose to waste money, throw money into the toilet by gambling, buying lottery tickets, buying alcohol, buying tobacco, buying expensive junk food, that's out of my control.
I saw a lot of this when I was a kid, too. Even when food stamps were restricted to healthy options, people found a way around it to buy junk food and beer.
Yes you can. You can eat healthy on a low budget & many folks do. There are a lot of families that cook & eat quite healthy without spending much at all.
Some people just choose to blow all their Public Aid money on lottery tickets, tobacco, alcohol, soft drinks, & expensive garbagy junk food.
You’re right. There’s plenty of manipulating and abusing the system. The comment above about Walmart is also accurate. Personal responsibility matters. I was pointing out the challenges that many face to find good food. It’s easy for me; there is a supermarket within a mile of my house and a half dozen within five, including Whole Foods and Walmart.
Another commenter mentioned a geographic connection between obesity and food deserts. There is a correlation for sure. There are obese people in food oases as well. No doubt personal responsibility plays a role.
My purpose in pointing out the challenges was merely to suggest the complexity of the social problem of obesity.
I wonder why the “food deserts” are in low income areas? Is San Francisco now considered a “pharmacy desert” because Walgreens and CVS closed so many of their stores? Why did the stores close? Personal responsibility is 99% the issue. Personal responsibility for every choice we make has an impact on the direction of our lives.
Have you tried it? It’s not just about the money, but also about the availability of real food. Drive through the poorest part of any city and count the supermarkets. Then count the convenience stores. Do the same in the wealthy parts of the same city and the suburbs. It’s astonishing.
Seems like you don't favor personal responsibility.
By this logic we should see an obvious geographic distribution of obesity and the obese would only live in the so-called food deserts. But we don't see that. Many obese people only shop at supermarkets with large produce sections. Look at all the fat people/Walmart memes.
It depends where you live. For some people it really is a challenge because they don't have transportation and the nearest big grocery store or farmer's market is miles away. I'm just talking about people living in poverty, mind you, not the majority.
Junk food is cheap and filling. Healthy food gets expensive fast and it’s not shelf stable. Food banks get donations of garbage that might keep people from starving to death, but how can anyone provide good healthy food to anyone for pennies? One place to start is schools-- offer both breakfast and lunch to all students, but make it actual food. It will cost more, but maybe the health savings later will balance it out?
And their poor choices.
Children don't eat food they don't like. Offer the kind of food you're talking about to kids in schools and it may make people feel virtuous but most of it will go in the trash.
Healthy food has lots of calories, too, if you serve it in huge portions.
What has happened is that in affluent Western societies, the "poor" (who are actually quite well off by the standards of most of the world and most of human history) can afford more food of all kinds - healthy and unhealthy - than they ever could in the past. So can almost everyone else in those societies.
People in tribal societies in arid parts of the world are eating a low proportion of fresh vegetables and meat and a high proportion of carbs, as have poor people throughout history. They are thin because they don't eat enough of those high-calorie/high-carb foods to get fat. And because they exercise, of course. But mostly because of scarcity.
Baby steps. Bring back recess (no screens allowed) to start!