A complete and total repudiation of all the people who bleat "calories in, calories out"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:They did not say there is no personal responsibility, but rather that it is the way our society is treating food and how there should be responsibility at the higher levels for food that is offered and how it is distributed and propaganda that supports horrible food choices.

What exactly do you think people at higher levels should do about this multi-faceted problem?

Tax the junk food? Okay, then you are punishing the low income in food deserts who don't have access to better.

Create more grocery stores in those areas? Yes, some have succeeded, and others have had to close or don't find business sustainable due to crime or other reasons.

Mandate only healthy food be made available? Limit how many sugary foods people can buy? That will never be acceptable. It's America - people want the right to choose what they want to to eat.

Even if it were possible to ensure only "healthy" food was available, who even can agree on what that is? Is meat healthy? Dairy? Depends who you ask. What is better for you - artificial sweeteners or pure sugar? Should everything with corn syrup and soybean oil be restricted? Should all sodas be banned? Those kind of measures will be extreme and cause public outrage.

Even if you could manage to get rid of even half the junk food out there, people could STILL become obese just eating large portions of regular foods! I've read posters on here in similar threads talking about how they have to be so vigilant that even an apple will make them gain weight. If that is true, then what hope is there that any of these interventions will do any good, even given the impossible odds that they could actually be put in place?

Americans want the right to eat what they want, even if what they want kills them. CICO doesn't matter.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They did not say there is no personal responsibility, but rather that it is the way our society is treating food and how there should be responsibility at the higher levels for food that is offered and how it is distributed and propaganda that supports horrible food choices.

What exactly do you think people at higher levels should do about this multi-faceted problem?

Tax the junk food? Okay, then you are punishing the low income in food deserts who don't have access to better.

Create more grocery stores in those areas? Yes, some have succeeded, and others have had to close or don't find business sustainable due to crime or other reasons.

Mandate only healthy food be made available? Limit how many sugary foods people can buy? That will never be acceptable. It's America - people want the right to choose what they want to to eat.

Even if it were possible to ensure only "healthy" food was available, who even can agree on what that is? Is meat healthy? Dairy? Depends who you ask. What is better for you - artificial sweeteners or pure sugar? Should everything with corn syrup and soybean oil be restricted? Should all sodas be banned? Those kind of measures will be extreme and cause public outrage.

Even if you could manage to get rid of even half the junk food out there, people could STILL become obese just eating large portions of regular foods! I've read posters on here in similar threads talking about how they have to be so vigilant that even an apple will make them gain weight. If that is true, then what hope is there that any of these interventions will do any good, even given the impossible odds that they could actually be put in place?

Americans want the right to eat what they want, even if what they want kills them. CICO doesn't matter.

Yes, CICO does matter. It is the only thing that matters. The ONLY way to lose weight is to eat less or eat only what your body needs. You can do that with self regulation/will power, meds, or surgery. If you can’t figure out how much food you should be eating to not gain weight, and stick to that, then there is no hope for you. The government can’t regulate how many bites to take.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They did not say there is no personal responsibility, but rather that it is the way our society is treating food and how there should be responsibility at the higher levels for food that is offered and how it is distributed and propaganda that supports horrible food choices.

What exactly do you think people at higher levels should do about this multi-faceted problem?

Tax the junk food? Okay, then you are punishing the low income in food deserts who don't have access to better.

Create more grocery stores in those areas? Yes, some have succeeded, and others have had to close or don't find business sustainable due to crime or other reasons.

Mandate only healthy food be made available? Limit how many sugary foods people can buy? That will never be acceptable. It's America - people want the right to choose what they want to to eat.

Even if it were possible to ensure only "healthy" food was available, who even can agree on what that is? Is meat healthy? Dairy? Depends who you ask. What is better for you - artificial sweeteners or pure sugar? Should everything with corn syrup and soybean oil be restricted? Should all sodas be banned? Those kind of measures will be extreme and cause public outrage.

Even if you could manage to get rid of even half the junk food out there, people could STILL become obese just eating large portions of regular foods! I've read posters on here in similar threads talking about how they have to be so vigilant that even an apple will make them gain weight. If that is true, then what hope is there that any of these interventions will do any good, even given the impossible odds that they could actually be put in place?

Americans want the right to eat what they want, even if what they want kills them. CICO doesn't matter.

Yes, CICO does matter. It is the only thing that matters. The ONLY way to lose weight is to eat less or eat only what your body needs. You can do that with self regulation/will power, meds, or surgery. If you can’t figure out how much food you should be eating to not gain weight, and stick to that, then there is no hope for you. The government can’t regulate how many bites to take.

Right, there's no hope. People are not going to change their behavior.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They did not say there is no personal responsibility, but rather that it is the way our society is treating food and how there should be responsibility at the higher levels for food that is offered and how it is distributed and propaganda that supports horrible food choices.

What exactly do you think people at higher levels should do about this multi-faceted problem?

Tax the junk food? Okay, then you are punishing the low income in food deserts who don't have access to better.

Create more grocery stores in those areas? Yes, some have succeeded, and others have had to close or don't find business sustainable due to crime or other reasons.

Mandate only healthy food be made available? Limit how many sugary foods people can buy? That will never be acceptable. It's America - people want the right to choose what they want to to eat.

Even if it were possible to ensure only "healthy" food was available, who even can agree on what that is? Is meat healthy? Dairy? Depends who you ask. What is better for you - artificial sweeteners or pure sugar? Should everything with corn syrup and soybean oil be restricted? Should all sodas be banned? Those kind of measures will be extreme and cause public outrage.

Even if you could manage to get rid of even half the junk food out there, people could STILL become obese just eating large portions of regular foods! I've read posters on here in similar threads talking about how they have to be so vigilant that even an apple will make them gain weight. If that is true, then what hope is there that any of these interventions will do any good, even given the impossible odds that they could actually be put in place?

Americans want the right to eat what they want, even if what they want kills them. CICO doesn't matter.

Yes, CICO does matter. It is the only thing that matters. The ONLY way to lose weight is to eat less or eat only what your body needs. You can do that with self regulation/will power, meds, or surgery. If you can’t figure out how much food you should be eating to not gain weight, and stick to that, then there is no hope for you. The government can’t regulate how many bites to take.

Right, there's no hope. People are not going to change their behavior.

what would solve the problem is for food to become much more expensive. all food, not just "healthy food". if a Big Mac cost $60 nobody would eat them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It seems one big issue is physical hunger (as opposed to an emotional desire to eat, which is also a problem), and I’m surprised more people aren’t talking about that. That’s why semaglutides are so successful. As someone upthread described, eating 1800 calories for an obese person might feel like eating 700 calories for you. Yes, possible, but incredibly difficult to do day after day without intervention.

The people who bleat on about CICO hate the existence and shocking success of the semaglutides because those provide hard evidence that obesity is not a moral failing. If a medication can immediately and profoundly remove the desire to overeat, it means overeating is a medical problem, not an issue of willpower, and the anti-fat moralists lose their platform. That’s why they don’t want to talk about the semaglutides.

A lot of people want a second piece of pie…

Should we all be on meds for that? Many of us know what “enough” is and then are able to say no to continuous eating. Even if we want a second helping or a triple scoop ice cream cone.

Congrats on being part of the 25% who can. But the norm for humans is to seek food. We just have too much of it now.

Only 25% of the population has control over their ability to limit their intake? Good thing we have our savior big pharma to swoop in and solve all these problems.

Well 75% of Americans are at least overweight so….

You know I’m good with money but I don’t go around saying poor people just need to try harder to save their nickels. That’s because I’m a nice person.

Yes, all discussions should only be nice and coddling. Nothing is anybody’s fault. It’s all elaborate external factors.

More seriously, I don’t think anybody is referencing simply being overweight. I think we are talking about obesity here and obesity at a level that is actually taxing people’s health.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They did not say there is no personal responsibility, but rather that it is the way our society is treating food and how there should be responsibility at the higher levels for food that is offered and how it is distributed and propaganda that supports horrible food choices.

What exactly do you think people at higher levels should do about this multi-faceted problem?

Tax the junk food? Okay, then you are punishing the low income in food deserts who don't have access to better.

Create more grocery stores in those areas? Yes, some have succeeded, and others have had to close or don't find business sustainable due to crime or other reasons.

Mandate only healthy food be made available? Limit how many sugary foods people can buy? That will never be acceptable. It's America - people want the right to choose what they want to to eat.

Even if it were possible to ensure only "healthy" food was available, who even can agree on what that is? Is meat healthy? Dairy? Depends who you ask. What is better for you - artificial sweeteners or pure sugar? Should everything with corn syrup and soybean oil be restricted? Should all sodas be banned? Those kind of measures will be extreme and cause public outrage.

Even if you could manage to get rid of even half the junk food out there, people could STILL become obese just eating large portions of regular foods! I've read posters on here in similar threads talking about how they have to be so vigilant that even an apple will make them gain weight. If that is true, then what hope is there that any of these interventions will do any good, even given the impossible odds that they could actually be put in place?

Americans want the right to eat what they want, even if what they want kills them. CICO doesn't matter.

Yes, CICO does matter. It is the only thing that matters. The ONLY way to lose weight is to eat less or eat only what your body needs. You can do that with self regulation/will power, meds, or surgery. If you can’t figure out how much food you should be eating to not gain weight, and stick to that, then there is no hope for you. The government can’t regulate how many bites to take.

Right, there's no hope. People are not going to change their behavior.

what would solve the problem is for food to become much more expensive. all food, not just "healthy food". if a Big Mac cost $60 nobody would eat them.

Okay but you know the $60 Big Mac can't realistically happen, right? People would riot! McDonalds would have to close down, people would lose jobs, etc. Should only rich kids get to have Happy Meals? You will also have all the non-obese people indignant that they are being nannied and food policed when they don't have weight issues.

If you are saying ALL FOOD should be more expensive...well that's what we are living through now and it's probably pushing people to more unhealthy foods that are cheaper.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It seems one big issue is physical hunger (as opposed to an emotional desire to eat, which is also a problem), and I’m surprised more people aren’t talking about that. That’s why semaglutides are so successful. As someone upthread described, eating 1800 calories for an obese person might feel like eating 700 calories for you. Yes, possible, but incredibly difficult to do day after day without intervention.

The people who bleat on about CICO hate the existence and shocking success of the semaglutides because those provide hard evidence that obesity is not a moral failing. If a medication can immediately and profoundly remove the desire to overeat, it means overeating is a medical problem, not an issue of willpower, and the anti-fat moralists lose their platform. That’s why they don’t want to talk about the semaglutides.

A lot of people want a second piece of pie…

Should we all be on meds for that? Many of us know what “enough” is and then are able to say no to continuous eating. Even if we want a second helping or a triple scoop ice cream cone.

Congrats on being part of the 25% who can. But the norm for humans is to seek food. We just have too much of it now.

Only 25% of the population has control over their ability to limit their intake? Good thing we have our savior big pharma to swoop in and solve all these problems.

Well 75% of Americans are at least overweight so….

You know I’m good with money but I don’t go around saying poor people just need to try harder to save their nickels. That’s because I’m a nice person.

Yes, all discussions should only be nice and coddling. Nothing is anybody’s fault. It’s all elaborate external factors.

More seriously, I don’t think anybody is referencing simply being overweight. I think we are talking about obesity here and obesity at a level that is actually taxing people’s health.

I am good with money and I do frequently offer friends advice on saving. And they appreciate it!

[Anonymous]

Obesity is 100% a FAILING, a personal, familial and societal failing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They did not say there is no personal responsibility, but rather that it is the way our society is treating food and how there should be responsibility at the higher levels for food that is offered and how it is distributed and propaganda that supports horrible food choices.

What exactly do you think people at higher levels should do about this multi-faceted problem?

Tax the junk food? Okay, then you are punishing the low income in food deserts who don't have access to better.

Create more grocery stores in those areas? Yes, some have succeeded, and others have had to close or don't find business sustainable due to crime or other reasons.

Mandate only healthy food be made available? Limit how many sugary foods people can buy? That will never be acceptable. It's America - people want the right to choose what they want to to eat.

Even if it were possible to ensure only "healthy" food was available, who even can agree on what that is? Is meat healthy? Dairy? Depends who you ask. What is better for you - artificial sweeteners or pure sugar? Should everything with corn syrup and soybean oil be restricted? Should all sodas be banned? Those kind of measures will be extreme and cause public outrage.

Even if you could manage to get rid of even half the junk food out there, people could STILL become obese just eating large portions of regular foods! I've read posters on here in similar threads talking about how they have to be so vigilant that even an apple will make them gain weight. If that is true, then what hope is there that any of these interventions will do any good, even given the impossible odds that they could actually be put in place?

Americans want the right to eat what they want, even if what they want kills them. CICO doesn't matter.

Yes, CICO does matter. It is the only thing that matters. The ONLY way to lose weight is to eat less or eat only what your body needs. You can do that with self regulation/will power, meds, or surgery. If you can’t figure out how much food you should be eating to not gain weight, and stick to that, then there is no hope for you. The government can’t regulate how many bites to take.

Right, there's no hope. People are not going to change their behavior.

what would solve the problem is for food to become much more expensive. all food, not just "healthy food". if a Big Mac cost $60 nobody would eat them.

All food is expensive now. Heathy food is actually cheaper. You can get a $5 McD sausage, egg, cheese biscuit or a $3 giant cylinder of oatmeal that gives you 30 servings. This doesn’t stop people from making unhealthy choices or more importantly, keeping portions in check

[Anonymous]

It depends on where you live.
In DC you might pay $2 for an avocado
In California you might pass a sign selling 6 avocados for $1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They did not say there is no personal responsibility, but rather that it is the way our society is treating food and how there should be responsibility at the higher levels for food that is offered and how it is distributed and propaganda that supports horrible food choices.

What exactly do you think people at higher levels should do about this multi-faceted problem?

Tax the junk food? Okay, then you are punishing the low income in food deserts who don't have access to better.

Create more grocery stores in those areas? Yes, some have succeeded, and others have had to close or don't find business sustainable due to crime or other reasons.

Mandate only healthy food be made available? Limit how many sugary foods people can buy? That will never be acceptable. It's America - people want the right to choose what they want to to eat.

Even if it were possible to ensure only "healthy" food was available, who even can agree on what that is? Is meat healthy? Dairy? Depends who you ask. What is better for you - artificial sweeteners or pure sugar? Should everything with corn syrup and soybean oil be restricted? Should all sodas be banned? Those kind of measures will be extreme and cause public outrage.

Even if you could manage to get rid of even half the junk food out there, people could STILL become obese just eating large portions of regular foods! I've read posters on here in similar threads talking about how they have to be so vigilant that even an apple will make them gain weight. If that is true, then what hope is there that any of these interventions will do any good, even given the impossible odds that they could actually be put in place?

Americans want the right to eat what they want, even if what they want kills them. CICO doesn't matter.

Yes, CICO does matter. It is the only thing that matters. The ONLY way to lose weight is to eat less or eat only what your body needs. You can do that with self regulation/will power, meds, or surgery. If you can’t figure out how much food you should be eating to not gain weight, and stick to that, then there is no hope for you. The government can’t regulate how many bites to take.

Right, there's no hope. People are not going to change their behavior.

what would solve the problem is for food to become much more expensive. all food, not just "healthy food". if a Big Mac cost $60 nobody would eat them.

All food is expensive now. Heathy food is actually cheaper. You can get a $5 McD sausage, egg, cheese biscuit or a $3 giant cylinder of oatmeal that gives you 30 servings. This doesn’t stop people from making unhealthy choices or more importantly, keeping portions in check

Awesome PP! Now do some other cheaper healthy foods! Nice healthy low sodium seafood instead of fatty ground beef! Crisp lettuce and fresh vegetables instead of canned! Inexpensive fresh fruit instead of canned! Why this could be a game changer for EVERYONE PP!

So, yeah, you did one particular high carb but healthy food against a McDs breakfast, and think you’ve somehow made a point. Please do a meal plan for a week — and then we’ll have something useful. Bonus points if you can buy everything from one store at a location that’s easy to access by Metro.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They did not say there is no personal responsibility, but rather that it is the way our society is treating food and how there should be responsibility at the higher levels for food that is offered and how it is distributed and propaganda that supports horrible food choices.

What exactly do you think people at higher levels should do about this multi-faceted problem?

Tax the junk food? Okay, then you are punishing the low income in food deserts who don't have access to better.

Create more grocery stores in those areas? Yes, some have succeeded, and others have had to close or don't find business sustainable due to crime or other reasons.

Mandate only healthy food be made available? Limit how many sugary foods people can buy? That will never be acceptable. It's America - people want the right to choose what they want to to eat.

Even if it were possible to ensure only "healthy" food was available, who even can agree on what that is? Is meat healthy? Dairy? Depends who you ask. What is better for you - artificial sweeteners or pure sugar? Should everything with corn syrup and soybean oil be restricted? Should all sodas be banned? Those kind of measures will be extreme and cause public outrage.

Even if you could manage to get rid of even half the junk food out there, people could STILL become obese just eating large portions of regular foods! I've read posters on here in similar threads talking about how they have to be so vigilant that even an apple will make them gain weight. If that is true, then what hope is there that any of these interventions will do any good, even given the impossible odds that they could actually be put in place?

Americans want the right to eat what they want, even if what they want kills them. CICO doesn't matter.

Yes, CICO does matter. It is the only thing that matters. The ONLY way to lose weight is to eat less or eat only what your body needs. You can do that with self regulation/will power, meds, or surgery. If you can’t figure out how much food you should be eating to not gain weight, and stick to that, then there is no hope for you. The government can’t regulate how many bites to take.

Right, there's no hope. People are not going to change their behavior.

what would solve the problem is for food to become much more expensive. all food, not just "healthy food". if a Big Mac cost $60 nobody would eat them.

All food is expensive now. Heathy food is actually cheaper. You can get a $5 McD sausage, egg, cheese biscuit or a $3 giant cylinder of oatmeal that gives you 30 servings. This doesn’t stop people from making unhealthy choices or more importantly, keeping portions in check

Awesome PP! Now do some other cheaper healthy foods! Nice healthy low sodium seafood instead of fatty ground beef! Crisp lettuce and fresh vegetables instead of canned! Inexpensive fresh fruit instead of canned! Why this could be a game changer for EVERYONE PP!

So, yeah, you did one particular high carb but healthy food against a McDs breakfast, and think you’ve somehow made a point. Please do a meal plan for a week — and then we’ll have something useful. Bonus points if you can buy everything from one store at a location that’s easy to access by Metro.

Please. People in other countries live on things such as rice and beans. Being so poor you can only buy junk is a myth, or maybe just a preference

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They did not say there is no personal responsibility, but rather that it is the way our society is treating food and how there should be responsibility at the higher levels for food that is offered and how it is distributed and propaganda that supports horrible food choices.

What exactly do you think people at higher levels should do about this multi-faceted problem?

Tax the junk food? Okay, then you are punishing the low income in food deserts who don't have access to better.

Create more grocery stores in those areas? Yes, some have succeeded, and others have had to close or don't find business sustainable due to crime or other reasons.

Mandate only healthy food be made available? Limit how many sugary foods people can buy? That will never be acceptable. It's America - people want the right to choose what they want to to eat.

Even if it were possible to ensure only "healthy" food was available, who even can agree on what that is? Is meat healthy? Dairy? Depends who you ask. What is better for you - artificial sweeteners or pure sugar? Should everything with corn syrup and soybean oil be restricted? Should all sodas be banned? Those kind of measures will be extreme and cause public outrage.

Even if you could manage to get rid of even half the junk food out there, people could STILL become obese just eating large portions of regular foods! I've read posters on here in similar threads talking about how they have to be so vigilant that even an apple will make them gain weight. If that is true, then what hope is there that any of these interventions will do any good, even given the impossible odds that they could actually be put in place?

Americans want the right to eat what they want, even if what they want kills them. CICO doesn't matter.

Yes, CICO does matter. It is the only thing that matters. The ONLY way to lose weight is to eat less or eat only what your body needs. You can do that with self regulation/will power, meds, or surgery. If you can’t figure out how much food you should be eating to not gain weight, and stick to that, then there is no hope for you. The government can’t regulate how many bites to take.

Right, there's no hope. People are not going to change their behavior.

what would solve the problem is for food to become much more expensive. all food, not just "healthy food". if a Big Mac cost $60 nobody would eat them.

All food is expensive now. Heathy food is actually cheaper. You can get a $5 McD sausage, egg, cheese biscuit or a $3 giant cylinder of oatmeal that gives you 30 servings. This doesn’t stop people from making unhealthy choices or more importantly, keeping portions in check

Awesome PP! Now do some other cheaper healthy foods! Nice healthy low sodium seafood instead of fatty ground beef! Crisp lettuce and fresh vegetables instead of canned! Inexpensive fresh fruit instead of canned! Why this could be a game changer for EVERYONE PP!

So, yeah, you did one particular high carb but healthy food against a McDs breakfast, and think you’ve somehow made a point. Please do a meal plan for a week — and then we’ll have something useful. Bonus points if you can buy everything from one store at a location that’s easy to access by Metro.

Nobody participating in this discussion has any of these problems.

Instead they are enamored with themselves having read a lot of obesity research and are contemplating the best way to use their buying power to soak up drugs designed for type 2 diabetics to further constrain the supply of those drugs for people that actually need them. That and figuring out how to appropriate things like food desert problems that don’t actually exist for them, or the need to eat shelf stable processed foods when they don’t have two jobs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They did not say there is no personal responsibility, but rather that it is the way our society is treating food and how there should be responsibility at the higher levels for food that is offered and how it is distributed and propaganda that supports horrible food choices.

What exactly do you think people at higher levels should do about this multi-faceted problem?

Tax the junk food? Okay, then you are punishing the low income in food deserts who don't have access to better.

Create more grocery stores in those areas? Yes, some have succeeded, and others have had to close or don't find business sustainable due to crime or other reasons.

Mandate only healthy food be made available? Limit how many sugary foods people can buy? That will never be acceptable. It's America - people want the right to choose what they want to to eat.

Even if it were possible to ensure only "healthy" food was available, who even can agree on what that is? Is meat healthy? Dairy? Depends who you ask. What is better for you - artificial sweeteners or pure sugar? Should everything with corn syrup and soybean oil be restricted? Should all sodas be banned? Those kind of measures will be extreme and cause public outrage.

Even if you could manage to get rid of even half the junk food out there, people could STILL become obese just eating large portions of regular foods! I've read posters on here in similar threads talking about how they have to be so vigilant that even an apple will make them gain weight. If that is true, then what hope is there that any of these interventions will do any good, even given the impossible odds that they could actually be put in place?

Americans want the right to eat what they want, even if what they want kills them. CICO doesn't matter.

Yes, CICO does matter. It is the only thing that matters. The ONLY way to lose weight is to eat less or eat only what your body needs. You can do that with self regulation/will power, meds, or surgery. If you can’t figure out how much food you should be eating to not gain weight, and stick to that, then there is no hope for you. The government can’t regulate how many bites to take.

Right, there's no hope. People are not going to change their behavior.

what would solve the problem is for food to become much more expensive. all food, not just "healthy food". if a Big Mac cost $60 nobody would eat them.

All food is expensive now. Heathy food is actually cheaper. You can get a $5 McD sausage, egg, cheese biscuit or a $3 giant cylinder of oatmeal that gives you 30 servings. This doesn’t stop people from making unhealthy choices or more importantly, keeping portions in check

Awesome PP! Now do some other cheaper healthy foods! Nice healthy low sodium seafood instead of fatty ground beef! Crisp lettuce and fresh vegetables instead of canned! Inexpensive fresh fruit instead of canned! Why this could be a game changer for EVERYONE PP!

So, yeah, you did one particular high carb but healthy food against a McDs breakfast, and think you’ve somehow made a point. Please do a meal plan for a week — and then we’ll have something useful. Bonus points if you can buy everything from one store at a location that’s easy to access by Metro.

Please. People in other countries live on things such as rice and beans. Being so poor you can only buy junk is a myth, or maybe just a preference

Wrong argument. Or rather, wrong counter-argument. P My argument is: No, it’s NOT true that “Healthy food is actually cheaper”. At least not where I live. And, no, I don’t have a yard where I can start a garden. “Other countries “ and “rice and beans” isn’t really relevant — although it would be great to hear from more people who can talk about that from their own lived experiences, sine I’m sure there’s a lot to be learned from traditional diets of all kinds.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They did not say there is no personal responsibility, but rather that it is the way our society is treating food and how there should be responsibility at the higher levels for food that is offered and how it is distributed and propaganda that supports horrible food choices.

What exactly do you think people at higher levels should do about this multi-faceted problem?

Tax the junk food? Okay, then you are punishing the low income in food deserts who don't have access to better.

Create more grocery stores in those areas? Yes, some have succeeded, and others have had to close or don't find business sustainable due to crime or other reasons.

Mandate only healthy food be made available? Limit how many sugary foods people can buy? That will never be acceptable. It's America - people want the right to choose what they want to to eat.

Even if it were possible to ensure only "healthy" food was available, who even can agree on what that is? Is meat healthy? Dairy? Depends who you ask. What is better for you - artificial sweeteners or pure sugar? Should everything with corn syrup and soybean oil be restricted? Should all sodas be banned? Those kind of measures will be extreme and cause public outrage.

Even if you could manage to get rid of even half the junk food out there, people could STILL become obese just eating large portions of regular foods! I've read posters on here in similar threads talking about how they have to be so vigilant that even an apple will make them gain weight. If that is true, then what hope is there that any of these interventions will do any good, even given the impossible odds that they could actually be put in place?

Americans want the right to eat what they want, even if what they want kills them. CICO doesn't matter.

Yes, CICO does matter. It is the only thing that matters. The ONLY way to lose weight is to eat less or eat only what your body needs. You can do that with self regulation/will power, meds, or surgery. If you can’t figure out how much food you should be eating to not gain weight, and stick to that, then there is no hope for you. The government can’t regulate how many bites to take.

Right, there's no hope. People are not going to change their behavior.

what would solve the problem is for food to become much more expensive. all food, not just "healthy food". if a Big Mac cost $60 nobody would eat them.

All food is expensive now. Heathy food is actually cheaper. You can get a $5 McD sausage, egg, cheese biscuit or a $3 giant cylinder of oatmeal that gives you 30 servings. This doesn’t stop people from making unhealthy choices or more importantly, keeping portions in check

Awesome PP! Now do some other cheaper healthy foods! Nice healthy low sodium seafood instead of fatty ground beef! Crisp lettuce and fresh vegetables instead of canned! Inexpensive fresh fruit instead of canned! Why this could be a game changer for EVERYONE PP!

So, yeah, you did one particular high carb but healthy food against a McDs breakfast, and think you’ve somehow made a point. Please do a meal plan for a week — and then we’ll have something useful. Bonus points if you can buy everything from one store at a location that’s easy to access by Metro.

Nobody participating in this discussion has any of these problems.

Instead they are enamored with themselves having read a lot of obesity research and are contemplating the best way to use their buying power to soak up drugs designed for type 2 diabetics to further constrain the supply of those drugs for people that actually need them. That and figuring out how to appropriate things like food desert problems that don’t actually exist for them, or the need to eat shelf stable processed foods when they don’t have two jobs.

You are assuming quite a lot there PP. You have absolutely no idea what “problems” I have — or anyone else posting ANONYMOUSLY might have. All you know is that I have access to the internet, which has zip to do with the rest of your assumptions.