Well, one could argue obesity has as much to do with deregulating the advertising of sugary cereals as a breakfast food for children in the 1980s as the non-existence of a $10,000+ shot that alters human metabolism!
Look at the historical rate of obesity in Europe. Following the same trajectory as the US, as far as I can tell. Does deregulating advertising of sugary cereals also explain that?
Advertising probably not but the simple availability of ever sweeter cheap products and with time their integration in people's diet is a strong candidate. Especially since sugar is way less good than say fat at provoking the feeling of satiation (I can think only of evolutionary explanations for that, available sweet food in the wild, think fruits, are not very nutritive, especially ones not selected by humans over time)
Whatever you teach them to eat. But parents are often lazy, its supremely easier to buy addictive paper boxes and be done rather than wake up 10 minutes earlier (or 2) and cook or prepare something quick and healthy. Depends also where you live, US its exactly as we discuss, ie France or Switzerland its a completely different world, and its immediately obvious on people too. This approach also permeates many aspects of society.
Kids also imitate what they see in parents, both good and bad. No point preaching healthy lifestyle if one is obese and spends hours daily in front of TV eating junkfood. Also, back in 80s I had maybe 4 years and I knew very well sweet stuff is bad for one's health, it was always as obvious as ie that cigarettes were very harmful and highly addictive.
I love how many folks desperately try to throw blame on literally anybody, anything for their failures in life, rather than taking a cold hard look at the mirror and accepting one's own failures, as a parent but also generally as human in this case. Sure, it makes life with oneself a bit easier, instead of huge instant dose of misery and self-disappointment its slowly dripping through the cracks of illusions for the rest of their lives and people love feeling like a victim, but it very effectively prevents actually fixing anything.
So sure, lets blame sugar industry (which is doing exactly what all other businesses do - sell to as many people as possible), lets blame tobacco industry or wine producers for people's failures. Lets wait till politicians will sweep away all obstacles and traps from our lives, of course that's a reasonable expectation. Anything but throwing away that 3rd cupcake or starbucks latte.
> I love how many folks desperately try to throw blame on literally anybody
When I read opinions like this, I immediately have two thoughts.
1) What makes people think it's their right to shame anyone else? The 'look in the mirror' advice is pretty universal.
2) Is there even anyone qualified to make comments like this? Am I to assume that the folks who imply their superiority do not in fact have their own failings? Glass house and all that.
I think perhaps it's more complicated, and declaring it a moral failing is not going to improve anyone's life.
Fails I own are the fails I try to tackle. If its outside force, then the only action can be altering that force (good luck changing nation's mindsets and values) or cutting off from it.
I chose the owning approach, it works very nicely for my entire life so far, since its work between me and me so whatever is happening outside has no impact. Doesn't make it an easier life, in contrary, but much much better overall. A plus is building stronger 'character' in challenges for lack of better words.
It was a serious question. Who is cooking in the morning? And what? Eggs and bacon (isn't that just replacing the sugar with fat/salt)? Porridge?
Bread/toast also isn't particularly healthy (too high in salt, spikes your insulin too much).
Fruit is also just very similar than sweets with a bit more fiber, isn't it?
So, a plate of some veggies?
And don't get me started on spreads which are available: you can choose between fat (butter/margerine/cheese/most other spreads), high salt (meat/salami) and sweet (jam, honey, nutella)
Fat is probably a better choice than sugar in nearly all instances. High calorie but it’ll keep you full quite a while. Veggies definitely aren’t any good for that. My strategy these days is to try and eliminate simple sugars and highly refined carbs whenever possible; everything else is fair game. When I see something advertised as “low fat” I instantly conclude it will probably make you fat and it’s best to skip it.
If most cases include people without diabetes, PCOS or some other condition, yes you can eat less than what you burn and you will lose weight. In other cases, those people need medical intervention such as Mounjaro, Ozempic, etc
I mean to point out that "signal to noise" is what's often being overlooked, though "noise to signal" is more descriptive terminology.
it's very easy, in american fast food, for example, to ingest a great amount of unnecessary sugars (difficult to digest lipids, etc) while your body is trying to just get necessary nutrients themselves. worse, since we are built to remember results of eating, if some low nutritional signal to noise "food" satisfies some necessary essential nutrient craving, it's easy to remember what it was that alleviated a craving before, and tail recursively go eat the same shit again.
ok, but we can very much start with blaming corporations. sure, there are other factors at play, these are very large systems acting on individuals.
that’s the point. corporations are sufficiently complex and large to manipulate the system.
individuals rarely are, and when they do, it is often by forming a corporation around themselves. influencers are faces for larger operations, they have employees, payroll… just like a more traditional brick and mortar.
