it started with this article on obesity. after a long discussion about this, someone posted the following:
So, a couple of things. First, BMI does not indicate obeseness. BMI does not indicate anything, because it is simply a random formula invented by a nutritionist with no medical or other relevant training in the 19th century. To be brief, studies have shown BMI to have zero relevance to actual health or nutrition. Read up on it. These days it's used mostly as a tool of fat shaming, which isn't really a decent medical practice.
And speaking of fat shaming, you guys must be really proud of yourselves, full of affluent privilege, berating those fat, lazy poor? So over there in reality land, eating fresh and healthy actually costs considerably more than eating crap. Crisps are cheaper then potatoes. Factory crappy mac n cheese is about tenth the cost of actual pasta with actual cheese, if I remember US prices correctly. Any snacks made of corn or corn syrup are dirt cheap, due to US subsidies on the crop. Not to mention if you're a single mother of 3 working 2 or 3 jobs to keep food on the table, you truly don't have the time to daintily chop up vegetables. You need something to fill the kids' stomachs, and you need sleep, and that's it.
And one other crucial thing: why do you care so much if people are fat? Do you feel it makes less of you in some way? Does it bother you aesthetically? If you're gonna say it's unhealthy for them, stop. Go read some research from the last five years. You'll find researchers hypothesizing that perhaps being fat doesn't necessarily make you ill. Perhaps, the fact that when a fat person seeks medical attention she usually gets berated by healthcare providers about her weight and is sometimes downright refused treatment unless she losses weight, and that due to the way they are treated fat people stop seeking medical attention, and thus let diseases fester and build longer, perhaps all this is relevant to the question of why fat people are ill more. Thus, there is now a movement to reexamine which fat-related diseases are truly related medically, and which only socially. People can be fat while being in good shape and having good health (incl. cholesterol values and the whole thing). Being fat isn't an indication of health. It's just an indication of weight.
i don't know what studies you're referring to, but i'd love to read them. i'm also wondering how you read the above conversation without picking up on the fact that there's a focus on nutrition and health. if you'd like to know where i source my arguments from, all sources are cited on nutritionfacts.org and i've personally gone through the process of verifying that the studies there aren't cherry-picked or biased.
regarding a couple of your points, are you implying that half of americans are single moms who can't afford vegetables or don't have the time to prepare food? these vegetables: organic, GMO-free and gluten free in special hand-picked pre-washed packages, or just regular loose stuff? when you say "healthy", are you including meat, dairy, poultry and eggs in your assessment?
being obese is not an indication of good health. neither is not being fat, by the way, but obesity is a more sure sign that something's wrong. when that movement of yours completes its re-examination and has solid data behind it, let me know! i'll be glad to eat my words. in the meanwhile, i'll continue to push for people to make an effort to educate themselves because our educational and medical institutions aren't making much effort.
gd posted the following:
well, that's an interesting comparison. let's see what walmart has to say. beef stew vs pinto beans (new york prices, apparently):
beans are half the price per ounce.
the beans contain 52 servings of 7g protein each, the beef stew contains 2.5 servings of 9g protein each.
now, i'm not advocating a diet of beans - just beans would be unhealthy - but it's clear from this that the "it's cheaper" argument is invalid.
then neil degrasse tyson: let's see him use that same argument to convince people that eating dogs is okay.
just because he's a scientist, doesn't mean he's not vulnerable to cognitive dissonance. just because he's right that we've engineered modern cows, doesn't mean that those cows don't have thoughts and feelings. the fact that he won't consider a plant-based diet as a solution has nothing to do with science, so even though it's the great neil degrasse tyson, it's still a human being who would rather seek impractical solutions than give up his few minutes of decadence.
circus animals: when this lion attacks, it's *justified*.
training and keeping circus animals is a savage practice and we need to bring it to an end. animal slavery for food, as misguided as it is, is marginally better than animal slavery for entertainment.