Major overhaul of US life urged to cure obesity: experts

[RandomGuy]

..Two-thirds of American adults are too fat, and a major overhaul of US policies -- from schools to restaurants to urban planning -- is needed to stem the epidemic, medical experts said Tuesday.

In a hefty, 400-plus page report, the Institute of Medicine (IOM) called for urgent action to reverse national obesity trends that are costing the US $190.2 billion a year in illness-related costs.

Peppered with terms like "synergies," "empower" and "systems approach," the report called for a renewed focus on schools as the place where eating habits take hold for life, noting that 17 percent of US children are obese, a figure that has tripled in 30 years.

Offering lunches packed with veggies and whole grains and limiting access to sugar-sweetened drinks were among the recommendations for kids age six to 18.

States and local schools should also make sure all children and teenagers have the opportunity for 60 minutes of exercise per day, said the report titled "Accelerating Progress in Obesity Prevention: Solving the Weight of a Nation."

Other top goals for all ages included making physical activity a daily routine, making healthy food and drink choices widely available, and expanding the role of doctors, insurers and employers.

"Because obesity is such a complex and stubborn problem, a bold, sustained and comprehensive approach is needed," said the report.

"Action must occur at all levels -- individual, family, community, and the broader society."

The IOM report reviewed past strategies for obesity prevention in order to come up with new recommendations to speed progress, it said.

"Left unchecked, obesity's effects on health, health care costs, and our productivity as a nation could become catastrophic," added the report.

People who belong to ethnic minorities, who have lower incomes and less education are more susceptible to obesity, partly due to policy decisions that result in limited access to healthy foods and places to enjoy exercise.

For instance, one third of children born today -- and half of Hispanic and black children -- will develop type 2 diabetes in their lifetime, according to projections cited by the IOM.

"Some communities may have no safe place to walk or play, no shops offering affordable healthy food, and widespread advertisements of unhealthy food and beverages," said the report.

Community planners could work harder to make sure there are safe places for exercise, for example by converting an unused railroad bed into a running and biking trail, said the report.

"People only have a certain, limited ability to control their weight in an environment where there is a lot of food available," said IOM committee member Shiriki Kumanyika, professor of epidemiology at the University of Pennsylvania.

"One of the main reasons (for obesity) has to do with people being presented with large quantities of food -- tasty food -- in a culture where more is better, portion sizes are getting larger and heavily advertised," she told AFP.

Separate research presented Monday at a related conference on obesity in the US capital warned that 42 percent of US adults could be obese by 2030, and the number of severely obese people could more than double from five to 11 percent.

Michael Jacobson, executive director of the Center for Science in the Public Interest, a consumer advocacy group, urged governments, the food and health care industries and schools to implement the IOM's recommendations, calling it an "excellent blueprint for solving America's costly obesity problem."

"But policy makers will have to invest both money and political capital to convert the advice into reality," he added.

Despite the report's repeated urging of more institutional measures to make sure healthy foods are readily available, Kumanyika said the report's authors were not seeking new laws or mandates.

"We can't rely on mandatory solutions where they are not likely to be put into place. There a lot of things that government can do voluntarily," she said.

"Many of the things we recommend are in the control of people," she added. "They just require energy, focus and leadership to get things done."

---------------------------------

http://news.yahoo.com/major-overhaul-us-life-urged-cure-obesity-experts-175148279.html

[mavs>spurs]

its simple, the red meat based diet and processed/sugary foods have to go. its too damn expensive to actually buy real food, and no one has time to do so while working 60 hours a week to barely keep their heads above water. good luck making real food affordable.

[coyotes_geek]

its simple, the red meat based diet and processed/sugary foods have to go. its too damn expensive to actually buy real food, and no one has time to do so while working 60 hours a week to barely keep their heads above water. good luck making real food affordable.

Real food being affordable isn't the problem. The unwillingness of Americans to sacrifice couch/TV time to exercise and cook for themselves is.

[boutons_deux]

Like the VRWC, the obesity epidemic is unstoppable.

BigFood sells only toxic, dead, food-like substances that are low-nutrient, high-calorie- density, and cheap (but still suitably profitable).

There are some positive moves:

Student fitness improves with anti-obesity program

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/03/26/us-health-fitness-idUSBRE82P0UF20120326?feedType=RSS&feedName=healthNews&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+reuters%2FhealthNews+%28Reute rs+Health+News%29&utm_content=Google+Reader

But let us know when (southern) red/Repug states (lots of obese blacks and browns, poor) actually do something for their 99%'s diseases.

"too damn expensive to actually buy real food"

It's not easy to buy fresh plant-based food every 2 or 3 days, but it's not really that expensive. I guarantee you, trying to make your co-pays (if you even insured) for CVD, diabetes treatment for years is much more impoverishing.

[mavs>spurs]

Real food being affordable isn't the problem. The unwillingness of Americans to sacrifice couch/TV time to exercise and cook for themselves is.

;LMAO LMAO LMAO are u some sort of fucktard? btw, aren't the GMO crops linked to obesity amongst other things? (such as organ failure) good luck buying organic chicken and vegetables, you have any idea how much that stuff costs? a good 75% of the country lives check to check and can't afford it.

[coyotes_geek]

;LMAO LMAO LMAO are u some sort of fucktard? btw, aren't the GMO crops linked to obesity amongst other things? (such as organ failure) good luck buying organic chicken and vegetables, you have any idea how much that stuff costs? a good 75% of the country lives check to check and can't afford it.

Don't be a dumbass. America is fat because too many people eat fast food 10 times a week and never exercise, not because everyone is buying non-organic produce.

[baseline bum]

Real food being affordable isn't the problem. The unwillingness of Americans to sacrifice couch/TV time to exercise and cook for themselves is.

I don't think that's nearly as much of a problem as lots of Americans' unwillingness to drink water not containing sugar or syrup in it. Then there is snacking, which has become the national pastime. It's the easiest thing in the world to tear through a big bag of chips when your attention is focused on watching a game.

[coyotes_geek]

I don't think that's nearly as much of a problem as lots of Americans' unwillingness to drink water not containing sugar or syrup in it. Then there is snacking, which has become the national pastime. It's the easiest thing in the world to tear through a big bag of chips when your attention is focused on watching a game.

Both legitimate concerns.

[DarrinS]

Miraculously, my entire family is thin, and without any govt intervention.

[jack sommerset]

Counting calories and exercise is a great start to losing those pounds. It doesn't mean you have stop eating those delicious high calorie foods, it just means you can't do it everyday. Being overweight is not good for anyone. God bless

"But the fruit of the spirit love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control. Against such things there is no law."

[Winehole23]

Avoiding simple carbohydrates and heavily processed food ain't that hard once your body has become accustomed to less and you get reacquainted with real food.

Took me 5-6 weeks of being hungry all the time and clocking my diet meticulously (with a well known online app) before I got used to the lower caloric load and less carbs in my diet. The real key, though, was that I began to eat less and enjoy eating more...

Something similar obtains for exercise: it feels great to get a little fitter.

[Winehole23]

now if you'll all excuse me, I'm off to ride my bike.

[boutons_deux]

The real problem is that the S.A.D. standard American diet as defined by USDA and BigFarma is so far from a healthy, lean-weight diet that most Americans don't have a clue about how to modify from SAD to healthy.

eg, the low-fat bullshit the govt has pushed for decades has failed terribly, because at the same time, overweight/obesity, for 30+ years, has exploded, while BigFood stuffed damn near everything full of HFCS, synthetic sweeteners, sugar (it's natural!).

eg "whole grains" is basically bullshit, too, since grains are almost totally fast carbs with a little bit of good stuff retained, vs the 100% pathogenic refined grains.

USDA pushes shit it subsidizes, naturally. Why is USDA in the food marketing business at all?

Lots of people hate exercise, and almost nobody can maintain exercise over a life time (eg, most health club members stop going after 6 months). So exercise is not an efficient weight-loss public policy, while eating a mostly plant-based diet while avoiding industrial food-like substances, snacking, etc. can work for everybody.

btw, here's an great example of how the Repugs vote against Americans' health:

Congress battles over car-free transportation


The Senate bill passed on a rare bipartisan vote of 74-22 after partisan differences were worked out between Boxer, who chairs the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, and the top committee Republican, Sen. James Inhofe, R-Okla.

Inhofe sought to cut the pedestrian and bicycle programs, but Boxer preserved most of them, with some concessions.

Bicycle and pedestrian programs "believe it or not, caused the most anguish and were the hardest to come to an accord on," Fowler said. She said the Senate bill scales back each of the programs to some extent, such as allowing governors to opt out of spending for recreational trails to divert the money to highways.

Fowler said that while Oklahoma City has started its first bike-share program with the full support of its mayor, Republicans such as Inhofe from rural states remain adamant that federal transportation money go to highways alone. She insisted that cycling and walking can work in small towns, too.

http://mobile.sfgate.com/sfchron/db_41685/contentdetail.htm?contentguid=iM005aqO

Repug assholes (sorry for the redundancy) like climate-denier James InBred are own by the oil/gascos.

[BlairForceDejuan]

crossfit and paleo my nikkas. Sucks but it's worth it.

being obese is just like being lower class (excluding medical conditions). You either sacrifice and become disciplined for the grand payoff, or you be fake happy and suffer forever.

Grabbing the soda instead of the ozarka is nothing more than natural selection. Government needs to quit trying to best natural selection. There are so many resources, free resources, support groups, communities out there to beat obesity...95% don't have an excuse.

[boutons_deux]

99% of people won't/can't do something extreme like crossfit.

[JoeChalupa]

Real food being affordable isn't the problem. The unwillingness of Americans to sacrifice couch/TV time to exercise and cook for themselves is.

My diabetic ass has had to make lifestyle change but I still don't like people pushing their "you have no self esteem" attitudes on me or others. I cook every night for our family and we go on nightly walks. Kids don't exercise like they did before. Well, it wasn't really exercise but we used to run and ride our bikes all day long. Now it is rare to see kids riding bikes or just doing things like being outside. Without a damn cell phone or electronic toy that is. Too much sitting around playing video games instead of participating in real games.

[JoeChalupa]

You don't have to do the P90X or Insanity workouts to be fit.

[BlairForceDejuan]

You can lose most weight just skipping rope and doing bodyweight exercises for 20 minutes every day in a crossfit style wod setup. Crossfit is death, but extreme laziness is far more scary.

Michelle Obama is doing it right aiming her fit craze at the kids. The trick is to not get addicted to easy cheap processed poison that is so abundant and tasty. Once you're hooked on the "norm" it's super hard to pull a 180.

[leemajors]

now if you'll all excuse me, I'm off to ride my bike.

:tu I rode 20 miles this morning. Feels damn good, and beats the hell outta a stationary in a gym.

[leemajors]

crossfit and paleo my nikkas. Sucks but it's worth it.

being obese is just like being lower class (excluding medical conditions). You either sacrifice and become disciplined for the grand payoff, or you be fake happy and suffer forever.

Grabbing the soda instead of the ozarka is nothing more than natural selection. Government needs to quit trying to best natural selection. There are so many resources, free resources, support groups, communities out there to beat obesity...95% don't have an excuse.

there is no reason to grab an ozarka either, just a glass of water will do.

[TeyshaBlue]

there is no reason to grab an ozarka either, just a glass of water will do.

I loves Ozarka, tho.:depressed

[baseline bum]

Not everyone can respond well to exercise (though most can get something out of it), but certainly anyone can cut out the Dr Pepper and Ruffles.

[elbamba]

Miraculously, my entire family is thin, and without any govt intervention.

Good for you. But should not someone step in if parents allow their children to eat out every day? Certainly you would agree that someone should regulate, and hopefully do a better job of ensuring that people no longer eat pink slime.

There is a role for government when it comes to food. And there is going to continue to be a need for government to get involved if the trends in obesity continue to skyrocket. Telling people they are fat and lazy doesn't work.

[elbamba]

Eating healthy is something that needs to start at a young age. My parents were educated, one being a doctor and the other a nurse. family was well to do growing up but we ate out way too much. It took a long time to get my eating habits under control. I used to think that because I ran daily and played basketeball 3-4 times a week that would be enough.

When I hit about 25-26 I started gaining weight for the first time in my life. I started increasing my exercise to 5 miles running every day. I lifted weights 3 times a week and still found time to play ball at least 2 a week and I still gained weight because of my diet. After putting on about 45 pounds, I forced myself to eat healthy. It took about 5 years of struggling but I was able to lose the 45 pounds. It was not easy to do and is still hard to do today. Plenty of times I would rather pick up a McDonalds burger and fries on the way home as oppossed to eating veggies.

My kids eat fast food about 5 times a year. My wife and I will take them during holidays. If we eat out at a restaurant, no soda or deserts, no french fries, always a vegitable and we won't go anywhere unless they can accomodate us. My kids do not struggle with their diet, they don't ask for the junk food. This is why I say that it has to start with good eating habits at an early age.

[Sportcamper]

Now it is rare to see kids riding bikes or just doing things like being outside.

Moms when I was a kid packed us a lunch of peanut butter & jelly sandwiches, Twinkies, potato chips, cookies, apples & a canteen of water & told us to not come home until the street lights came on…There were no fat kids riding 50 lb Schwinns exploring the outside world back then….

[greyforest]

Real food being affordable isn't the problem.

Yes it is. Healthy food is drastically more expensive than preservative-laden long shelf life low-nutrient human feed that most people eat every day.

[leemajors]

Yes it is. Healthy food is drastically more expensive than preservative-laden long shelf life low-nutrient human feed that most people eat every day.

Rice and beans are not expensive. There is plenty of cheap, healthy food out there.

[elbamba]

Yes it is. Healthy food is drastically more expensive than preservative-laden long shelf life low-nutrient human feed that most people eat every day.

I disagree, especially if you purchase healthy food the right way. It will obviously be more expensive if you shop at Whole Foods. However, if you subsitute carrots, banannas, broccoli, zuchini squash, snap peas for chips, crackers, cookies and other preservative-filled food, you will not see a difference in your grocery bill.

I purchase one big bag of carrots for $3.00 and keep it at my office for snacking and filler food at lunch. I used to purchase chips and other snack foods at Costco every two weeks for about $20.00.

You can buy healthy cereal for a slighly higher cost than sugar cereal or you can eat oatmeal which is even cheaper.

I started saving serious money when I stopped eating out for lunch every day and started bringing my lunch. I stopped eating breakfast tacos or bagels on the way to the office and substituted it for a bananna and egg whites.

But probably the most important thing is that I gave up soda and now drink free water. I don't waste money on orange juice or juice of any kind. I'll eat the fruit and drink water.

[DarrinS]

Good for you. But should not someone step in if parents allow their children to eat out every day? Certainly you would agree that someone should regulate, and hopefully do a better job of ensuring that people no longer eat pink slime.

There is a role for government when it comes to food. And there is going to continue to be a need for government to get involved if the trends in obesity continue to skyrocket. Telling people they are fat and lazy doesn't work.


NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO (am I being too subtle?)


Yes, let the FDA keep ensuring that food is safe. It is NOT the govt's job to tell me my kids can't have a fucking cheeseburger.

[baseline bum]

I agree, but it's also not their job to be feeding them crap like french fries, chips, and sodas every day at school.

[elbamba]

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO (am I being too subtle?)


Yes, let the FDA keep ensuring that food is safe. It is NOT the govt's job to tell me my kids can't have a fucking cheeseburger.

the problem does not arise when you feed your child one cheeseburger. The problem would not be present if you feed your child one cheeseburger a week. However, the problem does arise, and it is a very real problem, when parents feed their children cheeseburgers, french fries and soda every day.

Then the issue is no longer a question of your right as a parent. Now this is abuse, you are physically hurting your child. You are setting your child up for emotional damages as well from self-confidence issues to bullying at school for weight issues. Certainly a child has rights too. Or do children's rights only exist when they are unborn fetuses?

I would contend that this could justifiably be labled as cruel and unusual punishment for parents to force children to eat like this. Furthermore, this all effects me directly. My health insurance costs skyrocket when we have to provide 50% of the country with heath care for preventable diseases.

[CuckingFunt]

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO (am I being too subtle?)


Yes, let the FDA keep ensuring that food is safe. It is NOT the govt's job to tell me my kids can't have a fucking cheeseburger.

No one wants the government to tell you your kids can't have a cheeseburger.

I get that people think regulations are bad and evil, and that there is a tremendous amount of political motivation to maintain that position, but I don't get the argument that it is somehow bad or evil to ensure that school lunches are healthy and that food is made of food.

[boutons_deux]

"let the FDA keep ensuring that food is safe."

:lol :lol :lol

The Best, Most Disgusting Reporting on Food Safety

http://www.propublica.org/article/the-best-most-disgusting-reporting-on-food-safety

And since Round-up has failed on GMO crops + weeds, FDA/USDA ready to permit Agent Orange component on US crops :lol :lol :lol

The insane are running the asylum

[coyotes_geek]

the problem does not arise when you feed your child one cheeseburger. The problem would not be present if you feed your child one cheeseburger a week. However, the problem does arise, and it is a very real problem, when parents feed their children cheeseburgers, french fries and soda every day.

Then the issue is no longer a question of your right as a parent. Now this is abuse, you are physically hurting your child. You are setting your child up for emotional damages as well from self-confidence issues to bullying at school for weight issues. Certainly a child has rights too. Or do children's rights only exist when they are unborn fetuses?

I would contend that this could justifiably be labled as cruel and unusual punishment for parents to force children to eat like this. Furthermore, this all effects me directly. My health insurance costs skyrocket when we have to provide 50% of the country with heath care for preventable diseases.

I wholeheartedly agree with you that this is a real concern, but what do you want the government to do about it? Once you get past school lunches, what else is there? Do we start taking fat kids away from fat parents and putting them into foster homes?

[leemajors]

I wholeheartedly agree with you that this is a real concern, but what do you want the government to do about it? Once you get past school lunches, what else is there? Do we start taking fat kids away from fat parents and putting them into foster homes?

fat swap tv show!

[ElNono]

I wholeheartedly agree with you that this is a real concern, but what do you want the government to do about it? Once you get past school lunches, what else is there? Do we start taking fat kids away from fat parents and putting them into foster homes?

You can be creative about this. IE: require obese children to conduct a blood/weight test every 6 months or so and if there's no improvement, fine the parents. If they don't show up for the test, fine them. Make consecutive fines scale up the penalty amount.

Once you touch their pockets, they'll get the message. Can't pay? Spend the night in jail. You think this is too tough? Having diabetes when you're 13 is tough.

[elbamba]

I wholeheartedly agree with you that this is a real concern, but what do you want the government to do about it? Once you get past school lunches, what else is there? Do we start taking fat kids away from fat parents and putting them into foster homes?

You are right. All I can do is bitch and complain about the problem. I have no real solution.

Perhaps criminalizing obesity? Misdomenor or something to that effect. Texas does this if your child misses school. Perhaps we can pass a weight law that if your child reaches a certain unhealthy weight you get fined. You can draft exceptions that would exempt certain individuals with conditions.

They could also implement taxes on soda and other extremely unhealthy foods. (i.e. fast food tax). We do it with tabaco and alcohol.

[elbamba]

You can be creative about this. IE: require obese children to conduct a blood/weight test every 6 months or so and if there's no improvement, fine the parents. If they don't show up for the test, fine them. Make consecutive fines scale up the penalty amount.

Once you touch their pockets, they'll get the message. Can't pay? Spend the night in jail. You think this is too tough? Having diabetes when you're 13 is tough.

I agree. Extreme problems sometimes call for extreme measures. I wish it didn't come to that but my heart does break when I see young kids the same age but three times the width of my son struggling to play on a playground.

[rascal]

Real food being affordable isn't the problem. The unwillingness of Americans to sacrifice couch/TV time to exercise and cook for themselves is.

Good healthy food is not affordable for many people.

[DarkReign]

I am surprised people are so hungry all the time, honestly. Everyone around me, every family member, every friend, every coworker, motherfuckers all eat 3 meals a day with all sorts of shit in between.

People, in my uneducated opinion, are just plain addicted to eating.

Maybe back in the early 20th century when everyone worked 60 hours on their feet everyday except Sundays, eating three meals a day made sense. These days, everyone has a desk job and works 60hrs a week, but still eat like a person who does physical labor everyday.

Again, I dont pay attention to health and fitness, so I am admittedly ignorant on the subject. But people around me, everywhere, make me sick watching them eat all the fucking time. Always hungry, always want to eat.

I eat once, sometimes twice a day. A big healthy lunch and a very light dinner. Thats it. Way less than 2000 calories that I guarantee.

I dont know, just putting it out there. I am sure the phys ed teachers will jump all over this post and tell me how my diet sucks and bla bla bla.

My remedy for fat-asses? Stop eating all the god damn time. You shouldnt be that hungry all the time. You dont "do" shit. You barely move all day, listening to you breathing through your nose while eating makes me ill. Fat people seem to think walking from one end of the house to the other, bending over a few times and the back and forth between the parking lots is "exercise".

Newsflash: No it isnt. Maybe for a paraplegic it is, but not you with two working legs. At least, it shouldnt be. If you lose your breath walking up stairs and you dont have a long medical history of asthma, youre too god damned fat. Stop eating (so much) and start moving a helluva lot more. More fruit and vegetables, remove chips, cookies, sweets and sugar cereal from your diet.

I really dont see the issue here.

[baseline bum]

You can be creative about this. IE: require obese children to conduct a blood/weight test every 6 months or so and if there's no improvement, fine the parents. If they don't show up for the test, fine them. Make consecutive fines scale up the penalty amount.

Once you touch their pockets, they'll get the message. Can't pay? Spend the night in jail. You think this is too tough? Having diabetes when you're 13 is tough.

Wow, that's extreme. Count me out of advocating for that. Sounds like a Wild Cobra Libertarian utopia tbh.

[CuckingFunt]

People, in my uneducated opinion, are just plain addicted to eating.

A lot of the food that we eat is loaded with chemicals that inspire physical addiction.

[ChumpDumper]

crossfit and paleo my nikkas.Never thought of it before, but I can see how digging up fossils could be a decent workout.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Wow, that's extreme. Count me out of advocating for that. Sounds like a Wild Cobra Libertarian utopia tbh.

Assuming some vestige of the health care bill comes into play you are going to see it more and more used as a risk rating for health insurers. If you want to be a disgusting fat body then fine but your health coverage premium is going to go up.

Thats really the only reason why its even a big deal: health care costs.

Some people like fatties.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

A lot of the food that we eat is loaded with chemicals that inspire physical addiction.

Food is a physical addiction. You have physical withdrawals when you lack anything from vitamin B to protein. There is a distinction between something that helps for example vitamin C to be absorbed into the brain versus say nicotine.

[Heath Ledger]

Real food being affordable isn't the problem. The unwillingness of Americans to sacrifice couch/TV time to exercise and cook for themselves is.

False, be prepared for more record inflation as we keep printing more and more invisible money to keep our economy afloat. There is also a huge pending food crisis coming because of population and demand.

Did you know that since 2008 the Federal Reserve has tripled the amount of printed currency on the market? Our dollar has lost half its value in a 10 or 12 year span with more of the same coming.

[rascal]

Rice and beans are not expensive. There is plenty of cheap, healthy food out there.

Oranges are $1 for one where I live. Many people living paycheck to paycheck just cannot buy fresh fruits and vegetables. I don't buy oranges at $1 for 1.
I live paycheck to paycheck like many people.

[RandomGuy]

Real food being affordable isn't the problem. The unwillingness of Americans to sacrifice couch/TV time to exercise and cook for themselves is.

I kind of agree to a point. Next time you are at the store start pricing things by the pound. Carbs and fats win hands down for most things.

Biology and the way our brains are hardwired doesn't help either.

[rascal]

Americans have too much processed junk in their foods. The big buisness of making money for the food industy is more important than keeping the fat causing crap out of the American diet.

[RandomGuy]

False, be prepared for more record inflation as we keep printing more and more invisible money to keep our economy afloat. There is also a huge pending food crisis coming because of population and demand.

Did you know that since 2008 the Federal Reserve has tripled the amount of printed currency on the market? Our dollar has lost half its value in a 10 or 12 year span with more of the same coming.

There will be no "record inflation".

Deflation is more likely, given world economic conditions.

[Wild Cobra]

Wow, that's extreme. Count me out of advocating for that. Sounds like a Wild Cobra Libertarian utopia tbh.
LOL... and ElNoKnow says I'm extreme...

[ElNono]

Wow, that's extreme. Count me out of advocating for that. Sounds like a Wild Cobra Libertarian utopia tbh.

Well, it's a fine, not mandated gastric bypass surgery. What would you propose for enforcement?

[ElNono]

LOL... and ElNoKnow says I'm extreme...

I think there's a major distance between a fine and mandated castration... feel free to disagree...

[Wild Cobra]

I haven't looked, but I'll bet there is a correlation between sunscreen sales and obesity.

[Wild Cobra]

I think there's a major distance between a fine and mandated castration... feel free to disagree...

There you go lying again. Paraphrasing my words wrong is an effective lie. Stating I have a position that is false is a lie.

Please show me any post to support your allegation that I support castration.


Definition of CASTRATE

a : to deprive of the testes : geld

b : to deprive of the ovaries : spay

You are pathetic ElNoKnow.

[JoeChalupa]

People harm themselves because they have no self control.

[coyotes_geek]

You can be creative about this. IE: require obese children to conduct a blood/weight test every 6 months or so and if there's no improvement, fine the parents. If they don't show up for the test, fine them. Make consecutive fines scale up the penalty amount.

Once you touch their pockets, they'll get the message. Can't pay? Spend the night in jail. You think this is too tough? Having diabetes when you're 13 is tough.


You are right. All I can do is bitch and complain about the problem. I have no real solution.

Perhaps criminalizing obesity? Misdomenor or something to that effect. Texas does this if your child misses school. Perhaps we can pass a weight law that if your child reaches a certain unhealthy weight you get fined. You can draft exceptions that would exempt certain individuals with conditions.

They could also implement taxes on soda and other extremely unhealthy foods. (i.e. fast food tax). We do it with tabaco and alcohol.

I've mentioned a junk food tax a couple of times on this board as something that could be used to help with healthcare costs. (tax junk food and redistribute revenues to taxpayers via HSA accounts) So I'm with you on that one. Another thing the government could do is restrict food stamps to prohibit them being used to purchase junk food/soda/candy.

I can't go along with criminalizing obesity though. The results of criminalizing drugs are underwhelming, I don't see why criminalizing being fat would turn out any better.

[coyotes_geek]

Good healthy food is not affordable for many people.

1. I disagree.
2. Even if that were true, it's still not an excuse for never getting off the couch to go exercise. Last time I checked anyone can exercise for free.

[boutons_deux]

See on the many sites how much intense exercise it takes to burn 500 calories.

I'm not against exercise at all, but it's an unreliable, unsustainable, even unavailable method for weight loss/maintenance for the majority.

Diet is the only realiable, sustainable, universally available method. And it's certainly diet that causes the overweight/obestity epidemic and attendant diseases, not lack of exercise.

[elbamba]

I've mentioned a junk food tax a couple of times on this board as something that could be used to help with healthcare costs. (tax junk food and redistribute revenues to taxpayers via HSA accounts) So I'm with you on that one. Another thing the government could do is restrict food stamps to prohibit them being used to purchase junk food/soda/candy.

I can't go along with criminalizing obesity though. The results of criminalizing drugs are underwhelming, I don't see why criminalizing being fat would turn out any better.

I probably would not go for jail time but fines might work. I agree with you on the food stamps restrictions. I was at a Valero the other day in a poorer part of SA and I saw little green signs indicating which candy, chips and other snacks could be purchased with food stamps. Made me sick.

[boutons_deux]

A hardcore public health insurance option with serious bonuses (reductions) per year for people who are measured to be in good health. Maluses/penalties are not acceptable. The "penalty" for being measurably "life-style unhealthy" would be paying 100% of your insurance premiums.

This would spawn an industry of health testing, which should be cheaper than spending $8K/year per each of 300M+ for sick-care.

[leemajors]

1. I disagree.
2. Even if that were true, it's still not an excuse for never getting off the couch to go exercise. Last time I checked anyone can exercise for free.

no shit, it also takes very little money/effort for a small vegetable garden, even on an apartment patio.

[boutons_deux]

New Study Highlights The Need For Health Education Programs To Ward Off Childhood Obesity

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/releases/245096.php


Controlling Obesity Will Save Over Half A Trillion Dollars

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/245079.php

[ElNono]

There you go lying again. Paraphrasing my words wrong is an effective lie.

castrate (http://www.thefreedictionary.com/castrate)
1. To remove the testicles of (a male); geld or emasculate.
2. To remove the ovaries of (a female); spay.
3. To deprive of virility or spirit; emasculate.


virility (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/virility)
1. The state or quality of being virile; manly character, vigor, or spirit; masculinity.
2. The power of procreation.

Shut up, liar.

[Big Empty]

Very Simple

1. Tax the shit out of redmeat
2. tax the shit out of anything with sugar
3. Tax the sht out of grease
4. Give tax breaks to those woh purchase fruits greens and lean meat

[baseline bum]

A huge problem I have with ElNono's idea is that weight and fitness aren't as correlated as one would think. I remember a few years ago I was hiking a pretty strenuous trail in Grand Teton and I saw this woman who by all social standards would be considered a pig who zipped by me on the trail and started going up switchbacks on it like they were nothing. She was heavy as hell with floppy tits and a gut but still faster than me or any of the other people I ran into on the trail.

[Wild Cobra]

I've mentioned a junk food tax a couple of times on this board as something that could be used to help with healthcare costs. (tax junk food and redistribute revenues to taxpayers via HSA accounts) So I'm with you on that one. Another thing the government could do is restrict food stamps to prohibit them being used to purchase junk food/soda/candy.

I can't go along with criminalizing obesity though. The results of criminalizing drugs are underwhelming, I don't see why criminalizing being fat would turn out any better.
No kidding. I don't particularly care for a "junk food tax," but I would never go for criminalizing fatness. I think people should be responsible for themselves.

Why do people want the government to protect them form themselves?

ElNoKnow... Why don't you just ask them to put you in a strait jacket and padded room, so you can't hurt yourself. Since it appears you think the authoritarian approach to protect everyone from everything is the solution.

[boutons_deux]

A huge problem I have with ElNono's idea is that weight and fitness aren't as correlated as one would think. I remember a few years ago I was hiking a pretty strenuous trail in Grand Teton and I saw this woman who by all social standards would be considered a pig who zipped by me on the trail and started going up switchbacks on it like they were nothing. She was heavy as hell with floppy tits and a gut but still faster than me or any of the other people I ran into on the trail.

"studies have shown" that greasebags who anyway exercise can obviate nearly the negatives of greasebagginess. iow, fat can be fit.

[Wild Cobra]

I probably would not go for jail time but fines might work. I agree with you on the food stamps restrictions. I was at a Valero the other day in a poorer part of SA and I saw little green signs indicating which candy, chips and other snacks could be purchased with food stamps. Made me sick.
Now I would go along with only allowing healthy purchases on the tax payers dime.

Food stamps having only limited purchases...

Oh yea... No chips, soda, candy, etc.

[Wild Cobra]

A huge problem I have with ElNono's idea is that weight and fitness aren't as correlated as one would think. I remember a few years ago I was hiking a pretty strenuous trail in Grand Teton and I saw this woman who by all social standards would be considered a pig who zipped by me on the trail and started going up switchbacks on it like they were nothing. She was heavy as hell with floppy tits and a gut but still faster than me or any of the other people I ran into on the trail.
Not only that, but some people just are genetically fat.

[boutons_deux]

"Why do people want the government to protect them form themselves"

more specifically, govt should protect society from the greatly elevated health costs of the greasebags, which everybody else pays (hiked for-profit premiums for the insured, and taxpayers reimbursing health care for the uninsured).

Precedent is for-profit insurance companies makes smokers and driving violators pay more.

And let's not hear that obese people have uncontrollable "nothing I can do" medical/genetic problems. 99% of them simply overeat.

[Wild Cobra]

"Why do people want the government to protect them form themselves"

more specifically, govt should protect society from the greatly elevated health costs of the greasebags, which everybody else pays (hiked for-profit premiums for the insured, and taxpayers reimbursing health care for the uninsured).

Precedent is for-profit insurance companies makes smokers and driving violators pay more.

And let's not hear that obese people have uncontrollable "nothing I can do" medical/genetic problems. 99% of them simply overeat.
That's why I can grudgingly go along with a junk food tax.

[jack sommerset]

Seriously, does anyone else see if the obamacare or the healthcare industry as we know it now charging by the pound in the near future. God bless

[Wild Cobra]

Seriously, does anyone else see if the obamacare or the healthcare industry as we know it now charging by the pound in the near future. God bless
Not really, but I think "all you can eat" buffets should do that.

[bobbyjoe]

I am surprised people are so hungry all the time, honestly. Everyone around me, every family member, every friend, every coworker, motherfuckers all eat 3 meals a day with all sorts of shit in between.

People, in my uneducated opinion, are just plain addicted to eating.

Maybe back in the early 20th century when everyone worked 60 hours on their feet everyday except Sundays, eating three meals a day made sense. These days, everyone has a desk job and works 60hrs a week, but still eat like a person who does physical labor everyday.

Again, I dont pay attention to health and fitness, so I am admittedly ignorant on the subject. But people around me, everywhere, make me sick watching them eat all the fucking time. Always hungry, always want to eat.

I eat once, sometimes twice a day. A big healthy lunch and a very light dinner. Thats it. Way less than 2000 calories that I guarantee.

I dont know, just putting it out there. I am sure the phys ed teachers will jump all over this post and tell me how my diet sucks and bla bla bla.

My remedy for fat-asses? Stop eating all the god damn time. You shouldnt be that hungry all the time. You dont "do" shit. You barely move all day, listening to you breathing through your nose while eating makes me ill. Fat people seem to think walking from one end of the house to the other, bending over a few times and the back and forth between the parking lots is "exercise".

Newsflash: No it isnt. Maybe for a paraplegic it is, but not you with two working legs. At least, it shouldnt be. If you lose your breath walking up stairs and you dont have a long medical history of asthma, youre too god damned fat. Stop eating (so much) and start moving a helluva lot more. More fruit and vegetables, remove chips, cookies, sweets and sugar cereal from your diet.

I really dont see the issue here.

Great take! Obesity is so much more of a quantity of food issue than it is a quality of food issue. We as a society just consume WAY more calories than needed for our level of activity, which progressively declines with each generation.

Has anyone tried places like My Fit Foods, Nutrisystem, etc? You are eating a bunch of crap really but because you limit your portions and caloric intake per day, you lose weight doing it. And you don't give up the short-term gratifications of eating unhealthy food either.

I'm guessing most Americans are in the 2500-3000 a day calories consumed range when based on their caloric expenditure they should be in the 1800-2300 range...

BTW, it is actually better to eat 3-4 times a day than 1-2, but eat smaller portions. If you only eat 1-2 times a day but have really big meals, your metabolism is slower than if you eat more often but are spreading the calories out throughout the day. It's easier to accumulate undesirable body fat from only eating 1-2 X a day because your body will raid its own lean muscle mass for energy more often than if you spread your meals out.

[coyotes_geek]

Seriously, does anyone else see if the obamacare or the healthcare industry as we know it now charging by the pound in the near future. God bless

Absolutely. In fact it's already started. My employer started a program just last year where you can volunteer for a biometric screening and qualify for discounts on your insurance premiums based on your health.

[Blake]

I've mentioned a junk food tax a couple of times on this board as something that could be used to help with healthcare costs. (tax junk food and redistribute revenues to taxpayers via HSA accounts) So I'm with you on that one. Another thing the government could do is restrict food stamps to prohibit them being used to purchase junk food/soda/candy.

I can't go along with criminalizing obesity though. The results of criminalizing drugs are underwhelming, I don't see why criminalizing being fat would turn out any better.

what would be the parameters to determine what foods fall into the junk food category?

[coyotes_geek]

superjumbosized triple bacon cheeseburger combo meal = junk food

produce from grocery store = not junk food

[TeyshaBlue]

superjumbosized triple bacon cheeseburger combo meal = junk food
:depressed

[DarkReign]

BTW, it is actually better to eat 3-4 times a day than 1-2, but eat smaller portions. If you only eat 1-2 times a day but have really big meals, your metabolism is slower than if you eat more often but are spreading the calories out throughout the day. It's easier to accumulate undesirable body fat from only eating 1-2 X a day because your body will raid its own lean muscle mass for energy more often than if you spread your meals out.

Well, thanks for pointing that out without being a dick. Seriously.

Its been a lifestyle of mine since I can remember. I eat once or twice. My job does not require serious physical labor so I have always rationalized it that way.

Besides, I just dont like to waste time doing things I dont want to do. Such as eating or sleeping. Both are needs but I hate doing both as I see them as time sinks I could spend doing something else I enjoy.

I dont expect others to live like me, and if you are correct about it being healthier to eat more often but less in portion, then obviously my way isnt even good for you to begin with. But it sickens me to see fat people wonder why they are fat when theyre the first out the door for lunch, complain when dinner isnt ready and hover around the fridge all the time or cant pass a bowl of candy without gorging themselves.

Example:

My wife keeps candy in the house in bowls upstairs and downstairs. It isnt for us, neither of us eat candy on anything that could be considered a regular basis. Its for those we entertain at the house. We cant keep the bowls full, always running empty because (like I said) no one I know has the self control to ignore them. I have 2 family members and 2 friends over and our entire supply of candy that lasted us for 3 months is gone in less than 3 hours.

Its disgusting because every single person, tall, short, fat or skinny, all say the same thing. "Man, these things are addicting!" No theyre not, you just have no self control. I can have one bite size Twix or Snickers and never eat another for weeks. These gluttons make you think you fucked up by making them the bite size pieces...might have been more effective to just buy the full size bars so they could jam more of it in their fat mouths.

Same thing when going out to dinner. They have to order appetizers, entree, 3 sodas/pops and a dessert. While my wife and I always have to get a doggy bag to take home what we ordered.

Its just weird to me. I eat to live, I do not live to eat. Exact opposite of nearly everyone I know, really. My body will tell me when to eat, then I eat until I am full, nothing beyond that. Just seems like common sense to me.

I mean, you dont go to the bathroom and sit down anticipating having to take a shit, do you? "Oh man, its about that time, I should go get ready to take a shit." No, thats stupid. Your body tells you, some people are right as rain in schedule, you have to go to the bathroom. Same with eating.

[Blake]

superjumbosized triple bacon cheeseburger combo meal = junk food

produce from grocery store = not junk food

A triple bacon cheeseburger contains most of your basic food groups, and if you add lettuce, tomato and onions, you've just added produce from the grocery store.

If you substitute apples for french fries should a tax still apply?

What about diet soda?

[coyotes_geek]

A triple bacon cheeseburger contains most of your basic food groups, and if you add lettuce, tomato and onions, you've just added produce from the grocery store.

If you substitute apples for french fries should a tax still apply?

What about diet soda?

Yes.

Not junk food.

[TeyshaBlue]

I have a feeling my bar tab's about to go up.

[Blake]

Yes.

yes as in the tax would still apply? Why?

Exactly which part of the burger is junk?

[TeyshaBlue]

Because there's not enough taxes on booze as it is.

[Blake]

Because there's not enough taxes on booze as it is.

Order a jack and regular coke and feel the pain of the double junk tax.

[boutons_deux]

A triple bacon cheeseburger contains most of your basic food groups, and if you add lettuce, tomato and onions, you've just added produce from the grocery store.

If you substitute apples for french fries should a tax still apply?

What about diet soda?

the industurial cheese-like substance is junk

the pink-slimed meat-like substance is junk

the heavily processed bread-like bun is junk

the mayo and mustard and ketchup are processed, sweetened junk

the lettuce, pickle, onion, tomato are OK, so have a salad even more veg rather than cheeseburger.

diet soda is chemical junk.

[coyotes_geek]

yes as in the tax would still apply? Why?

Exactly which part of the burger is junk?

Yes, for the same reasons why ordering an iced tea instead of a soda won't keep the burger from making you fat.

The part that you eat.

[Blake]

the industurial cheese-like substance is junk

the pink-slimed meat-like substance is junk

the heavily processed bread-like bun is junk

the mayo and mustard and ketchup are processed, sweetened junk.

diet soda is chemical junk.

should all those items be slapped with a junk food tax?

[Blake]

The part that you eat.

So you want to tax bread, beef, pork, and cheese.

Neat.

[boutons_deux]

your call.

A killer problem is defining what is junk food.

I don't think junk food tax is workable. BigFood will certainly kill it.

Nearly everything in a grocery store, and EVERYTHING in a convenience store, is dead (packaged for shelf-life, not health), processed, chemically saturated corporate crap.

Think that's a radical position? Then you have been co-opted, hypnotized into the BigFood/USDA/FDA for-profit food world.

Fruit and veg, even if their nutrient value has deteriorated by intensive corporate agriculture on depleted soil and polluted water, is much superior to anything in packages.

[coyotes_geek]

So you want to tax bread, beef, pork, and cheese.

When used in combination to make a 1,000 calorie sandwich with 50 grams of fat, yes I do.


Neat.

Glad you like it. :tu

[Blake]

A killer problem is defining what is junk food.

I don't think junk food tax is workable.

I don't think it is either.

[Blake]

When used in combination to make a 1,000 calorie sandwich with 50 grams of fat, yes I do.

So a sandwich with 999 calories and 49 grams of fat is exempt in your plan.

neato.


Glad you like it. :tu

good stuff. :tu

[coyotes_geek]

So a sandwich with 999 calories and 49 grams of fat is exempt in your plan.

neato.

No.


good stuff. :tu

Thank you for a very intelligent and thought provoking conversation.

[Blake]

No.

K, then what's the cut off?


Thank you for a very intelligent and thought provoking conversation.

I don't think you thought your junk food tax plan out very far past the word ”junk”

[TeyshaBlue]

This approach seemed to work out. TGI Friday's Smaller Portions.

http://abcnews.go.com/Nightline/story?id=3015921&page=1

[leemajors]

This approach seemed to work out. TGI Friday's Smaller Portions.

http://abcnews.go.com/Nightline/story?id=3015921&page=1

that indirectly reminded me of this:

WX2Y4czgY8s

[elbamba]

K, then what's the cut off?



I don't think you thought your junk food tax plan out very far past the word ”junk”

Its not really his place to determine. One would hope that doctors, dietitians and other relevant parties would be consulted and have a hand in making such determinations.

I would contend that everything on this list falls in the tax category. http://www.acaloriecounter.com/fast-food.php

[TeyshaBlue]

I fuckin love Adult Swim. :tu

[Blake]

Its not really his place to determine. One would hope that doctors, dietitians and other relevant parties would be consulted and have a hand in making such determinations.

have there been any to set junk food parameters?


I would contend that everything on this list falls in the tax category. http://www.acaloriecounter.com/fast-food.php

Hamburger is on that list.

It took all of 5 seconds to destroy your lazy contention

[boutons_deux]

"doctors, dietitians"

doctors are famously totally untrained in nutrition

trained dietitians and nutritionists are pretty useless, since they advocate the official, conventional BigFood crap, like S.A.D. and USDA "food plate"/pyramid silliness.

[boutons_deux]

...

[coyotes_geek]

K, then what's the cut off?

Somewhere between 0 cal / 0g fat and 999 cal / 49g fat.


I don't think you thought your junk food tax plan out very far past the word ”junk”

Correct. It's a concept. Apparently one too abstract for your liking. Oh well.

[NewcastleKEG]

First of all. American food is of poor quality & has tons of shit mixed in to keep food ''fresh'' longer

Secondly, Americans don't walk/move enough

Thirdly, Americans are not properly taught to eat (vegetables) growing up

[boutons_deux]

the "low-fat" / "low cholesterol" multi-decade bullshit hasn't stopped or even dented the obesity crisis.

low cholesterol people are at elevated risk for cancer, millions of high cholesterol people have no heart disease. so now what?

cholestorol marketing is a BigPharma/doctor scam.

the low-fat talisman is bullshit, since the real culprit is carbs not fat.

[Blake]

I don't think you thought your junk food tax plan out very far past the word ”junk”




Correct.

That's a shame. When you bragged about proposing a junk tax, I was hoping for something fresh.

I've tried to come up with one that works myself.

No luck.

[coyotes_geek]

That's a shame. When you bragged about proposing a junk tax, I was hoping for something fresh.

I've tried to come up with one that works myself.

No luck.

I'm sure you have. I'm also sure the board appreciates you refraining from suggesting anything until you've got all the details worked out.

[NewcastleKEG]

American Life: Shitty food, superficial life in front of the television & disconnected from reality constantly on their phones

[Blake]

I'm sure you have. I'm also sure the board appreciates you refraining from suggesting anything until you've got all the details worked out.

That didn't stop you from posting your suggestion.

For me personally, I don't really care what the board appreciates.

[elbamba]

have there been any to set junk food parameters?



Hamburger is on that list.

It took all of 5 seconds to destroy your lazy contention

Only you didn't destory it, you spent five seconds and decided that you did not agree with it without providing any basis for your opinion. Good for you.

[Blake]

Only you didn't destory it, you spent five seconds and decided that you did not agree with it without providing any basis for your opinion. Good for you.

the ingredients of a regular hamburger at Mcdonalds are bread, beef, ketchup and onions.

Which of those ingredients is unhealthy junk that deserves excess taxation, counselor?

[coyotes_geek]

That didn't stop you from posting your suggestion.

Why would it? I'm not the one who thinks you shouldn't toss out an idea without having every last detail worked out.


For me personally, I don't really care what the board appreciates.

Ok.

[Blake]

Why would it? I'm not the one who thinks you shouldn't toss out an idea without having every last detail worked out.

I'm not the one who thinks that either.

In fact, the more silly ideas you throw out and get defensive and butthurt about when questioned, the better, imo.

[Drachen]

Great take! Obesity is so much more of a quantity of food issue than it is a quality of food issue. We as a society just consume WAY more calories than needed for our level of activity, which progressively declines with each generation. Has anyone tried places like My Fit Foods, Nutrisystem, etc? You are eating a bunch of crap really but because you limit your portions and caloric intake per day, you lose weight doing it. And you don't give up the short-term gratifications of eating unhealthy food either.

I'm guessing most Americans are in the 2500-3000 a day calories consumed range when based on their caloric expenditure they should be in the 1800-2300 range...

BTW, it is actually better to eat 3-4 times a day than 1-2, but eat smaller portions. If you only eat 1-2 times a day but have really big meals, your metabolism is slower than if you eat more often but are spreading the calories out throughout the day. It's easier to accumulate undesirable body fat from only eating 1-2 X a day because your body will raid its own lean muscle mass for energy more often than if you spread your meals out.

This is true for me. It is rare that I eat processed food, or eat out. I eat a cooked dinner with veggies 6 times out of the week. I eat healthy cereal (special K or kashi go lean crunch) for breakfast. For lunch I usually eat sandwiches and fruit. I still fluctuate between 220 and 230. I have started (in mid march) to ride a bike at least once a week (school/work/family doesn't allow for much more), and can now ride about 15 miles at once doing about 12 mph on a mountain bike (but annoyingly still get out of breath going up more than one flight of stairs). All of this to say, my issue is portion size. I am not perfect and the above explained diet isn't followed 100% of the time, but more like 80-85% of the time, however no matter how good I eat, I like to eat. I like big portions, not only of meat and pasta, but also of broccoli and green beans. I think that once I can kill that, I will see a major change in weight.

When, though, will I be able to breath after taking more than 5 steps, THAT fucking sucks. I quit smoking over a year ago, and I have ridiculously mild asthma (so mild that I haven't owned an inhaler for about a decade and I never used it). I figured once I could ride 15 freaking miles that my cardio-vascular system would catch up a little.

Edit: I am not totally out of breath, but it is enough to notice, it fucking sucks and I am tired of it. I am 5'10'' and barrel chested, so it is not like I am some complete slug.

[coyotes_geek]

I'm not the one who thinks that either.

Good to hear.


In fact, the more silly ideas you throw out and get defensive and butthurt about when questioned, the better, imo.

I agree. Silly ideas and silly questions make this forum a better place.

[Blake]

I agree. Silly ideas and silly questions make this forum a better place.

Whatever makes it enjoyable for you.

Watching people get defensive and butthurt over their silly questions is more entertaining than the questions themselves, imo.

[coyotes_geek]

Precisely why I didn't feel your questions deserved a serious response. I didn't think you were interested in actually having a conversation about the topic. Looks like I was right.

[TeyshaBlue]

I dont wanna talk to you either, CG.:ihit

[coyotes_geek]

I dont wanna talk to you either, CG.:ihit

You're butthurt. GFY! :p:

[Blake]

Precisely why I didn't feel your questions deserved a serious response. I didn't think you were interested in actually having a conversation about the topic. Looks like I was right.

it's duly noted that you're not serious about a fast food tax, even though you've brought it up now on several different occasions.

I'll just go straight into making fun of your silly idea the next time you bring it up.

Keep making this forum a better place. :tu

[Frank Dux]

My routine rocks. It's easy and inexpensive. I'm 30 years old, 6'2 185 pounds and in the best shape I've been in since I was 19 years old.

Exercise:
Weight/Strength training with 20 minutes of light cardio three/four times per week.
Run four miles two times per week.
Walk around the block daily at work during lunch.

Diet:
Breakfast is oatmeal, piece of fruit and a protein shake. Lean meats and vegetables for lunch and dinner. Snack on almonds and fruit while at work.

Difference-makers:
I don't drink sodas/sweet tea/sugar-based drinks. I don't eat any fast food at all. I cut television out of my life. When you cut out tv, you'd be surprised how time you have to exercise, cook and rest properly.


After a year of doing this, my food bills are down, my dentist bills are down, my doctor is happy with me and the women are flocking like salmon of capistrano.

[leemajors]

This is true for me. It is rare that I eat processed food, or eat out. I eat a cooked dinner with veggies 6 times out of the week. I eat healthy cereal (special K or kashi go lean crunch) for breakfast. For lunch I usually eat sandwiches and fruit. I still fluctuate between 220 and 230. I have started (in mid march) to ride a bike at least once a week (school/work/family doesn't allow for much more), and can now ride about 15 miles at once doing about 12 mph on a mountain bike (but annoyingly still get out of breath going up more than one flight of stairs). All of this to say, my issue is portion size. I am not perfect and the above explained diet isn't followed 100% of the time, but more like 80-85% of the time, however no matter how good I eat, I like to eat. I like big portions, not only of meat and pasta, but also of broccoli and green beans. I think that once I can kill that, I will see a major change in weight.

When, though, will I be able to breath after taking more than 5 steps, THAT fucking sucks. I quit smoking over a year ago, and I have ridiculously mild asthma (so mild that I haven't owned an inhaler for about a decade and I never used it). I figured once I could ride 15 freaking miles that my cardio-vascular system would catch up a little.

Edit: I am not totally out of breath, but it is enough to notice, it fucking sucks and I am tired of it. I am 5'10'' and barrel chested, so it is not like I am some complete slug.

Stairs are an entirely different animal from riding a bike, sir. Sounds like you are doing pretty well. I rode 30 miles this morning, myself but I am divorced and share custody, work at home, and do not have school. Kudos on getting outside on the bike, it is definitely more effective than a machine in my experience. I generally ride 85-110 miles a week depending on the weather, but I am still around 225 myself. I do enjoy my beer, so I will eventually plateau in my weight loss, but that is fine with me for now. I have lost 40 pounds in the last 3 years, 10 of those since Christmas which is about when I upped my weekly mileage from around 65-70 to its current rate around then.

[coyotes_geek]

it's duly noted that you're not serious about a fast food tax, even though you've brought it up now on several different occasions.

I'll just go straight into making fun of your silly idea the next time you bring it up.

Keep making this forum a better place. :tu

Hmm. So me not taking your questions seriously means I can't be serious about a junk food tax? Well, I can't say that I think most people of average intelligence or better would have connected those dots in the manner you have, but far be it from me try and tell you what to think. :toast

[leemajors]

I bet fast food companies would either just lower their prices or introduce paid memberships offering a card that deducts the amount of tax on your total. Not a bad idea, but impossible to enforce effectively.

[coyotes_geek]

I bet fast food companies would either just lower their prices or introduce paid memberships offering a card that deducts the amount of tax on your total. Not a bad idea, but impossible to enforce effectively.

Not necessarily. I'd think they just pass those costs along the same way corner stores pass along tobacco taxes.

[Blake]

Hmm. So me not taking your questions seriously means I can't be serious about a junk food tax?

Any slappy can toss out silly ideas. You aren't really serious because you have no details worked out.


Well, I can't say that I think most people of average intelligence or better would have connected those dots in the manner you have, but far be it from me try and tell you what to think. :toast

When I go to the grocery store, I can purchase beef, buns, cheese, bacon and produce with no tax at all.

When Mcdonalds puts that same chunk of ground beef on a piece of bread, you want to call it junk food and slap an excessive tax on it.

I know you are an Aggie but I thought you yourself were at least of average intelligence.

[coyotes_geek]

Any slappy can toss out silly ideas. You aren't really serious because you have no details worked out.

Ok.


When I go to the grocery store, I can purchase beef, buns, cheese, bacon and produce with no tax at all.

Ok.


When Mcdonalds puts that same chunk of ground beef on a piece of bread, you want to call it junk food and slap an excessive tax on it.

Yes.


I know you are an Aggie but I thought you yourself were at least of average intelligence.

Ok.

[Blake]

Yes.

stupid, but ok.

[Blake]

You are right. All I can do is bitch and complain about the problem. I have no real solution.

Perhaps criminalizing obesity? Misdomenor or something to that effect. Texas does this if your child misses school. Perhaps we can pass a weight law that if your child reaches a certain unhealthy weight you get fined. You can draft exceptions that would exempt certain individuals with conditions.

They could also implement taxes on soda and other extremely unhealthy foods. (i.e. fast food tax). We do it with tabaco and alcohol.

This just popped up on Yahoo. Sheer coincidence.


A 9-year-old Ohio boy who once weighted more than 200 pounds and was removed from his mother's custody has been returned to her care.

The boy who had had slimmed down to 166 lbs., according to the Cleveland Plain Dealer, is now 173 lbs. The newspaper story reported the case drew national attention last fall when Cuyahoga County Children & Family Services removed the boy from his mother's care when caseworkers said she wasn't doing enough to control his weight, which was 218 pounds at the time.

....

"We are happy the county terminated protective services. We think the case was ill-advised," Hardiman told Reuters. "Our plan was to get him out of the system as soon as possible. This whole thing has been about his weight with no concern to his emotional state."

This was the first time an Ohio child was removed from a parent's custody mainly due to weight issues.

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/obese-ohio-boy-returned-mother-losing-weight-143407172.html

[boutons_deux]

150 excess calories per = +15 pounds fat/year.

Why It Matters That California Teens Eat Less Than Their Peers

So, can 158 fewer calories a day have any meaningful impact on the complex obesity problem?

The daily swing of a 158 calories may sound trivial, but over the course of the year this can really add up, explains Dave Grotto, RD, president and founder of Chicago nutritional counseling firm, Nutrition Housecall LLC. "That can mean 15 pounds a year - gained or lost- depending on which side of the calorie equation you are on."

Yep, it sounds shocking. But here's how the math works: 100 calories x 365 days = 36,500 calories. There are 3,500 calories are in a pound of fat. So that would be 10 pounds. 150 calories extra or less than what is needed to maintain weight will produce a 15 pound weight swing.

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thesalt/2012/05/10/152413050/why-it-matters-that-california-teens-eat-less-than-their-peers?sc=17&f=1003

[Winehole23]

1500 calories a day seems to be a good level for me. I've lost 35 lbs in eight months. Weigh slightly under 200 lbs now.To lose another 20 (college playing weight) I'd probably have to start playing soccer again, but I've been lookin forward to that.

Pickup basketball has also been threatening to happen to me of late...

[boutons_deux]

One in 5 Kids Is Obese, Yet Congress Is More Concerned With Protecting Profits Than Kids' Health

Childhood obesity affects one in five Americans under 18—15 million or more kids, with the highest rates in communities of color, according to public health scientists. Advocates, who add in overweight youths, call it an “unprecedented national health crisis” that affects one in three kids. Extended into adulthood, obesity accounts for one-fifth of the nation’s healthcare expenses. Indeed, as two lawmakers who pushed for the marketing changes last year wrote, “Children today are likely to be the first generation to have a shorter lifespan than their parents.”

The paper trail showed the lengths to which corporate America will go to protect profits using every available means—campaign donations, attacking science, asserting corporate constitutional rights, and threatening federal agencies with smear campaigns—and how nearly 200 lawmakers from both parties piled onto their tirade, ignoring a nationwide health epidemic affecting millions of children and teenagers, to say nothing of adults. The evidence—especially letters attacking the initiative signed by scores of lawmakers from both parties—shows how ingrained protecting profits, not standing up for the public interest, is in Congress and Washington’s corporate lobbying culture.

the Federal Trade Commission, which in early 2011 drafted voluntary marketing guidelines. Federal scientists found most of the foods marketed to kids and teenagers were sugary and fat-laden. The FTC put together nutrition and marketing suggestions coupled with a let-industry-police-itself approach.

The FTC’s voluntary effort was ravaged on Capitol Hill. The paper trail that traced its undoing over a six-month period is staggering, particularly how so many members of Congress unabashedly assisted corporate lobbyists. Democrats who view themselves as liberal on children’s issues, such as Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchar, wrote to the FTC to question, water-down, impugn or attack the voluntary marketing guidelines.

http://www.alternet.org/module/printversion/155394

iow, America is a nation of bigger and more numerous greasebags because UCA make $100Bs from inducing/stuffing them with crap, 24/7. High-calorie density shit is also high profit margin shit.

[boutons_deux]

http://newsjunkiepost.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/piggyeater1.jpg

[boutons_deux]

More UCA industrial/marketing bullshit that makes Americans fat

HFCS’s lower cost is one of the main reasons for its substitution for sucrose.

HFCS-42 (one of the blends of HFCS) cost an average of 13.6 cents per pound in 2005, while the price of wholesale refined beet sugar averaged 29.5 cents per pound. Also, because HFCS is a liquid, it is easier to blend into many foods than sugar. HFCS is commonly used to sweeten soft drinks, sport drinks, and numerous processed foods, such as ketchup, crackers, bread, soups, cereals, and spaghetti sauce.

Over the past 35 years, the total amount of added sugars and caloric sweeteners available in the U.S. food supply grew 19 percent, from 119 pounds per person in 1970 to 142 pounds per person in 2005, according to ERS’s per capita food availability data.

Since peaking in 1999, however, HFCS availability has dropped to 59 pounds per person in 2005, as no-calorie bottled water and diet soft drinks have grown in popularity at the expense of regular carbonated soft drinks.

http://www.ers.usda.gov/AmberWaves/February08/Findings/Charts/Findings2_fig01.gif

[boutons_deux]

High Fructose Corn Syrup Linked to Liver Scarring

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/03/100322204628.htm

fructose is metabolized in the liver, sucrose isn't.

Co-incident with the huge increase in cheap HFCS in damn near everything since the 1970s, there has been a huge increase NAFLD, non-alcoholic fatty liver disease. iow, it's highly likely the UCA's injecting HFCS is pathogenic.

[boutons_deux]

The Terrifying Truth About America's Obesity Epidemic

"If we reduced our caloric intake by a hundred calories, it would cost the industry about $36-$40 billion every year. It's sort of like the energy industry isn't really excited about programs to become more energy efficient, because they don't earn anything when we're buying fewer gallons. The same problem besets the food industry and really is one of the biggest stumbling blocks to dealing with obesity."

http://www.alternet.org/module/printversion/155398

yep, BigFood requires and facilitates overweight and obesity to sustain/increase its profits.

And the sick-care industry LOVES people who self-inflict themselves with pathogenc S.A.D.

[boutons_deux]

How Western Diets Are Making The World Sick

"Typical Afghan civilians and soldiers would have been 140 pounds or so as adults. And when we operated on them, what we were aware of was the absence of any fat or any adipose tissue underneath the skin," Patterson says. "Of course, when we operated on Canadians or Americans or Europeans, what was normal was to have most of the organs encased in fat. It had a visceral potency to it when you could see it directly there."

http://www.npr.org/2011/03/24/132745785/how-western-diets-are-making-the-world-sick

[RandomGuy]

Real food being affordable isn't the problem. The unwillingness of Americans to sacrifice couch/TV time to exercise and cook for themselves is.

That is way too simplistic.


What about food deserts?



There's a battle for better health going on in poor neighborhoods across the country, and part of that battle involves getting people living in so-called food deserts access to healthy food.

But as many activists have learned, it takes a combination of access, innovation, and education to change peoples' habits for the better.

Duane Perry stepped into the struggle by accident twenty years ago. He founded an organization called The Food Trust that set up farmers markets in low-income neighborhoods of Philadelphia. At the time, he wasn't thinking about what makes people healthy or sick. The lack of grocery stores in these neighborhoods just seemed like an issue of basic fairness.


"We'd go out and hear stories from little kids who'd say, 'My grandmother has to go out to the suburbs; she has to borrow a car from a friend to go once a month to get fresh fruits and vegetable; why is that?'" says Perry...

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thesalt/2012/05/09/151707985/what-will-make-the-food-desert-bloom



ThiLuck_The_Fakers_nk fast: How clLuck_The_Fakers_oseLuck_The_Fakers_ do you live to your local grocery store? Most of us don't know. As long as it's close to home, it's not a problem. But when you don't have a local grocery store, or you have one but it's too far away to get to without transportation, figuring out how you'll buy your groceries becomes a big problem.

For the past decade, Americans have driven an average of 6 miles (9 kilometers) between home and their closest grocery store. For rural Americans, especially those in the South, the trip can be much longer -- for example, in the food landscape of the Lower Mississippi Delta, you'll likely find one supermarket serving a 190.5-square-mile (493-square-kilometer) area. There, residents could expect to drive 30 miles (48 kilometers) or more from home to store [source: Hinrichs]. This phenomenon is called a food desert.

...


http://science.howstuffworks.com/environmental/green-science/food-desert.htm

[RandomGuy]

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO (am I being too subtle?)


Yes, let the FDA keep ensuring that food is safe. It is NOT the govt's job to tell me my kids can't have a fucking cheeseburger.

Whose job is it?

If you don't teach your kids good habits that affects me and my kids.

You do understand that the costs of this problem are collectively paid in everything you buy and sell, right?

Collective problems generally require a pooling of resources. That is how civilization works.

[coyotes_geek]

That is way too simplistic.


What about food deserts?



Food deserts would be taxed as junk food. :)

Ok, serious response.

What about food deserts? Yes, rural Americans have to travel further to get to grocery stores. That's pretty much the definition of what rural is.

As for grocery stores not being common in poor neighborhoods, that's a problem of convienence, not expense. Undoubtedly it's a huge pain in the ass to borrow a car or take the bus to get to the grocery store. That doesn't make it cheaper to eat every meal at whatever fast food joint is within walking distance.

[boutons_deux]

Beautiful aspects of conservative's Rugged Individualism is that

All Men Are Islands,

All Men must have complete freedom, but no responsibility for themselves or anything else (Christ is gonna fix everything come End Time anway, so why worry?),

the Common Good is Communist Good.

Their motto is United We Stand (is socialism, so let's divide and conquer), Divided We Fall (only others fall, not me nor mine).

[Blake]

Food deserts would be taxed as junk food. :)

Ok, serious response.

What about food deserts? Yes, rural Americans have to travel further to get to grocery stores. That's pretty much the definition of what rural is.

As for grocery stores not being common in poor neighborhoods, that's a problem of convienence, not expense. Undoubtedly it's a huge pain in the ass to borrow a car or take the bus to get to the grocery store. That doesn't make it cheaper to eat every meal at whatever fast food joint is within walking distance.

You want to slap a tax on ”real food” that's prepared by Mcdonalds, just because it's Mcdonalds.

[coyotes_geek]

You want to slap a tax on ”real food” that's prepared by Mcdonalds, just because it's Mcdonalds.

Ok.

[RandomGuy]

Food deserts would be taxed as junk food. :)

Ok, serious response.

What about food deserts? Yes, rural Americans have to travel further to get to grocery stores. That's pretty much the definition of what rural is.

As for grocery stores not being common in poor neighborhoods, that's a problem of convienence, not expense. Undoubtedly it's a huge pain in the ass to borrow a car or take the bus to get to the grocery store. That doesn't make it cheaper to eat every meal at whatever fast food joint is within walking distance.

IF you had read either article, it is not restricted to rural neighborhoods.

"Too far" is quite a local measure.

"Pain in the ass" to take a bus is also a gross simplification of a very real limitation.

It is not possible to shop for 4 kids on a regular basis by taking a bus, unless you don't work at all.

The time required becomes prohibitively expensive when you can't take time from work.

[Blake]

Ok.

So you're ok with your opinion.

that's pretty neat.

Keep making the forum a better place with your silly ideas and posts. :tu

[rjv]

if people want to get obese or morbidly fat that is their option. the real concern here is the burden this places on the health care industry. however, one can put to task more than the junk food industry as culprits for epidemics.

[rjv]

IF you had read either article, it is not restricted to rural neighborhoods.

"Too far" is quite a local measure.

"Pain in the ass" to take a bus is also a gross simplification of a very real limitation.

It is not possible to shop for 4 kids on a regular basis by taking a bus, unless you don't work at all.

The time required becomes prohibitively expensive when you can't take time from work.

i do often think one has to live in someone else's shoes to get perspective.

[coyotes_geek]

IF you had read either article, it is not restricted to rural neighborhoods.

Where are you getting the idea that I thought it was restricted to rural neighborhoods? My response specifically mentioned poor neighborhoods. I probably could have thrown in "urban", but that didn't dawn on me at the time. Regardless, I acknowledge and agree with you that it's not strictly a rural concern.


"Too far" is quite a local measure.

Agreed. It's all relative.


"Pain in the ass" to take a bus is also a gross simplification of a very real limitation.

I get it. It's inconvienent. It's also pretty simple concept that doesn't require much in the way of elaboration.


It is not possible to shop for 4 kids on a regular basis by taking a bus, unless you don't work at all.

The time required becomes prohibitively expensive when you can't take time from work.

Again, the inconvience is acknowledged. Convienence and expense are two different things though. Just because something is inconvienent doesn't mean it's more expensive.

[coyotes_geek]

So you're ok with your opinion.

that's pretty neat.

Keep making the forum a better place with your silly ideas and posts. :tu

Thanks.

Great talk. :tu

[boutons_deux]

"concern here is the burden this places on the health care industry"

no, the real concern is

how much more the health care industry charges for insurance

and

how much more taxes have to be paid to public health facilities

to pay for the $200B+/year for obesity diseases treatment.

Same with the 400K lung cancer (smoking) deaths/year. Probably $100K+ spent for each self-inflicted lung cancer death.

[coyotes_geek]

if people want to get obese or morbidly fat that is their option. the real concern here is the burden this places on the health care industry. however, one can put to task more than the junk food industry as culprits for epidemics.

No doubt. It's not the junk food industry's fault that people don't want to exercise. The problem clearly goes beyond them. The junk food industry just makes a logical target when looking for potential ways the government can do something to help protect taxpayers from the costs associated with the obesity epidemic.

[Blake]

Thanks.

Great talk. :tu

Lousy talk, tbh. Your replies to my simple, honest questions were silly and stupid.

What's even sillier is that you think silliness makes the forum a better place.

[Blake]

No doubt. It's not the junk food industry's fault that people don't want to exercise. The problem clearly goes beyond them. The junk food industry just makes a logical target when looking for potential ways the government can do something to help protect taxpayers from the costs associated with the obesity epidemic.

Not a logical target. Just an easy target.

You're too lazy to use logic on this subject.

[TeyshaBlue]

I'm putting both of you on the opposite sides of this thread.

And stop looking at each other!:ihit

[coyotes_geek]

Lousy talk, tbh. Your replies to my simple, honest questions were silly and stupid.

What's even sillier is that you think silliness makes the forum a better place.

Ok.


Not a logical target. Just an easy target.

You're too lazy to use logic on this subject.

Ok.

[coyotes_geek]

I'm putting both of you on the opposite sides of this thread.

And stop looking at each other!:ihit

Ok. :p:

[Blake]

Ok.

Ok.


Lousy talk, tbh.

[rjv]

No doubt. It's not the junk food industry's fault that people don't want to exercise. The problem clearly goes beyond them. The junk food industry just makes a logical target when looking for potential ways the government can do something to help protect taxpayers from the costs associated with the obesity epidemic.

but it would smack of monumental hypocrisy. the government attacking certain industries that place huge burdens on taxpayers while grossly overprotecting others (all while under the guise of being concerned for public health).

[coyotes_geek]

but it would smack of monumental hypocrisy. the government attacking certain industries that place huge burdens on taxpayers while grossly overprotecting others (all while under the guise of being concerned for public health).

Hasn't seemed to stop us when it comes to taxing cigarettes and booze. Would taxing junk food really be any different?

[Blake]

Hasn't seemed to stop us when it comes to taxing cigarettes and booze. Would taxing junk food really be any different?

You want to charge tax on beef sold at Mcdonalds when there is no tax on it at HEB.

Not logically ok.

[rjv]

Hasn't seemed to stop us when it comes to taxing cigarettes and booze.

because there is a huge profit to be made from taxation of these products. but if you are implying, or even arguing, that it would be fair to continue to tax products that are addictive to the point that it would not impact the industries that sell them (because people will continue to buy) then i understand. that view is certainly not a moral position by any means. rather, it appears to be a justification for taxation on the pretense that it is meant to protect other taxpayers. personally, if i'd rather see such efforts aimed against corporate oligarchies than the middle and lower class demographic. if, on the other hand, your position is that given the choice between more expensive junk food or healthier albeit expensive groceries, people will suddenly change their lifestyles, i do not feel inclined to think this would happen. it would make more sense to create stronger nutrition and fitness initiatives in certain populations to create that kind of shift.

[RandomGuy]

Convienence and expense are two different things though. Just because something is inconvienent doesn't mean it's more expensive.

The point I am trying to make is that there is a point where it isn't a question of merely being inconvenient, but practically impossible.

Working 40-80 hours a week, with no paid time off, and caring for kids, does not allow for a lot of time to spend on buses to shop for food several times a week.

If you go by bus, you are limited to what you can physically carry. That means you can't do all your monthly shopping in one go. No car trunk to carry things in.

If you have two or three other human beings to shop for, that means constant trips to the store, even if the store is close by.

The only way this is sustainable, is if you give up exchanging work hours for food shopping hours, adding to your costs.

time = money at some level

That is the point.

[RandomGuy]

The other thing that has been found, is that whatever grocery stores are in areas like poor neighborhoods, is that they charge more for the same goods that might be gotten in the burbs.

We suck at planning out cities and urban areas to have access to decent food, and it goes beyond merely being "inconvenient".

It isn't like people are choosing to eat crap because it is a bit out of their way to get better food.

Sometimes, you have little or no choice in the matter.

[RandomGuy]

Hasn't seemed to stop us when it comes to taxing cigarettes and booze. Would taxing junk food really be any different?

As long as one had alternatives to junk food available, no.

I would be all for taxes on junk food, as long as we made sure that we are supplying these food deserts with increased alternatives to junk food.

[elbamba]

The point I am trying to make is that there is a point where it isn't a question of merely being inconvenient, but practically impossible.

Working 40-80 hours a week, with no paid time off, and caring for kids, does not allow for a lot of time to spend on buses to shop for food several times a week.

If you go by bus, you are limited to what you can physically carry. That means you can't do all your monthly shopping in one go. No car trunk to carry things in.

If you have two or three other human beings to shop for, that means constant trips to the store, even if the store is close by.

The only way this is sustainable, is if you give up exchanging work hours for food shopping hours, adding to your costs.

time = money at some level

That is the point.

I get your point but realistically,most people are lazy and want to do what ever is quick and easy. I see plenty of fat people walking around HEB skipping the produce section and loading up at the bakery section. While some people do work 40-80 hour weeks and have a legitimate excuse for not going to a store that sells healthy food, many people do not have an excuse. The problem is a nation wide problem and tends to skip classes.

[RandomGuy]

because there is a huge profit to be made from taxation of these products. but if you are implying, or even arguing, that it would be fair to continue to tax products that are addictive to the point that it would not impact the industries that sell them (because people will continue to buy) then i understand. that view is certainly not a moral position by any means. rather, it appears to be a justification for taxation on the pretense that it is meant to protect other taxpayers. personally, if i'd rather see such efforts aimed against corporate oligarchies than the middle and lower class demographic. if, on the other hand, your position is that given the choice between more expensive junk food or healthier albeit expensive groceries, people will suddenly change their lifestyles, i do not feel inclined to think this would happen. it would make more sense to create stronger nutrition and fitness initiatives in certain populations to create that kind of shift.

Basic economics would dictate the switch. Some would still want junk food and pay more, but if you make healthier food cheaper than junk food, that will tend to factor into decision making for large populations.

It would seem we have to do a number of things to solve a complex problem.

This is a complex problem, and looking at just one part and solving that won't work well.

[elbamba]

The other thing that has been found, is that whatever grocery stores are in areas like poor neighborhoods, is that they charge more for the same goods that might be gotten in the burbs.

We suck at planning out cities and urban areas to have access to decent food, and it goes beyond merely being "inconvenient".

It isn't like people are choosing to eat crap because it is a bit out of their way to get better food.

Sometimes, you have little or no choice in the matter.

When I lived in KCMO, I lived in a dirt poor area. The closest grocery store was about 1 mile away, the prices where no different than in nicer areas. They had produce and healthy food. Most of my neighbors routinely choose the Go Chicken Go that was across the street.

There were also probably 6 grocery stores within a 5 mile radius to my house alone.

I can't speak for every major city, but I have visited and lived in plenty of cities where this is not a problem.

[rjv]

Basic economics would dictate the switch. Some would still want junk food and pay more, but if you make healthier food cheaper than junk food, that will tend to factor into decision making for large populations.

It would seem we have to do a number of things to solve a complex problem.

This is a complex problem, and looking at just one part and solving that won't work well.

that appears to be the variable that would not suddenly become available

[vy65]

Where are these 40-80 hour work week peeps living that they are 1) working up to 80 hours a week and 2) can't easily access a supermarket? Something's not making sense here.

And also, lol blake.

[vy65]

in b4 "you're obsessed with me"

[rjv]

When I lived in KCMO, I lived in a dirt poor area. The closest grocery store was about 1 mile away, the prices where no different than in nicer areas. They had produce and healthy food. Most of my neighbors routinely choose the Go Chicken Go that was across the street.

There were also probably 6 grocery stores within a 5 mile radius to my house alone.

I can't speak for every major city, but I have visited and lived in plenty of cities where this is not a problem.

grocery stores typically do not stock products in higher volumes in stores located in neighborhoods not typically seeking out those products. flax seed can be found in any north side HEB in san antonio but not so much in any west side store. conversely, tripe can be readily found in the west side while probably not the most commonly sought out product in a central market.

[RandomGuy]

I get your point but realistically,most people are lazy and want to do what ever is quick and easy. I see plenty of fat people walking around HEB skipping the produce section and loading up at the bakery section. While some people do work 40-80 hour weeks and have a legitimate excuse for not going to a store that sells healthy food, many people do not have an excuse. The problem is a nation wide problem and tends to skip classes.

That I can agree with.

Many don't have an excuse, but there are millions that do.

I think we have kind of sloched towards this problem, most definitely.

I would encourage anybody who wants an eye-opener, to watch Jamie Oliver's Food Revolution.

[RandomGuy]

http://www.jamieoliver.com/foundation/

5xBkAqzI2bI

It is a good place to start.

Watch it a bit, and you come away a lot less judgmental about the people stuck with bad choices versus really bad choices.

It is possible to change, it just takes a kick and some education.

[boutons_deux]

"if you make healthier food cheaper than junk food"

healthiest food is fresh, raw, unprocessed (fruit, nuts, seeds, veg) harvested at full ripeness and consumed a day or two later so it can be consumed before losing much of it vitality. This is the argument for local production, which also reduces transportation costs and pollution.

junk food or any dead, packaged food is engineered for shipping and long shelf life, ie, to maximize the profits for the production/distribution people, not to maximize nutritional value for consumers. BigFood's "fresh" fruit and veg engineered to grow fast, be picked before full ripeness, and grown in soil depleted of nutrients and saturated with x-icides.

The above is why food "thinkers" have decided the industrial food system dominated by corporations is badly broken, and beyond repair.

[Blake]

And also, lol blake.


in b4 "you're obsessed with me"

Beat me in calling you obsessed. Well done. :tu

[RandomGuy]

Where are these 40-80 hour work week peeps living that they are 1) working up to 80 hours a week and 2) can't easily access a supermarket? Something's not making sense here.

And also, lol blake.

Google and the words "working poor" are that way ---->

:toast

(edit)

Here is a good book on the subject:

http://www.amazon.com/Nickel-Dimed-Not-Getting-America/dp/0805063897

[rjv]

by the way, i go to the pearl market 2 times a month. always have to be prepared to drop close to 100.00 for about a week's worth of meat, produce and bread.

[RandomGuy]

that appears to be the variable that would not suddenly become available

... and that is why you make sure that such food *is* available, before taking such a step.

One can't just tax junk food, one has to do a LOT of things at once, and that is just a minor part of it.

[vy65]

Google and the words "working poor" are that way ---->

:toast

Did a quick search and couldn't find anything that suggested the working poor are so removed from grocery stores as to make shopping there an unreasonable burden. Maybe you can help out?

[vy65]

Beat me in calling you obsessed. Well done. :tu

lol no reply
lol getting shit on in this thread per/par
lol probably likes it
lol obsessed
lol cuck

[Wild Cobra]

The other thing that has been found, is that whatever grocery stores are in areas like poor neighborhoods, is that they charge more for the same goods that might be gotten in the burbs.

We suck at planning out cities and urban areas to have access to decent food, and it goes beyond merely being "inconvenient".

It isn't like people are choosing to eat crap because it is a bit out of their way to get better food.

Sometimes, you have little or no choice in the matter.

Maybe you should look into the reasons why the prices are higher.

Do you think the stores pay higher insurance rates and maybe have more theft problems? I'll bet the these higher prices do have a correlation to local crime rate.

I'm sure some of the pricing is because they do have a captive set of costumers, but not all is. they still have some nearby competition.

[Wild Cobra]

Where are these 40-80 hour work week peeps living that they are 1) working up to 80 hours a week and 2) can't easily access a supermarket? Something's not making sense here.

And also, lol blake.
Maybe it's another strawman.

[RandomGuy]

Did a quick search and couldn't find anything that suggested the working poor are so removed from grocery stores as to make shopping there an unreasonable burden. Maybe you can help out?

http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showpost.php?p=5882575&postcount=139

Couple good links there for starters.

There are some fair studies on the phenomenon.

[elbamba]

Where are these 40-80 hour work week peeps living that they are 1) working up to 80 hours a week and 2) can't easily access a supermarket? Something's not making sense here.

And also, lol blake.

I put in on average 60 hours M-F. I do have access to supermarkets.

I usually go to the store on the way home from work every 10 days or so and stock up on carrots and dried fruit for work snacks.

[RandomGuy]

Maybe you should look into the reasons why the prices are higher

Done.

Maybe you should do the same.

[elbamba]

grocery stores typically do not stock products in higher volumes in stores located in neighborhoods not typically seeking out those products. flax seed can be found in any north side HEB in san antonio but not so much in any west side store. conversely, tripe can be readily found in the west side while probably not the most commonly sought out product in a central market.

I agree. But I don't think a lack of flax seed constitutes unhealthy food. Any of those store sell Bananas and carrots which are just as cheap as typical snack food.

[RandomGuy]

I put in on average 60 hours M-F. I do have access to supermarkets.

I usually go to the store on the way home from work every 10 days or so and stock up on carrots and dried fruit for work snacks.

Children? Number of people in household?

(edit)

More curious than anything else, don't take it as hostile in any way. Always good to get first hand information.

[coyotes_geek]

because there is a huge profit to be made from taxation of these products. but if you are implying, or even arguing, that it would be fair to continue to tax products that are addictive to the point that it would not impact the industries that sell them (because people will continue to buy) then i understand. that view is certainly not a moral position by any means. rather, it appears to be a justification for taxation on the pretense that it is meant to protect other taxpayers. personally, if i'd rather see such efforts aimed against corporate oligarchies than the middle and lower class demographic. if, on the other hand, your position is that given the choice between more expensive junk food or healthier albeit expensive groceries, people will suddenly change their lifestyles, i do not feel inclined to think this would happen. it would make more sense to create stronger nutrition and fitness initiatives in certain populations to create that kind of shift.

While I do think that taxing junk food wouldn't put anyone out of business, that's not really what I'm implying/arguing. I'm also not trying to take any kind of a moral position here. I'm taking a premise that it's the government's responsibility to lower healthcare costs and looking for something the government could do that is a step in the right direction.

Given that obesity is a large part (pardon the pun) of the reason why costs are escalating, I think the concept of targeting a behavior that contributes to people becoming obese makes a lot of sense. Generate revenue, give it back to the people via HSA accounts for them to use on their personal medical expenses. Would the mere presence of a junk food tax force people to change their lifestyles? For most people, no. You still end up with a pot of money that can be used to help people lower their medical costs. You could even use some of the money to help fund whatever additional nutrition and fitness initiatives.

[rjv]

http://www.ajpmonline.org/article/S0749-3797(08)00838-6/abstract

[RandomGuy]

http://www.ajpmonline.org/article/S0749-3797(08)00838-6/abstract

For those adverse to clicking links:


Background
Poor dietary patterns and obesity, established risk factors for chronic disease, have been linked to neighborhood deprivation, neighborhood minority composition, and low area population density. Neighborhood differences in access to food may have an important influence on these relationships and health disparities in the U.S. This article reviews research relating to the presence, nature, and implications of neighborhood differences in access to food.

Methods
A snowball strategy was used to identify relevant research studies (n=54) completed in the U.S. and published between 1985 and April 2008.

Results
Research suggests that neighborhood residents who have better access to supermarkets and limited access to convenience stores tend to have healthier diets and lower levels of obesity. Results from studies examining the accessibility of restaurants are less consistent, but there is some evidence to suggest that residents with limited access to fast-food restaurants have healthier diets and lower levels of obesity. National and local studies across the U.S. suggest that residents of low-income, minority, and rural neighborhoods are most often affected by poor access to supermarkets and healthful food. In contrast, the availability of fast-food restaurants and energy-dense foods has been found to be greater in lower-income and minority neighborhoods.

Conclusions
Neighborhood disparities in access to food are of great concern because of their potential to influence dietary intake and obesity. Additional research is needed to address various limitations of current studies, identify effective policy actions, and evaluate intervention strategies designed to promote more equitable access to healthy foods.


Thank you.

[elbamba]

Children? Number of people in household?

3 and a wife total of 5. Wife is now stay-at-home mom. My response was to VR not you. I realize that I am very fortunate. I do my own shopping because I like to see what I am eating before I buy and I have always done my own shopping. While my wife cooks dinner I am responsible for my own breakfast and lunches.

However, I was poor for the better part of ten years when I married in college and then went to grad school. That was when I lived in KCMO and my wife worked while I worked and went to school.

[vy65]

http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showpost.php?p=5882575&postcount=139

Couple good links there for starters.

There are some fair studies on the phenomenon.

Meh. I overlooked those links, sure. But the food desert article doesn't do the work I think you think it does.

[boutons_deux]

Industrial, brutalized meat at its finest:

Texas Farm Bureau backs Domino’s pig-crate decision

While some food chains, including McDonald’s, Safeway and Burger King, are phasing out controversial “gestation crates” for pigs that provide their meat, Domino’s Pizza rejected the idea, and is getting kudos from, of all people, the Texas Farm Bureau

http://blog.mysanantonio.com/hottopics/2012/05/texas-farm-bureau-backs-domino%E2%80%99s-pig-crate-decision/

[rjv]

While I do think that taxing junk food wouldn't put anyone out of business, that's not really what I'm implying/arguing. I'm also not trying to take any kind of a moral position here. I'm taking a premise that it's the government's responsibility to lower healthcare costs and looking for something the government could do that is a step in the right direction.

Given that obesity is a large part (pardon the pun) of the reason why costs are escalating, I think the concept of targeting a behavior that contributes to people becoming obese makes a lot of sense. Generate revenue, give it back to the people via HSA accounts for them to use on their personal medical expenses. Would the mere presence of a junk food tax force people to change their lifestyles? For most people, no. You still end up with a pot of money that can be used to help people lower their medical costs. You could even use some of the money to help fund whatever additional nutrition and fitness initiatives.

i'd like to know more about how we could create these HSA accounts and who would qualify for them.

[RandomGuy]

Meh. I overlooked those links, sure. But the food desert article doesn't do the work I think you think it does.

Hmm, ok. I think they work well as starter articles on the topic, though.

If you can find something better or more comprehensive, let me know, I would be interested in reading it.

[coyotes_geek]

The point I am trying to make is that there is a point where it isn't a question of merely being inconvenient, but practically impossible.

Working 40-80 hours a week, with no paid time off, and caring for kids, does not allow for a lot of time to spend on buses to shop for food several times a week.

If you go by bus, you are limited to what you can physically carry. That means you can't do all your monthly shopping in one go. No car trunk to carry things in.

If you have two or three other human beings to shop for, that means constant trips to the store, even if the store is close by.

The only way this is sustainable, is if you give up exchanging work hours for food shopping hours, adding to your costs.

time = money at some level

That is the point.

I really just have a hard time believing that there are families out there who have no other alternative than to eat every meal at a fast food joint.

[RandomGuy]

i'd like to know more about how we could create these HSA accounts and who would qualify for them.

HSA's (the "A" stands for account, fwiw)

are existing tax-deferred accounts.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_savings_account

You set aside pre-tax income to health expenses, to pay for things like co-pays and other out of pocket costs.

[RandomGuy]

I really just have a hard time believing that there are families out there who have no other alternative than to eat every meal at a fast food joint.

Not saying there are those, just that there tend to be some real barriers to healthy eating. A local market with no fruits/veggies on the shelves, for example.

Ramen, cookies, and sugary cereal can be just as bad in large quantities as any cheeseburger.

[vy65]

Meh. I overlooked those links, sure. But the food desert article doesn't do the work I think you think it does.


I really just have a hard time believing that there are families out there who have no other alternative than to eat every meal at a fast food joint.

That's really my point.

I definitely think the access issue is a problem. Just not as big as you're making it seem to me. I think that where there's a will - there's a way. If you want to be and eat healthy, even if you're poor, you'll be inconvenienced and get healthy food. While I don't live in one of these areas, I don't see people being sentenced to whoppers either ...

[rjv]

I really just have a hard time believing that there are families out there who have no other alternative than to eat every meal at a fast food joint.

not every meal-the majority of meals. and one does not have to eat at a fast food joint to be getting junk. grocery stores sell plenty of junk. cheap and terrible for you but fills a stomach.

truthfully, most fast food patrons are probably in the middle-class.

[RandomGuy]

That's really my point.

I definitely think the access issue is a problem. Just not as big as you're making it seem to me. I think that where there's a will - there's a way. If you want to be and eat healthy, even if you're poor, you'll be inconvenienced and get healthy food. While I don't live in one of these areas, I don't see people being sentenced to whoppers either ...

I would agree for the most part.

I am not trying to make it out that choice doesn't enter into it. It does.

Bad habits most definitely play a part, and barriers to access don't help.

Sort of self-reinforcing cycle, IMO.

Education, and access to work on both ends of the problem.

[rjv]

HSA's (the "A" stands for account, fwiw)

are existing tax-deferred accounts.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_savings_account

You set aside pre-tax income to health expenses, to pay for things like co-pays and other out of pocket costs.

i am familiar with an HSA but what i should have been more clear about was how taxes generated from a fast food tax would be allocated to HSAs

[Blake]

lol no reply
lol getting shit on in this thread per/par
lol probably likes it
lol obsessed
lol cuck

Rofl more obsessing per par

[Wild Cobra]

Done.

Maybe you should do the same.
Were your findings unreasonable?

Tell you what. You open a neighborhood store, and charge the lower prices. See if you can make a go at it.

[RandomGuy]

Were your findings unreasonable?

Tell you what. You open a neighborhood store, and charge the lower prices. See if you can make a go at it.

My findings were that that prices were not entirely unreasonable, that is correct.

That is, however, the problem.

The business environment in some places needs to be altered.

We need to monkey with the market and pick winners and losers.

[Wild Cobra]

My findings were that that prices were not entirely unreasonable, that is correct.

That is, however, the problem.

The business environment in some places needs to be altered.

We need to monkey with the market and pick winners and losers.

Sorry, I disagree.

The root problems need to be addressed. Band-aids ate temporary.

[coyotes_geek]

i'd like to know more about how we could create these HSA accounts and who would qualify for them.

Something similar to how Lone Star cards are used should work. Basically just give every household/individual a card that functions like any credit/debit card does. Use the tax revenues to fund the accounts tied to the cards. An individual gets $X put on his card, a household of 4 gets $4X put on their card. People could then use those cards to pay for prescription or OTC drugs, Dr. office copays, or whatever other expenses are allowed per the tax laws covering HSA accounts. You could even let people submit claims on those accounts to get reimbursed for their insurance premiums.

Anyone with a social security number qualifies.

[boutons_deux]

self-employed people can open an HSA, which covers more expenses and can be rolled over for later years vs employees' FSA, Flex Savings Accounts, which are quite restricted in types of payments and can't be rolled over year to year.

A person funds his HSA with pre-tax income, just like FSA.

FSA max account in $2500, while HSA max is $5000, IIRC.

[elbamba]

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/utah-school-fined-15000-for-accidentally-selling-soda-during-lunch/

A Utah high school is learning the hard way that the government is serious about nudging students away from food it doesn’t want them to consume. Davis High School in the Salt Lake City area is having to fork over a whopping $15,000 in fines to the Feds because it accidentally sold soda through a vending machine during lunch.

Federal law requires the school to turn off its soda machines during the lunch period, which is 47 minutes a day. And Davis High school did turn off the machines in the lunch room. However, the school didn‘t realize that there was another machine in the school bookstore that wasn’t being turned off. And when the food police realized it, the school was hit with a $0.75 fine per student for the duration of the offense.

Now the school is going to have to cut money to fine arts programs to make up the cost.

KTVX-TV has the report:


But here’s where things really get nutty, so to speak. Davis High School Principal Dee Burton said that the law is disingenuous. For example, while students can’t buy soda, they can buy sugar-loaded sports drinks and even Snickers bars because they contain, you guessed it, nuts. In addition, students can buy soda earlier in the day before the machines get turned off and drink it during lunch.

And simple economics is at play, too. The ban isn’t forcing students to stop drinking or eating the sugar-laced food and drink. It’s just driving them to places where they can get it.

“The misconception is if we don’t let kids buy candy and pop, we drive them to the cafeteria, it doesn’t drive them to the cafeteria it drives them off campus,” Burton told KUTV.

One commenter on the KUTV website picked up on that.

“The principal is right, the kids will leave campus. What are you going to do? Close Walmart and Quick Trip for 47 minutes every day?” the commenter wrote.

Don’t give them any ideas.

As a disclaimer I do not generally read the Blaze. but I thought this was right on point to the problem of turning to the government for regulation.

[baseline bum]

The kids will leave campus? :lol Is that standard for high schools to let all their students leave school for lunch?

[coyotes_geek]

As a disclaimer I do not generally read the Blaze. but I thought this was right on point to the problem of turning to the government for regulation.

It's certainly a pretty half-assed attempt.


The kids will leave campus? :lol Is that standard for high schools to let all their students leave school for lunch?

Been a while, but back when I was in HS seniors got to go off campus for lunch. Naturally, we all ended up at nearby fast food joints.

[Drachen]

CG, they had stopped that even before I started HS in 1993. Not to say that we didn't, but it was an adventure to slip past the Vice Principals and jump into a car and drive off while dodging the cops. because of this trouble, we didn't do it very often

[coyotes_geek]

CG, they had stopped that even before I started HS in 1993. Not to say that we didn't, but it was an adventure to slip past the Vice Principals and jump into a car and drive off while dodging the cops. because of this trouble, we didn't do it very often

Looks like I might have been in one of the last groups to get that perk. I can vouch that NISD was letting seniors off campus in '89.

[Blake]

As a disclaimer I do not generally read the Blaze. but I thought this was right on point to the problem of turning to the government for regulation.

That's a great example of stupid regulation

[clambake]

Looks like I might have been in one of the last groups to get that perk. I can vouch that NISD was letting seniors off campus in '89.

they allow it here for juniors and seniors. but, gotta keep your grades up.

[TeyshaBlue]

CG, they had stopped that even before I started HS in 1993. Not to say that we didn't, but it was an adventure to slip past the Vice Principals and jump into a car and drive off while dodging the cops. because of this trouble, we didn't do it very often


Looks like I might have been in one of the last groups to get that perk. I can vouch that NISD was letting seniors off campus in '89.


Sigh. *Grabs walker* :depressed

[coyotes_geek]

Sigh. *Grabs walker* :depressed

Cheer up! We still have to pay full price at Luby's. :)

Yes, my parents still make me go to Luby's. :depressed

[TeyshaBlue]

Cheer up! We still have to pay full price at Luby's. :)

Yes, my parents still make me go to Luby's. :depressed

:lol:lol

[Blake]

Cheer up! We still have to pay full price at Luby's. :)

Yes, my parents still make me go to Luby's. :depressed

I can't fathom how expensive Lubys would end up being if a junk food tax gets approved.

[coyotes_geek]

I can't fathom how expensive Lubys would end up being if a junk food tax gets approved.

Not surprising.

[Blake]

Not surprising.

Ok.

[Drachen]

Sigh. *Grabs walker* :depressed

LOL, and to make matters worse, I mis-remembered 94-95 was freshman year.

[Drachen]

heard this on NPR this morning and thought that I should post it here since it posits that healthy eating is indeed less expensive. Interesting.


An Agriculture Department study released Wednesday found that most fruits, vegetables and other healthy foods cost less than foods high in fat, sugar and salt.

That counters a common perception among some consumers that it's cheaper to eat junk food than a nutritionally balanced meal.

The government says it all depends on how you measure the price. If you compare the price per calorie — as some previous researchers have done — then higher-calorie pastries and processed snacks might seem like a bargain compared with fruits and vegetables.

But comparing the cost of foods by weight or portion size shows that grains, vegetables, fruit and dairy foods are less expensive than most meats or foods high in saturated fat, added sugars or salt.

That means bananas, carrots, lettuce and pinto beans are all less expensive per portion than French fries, soft drinks, ice cream or ground beef.

"Using price per calorie doesn't tell you how much food you're going to get or how full you are going to feel," said Andrea Carlson, scientist at the USDA's Economic Research Service and an author of the study.

For example, eating a chocolate glazed donut with 240 calories might not satiate you but a banana with 105 calories just might.

In the comparisons, the USDA researchers used national average prices from Nielsen Homescan data, which surveyed a panel of households that recorded all food purchases over a year from retail outlets.

The cost of eating healthy foods has been the subject of growing debate as experts warn Americans about the dangers of obesity. More than a third of U.S. adults are obese, according to the government, and researchers expect that number to grow to 42 percent by 2030.

"Cheap food that provides few nutrients may actually be 'expensive' for the consumer from a nutritional economy perspective, whereas food with a higher retail price that provides large amounts of nutrients may actually be quite cheap," the study said.

The USDA study criticizes a 2010 report from researchers at the University of Washington, which found that calorie-for-calorie junk food is more cost-effective for low-income people than eating healthy.

Adam Drewnowski, director of the Nutritional Sciences Program at the University of Washington and lead author of the prior study, said he stands by his findings that a healthier diet generally costs more. He said there is no government recommendation for how many pounds of food an American should eat each day, but there are federal guidelines that suggest a 2,000 calorie diet.

"Some of these calories are in fact empty calories, so from the standpoint of nutrition they are not terrific," Drewnowski said. "But the empty calories keep you from being hungry, and this is why people buy them, especially lower-income people."

Margo Wootan, a nutrition advocate with the Center for Science in the Public Interest, said some people don't think they get as much value from fruits and vegetables as they get from other foods.

"If they buy a bag of chips for $2, they think it's a good deal, but if they buy a bag of apples for $2, they think it's a lot," Wootan said. "We need to do more to help people understand that fruits and vegetables are not as expensive as they think they are."

Wootan said shopping smart can make healthy eating more affordable. Consumers should be more flexible about choosing less expensive fruits and vegetables that are in season and supplementing those with frozen or canned fruits and vegetables so they don't have to throw away as much.



http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=152846630

[leemajors]

Looks like I might have been in one of the last groups to get that perk. I can vouch that NISD was letting seniors off campus in '89.

VHS started letting people go off campus again around 93 or 94, provided you passed your D.A.R.E. monthly tests!

[MannyIsGod]

I've done some really really really minor GIS research regarding food deserts in the United States and rates of diseases such as diabetes. Simply put, the areas where you see high rates of diabetes you also see a lack of selection of produce and the proximity of places that sell it is reduced. I probably have enough time to throw together some simple maps displaying this in the coming weeks and since I love any excuse to make maps I'll probably do it and post them here.

There are so many factors to this situation and it is very complicated but this is something I found very very interesting when I encountered it.

[MannyIsGod]

Dupe (for some reason this always happens when I'm tethering and posting on my laptop)

[MannyIsGod]

Looks like I might have been in one of the last groups to get that perk. I can vouch that NISD was letting seniors off campus in '89.

As a senior at an NISD school in 98 we got that perk still.

[boutons_deux]

Supermarket intervention prompted shoppers to buy more produce

We’re fat, in case you hadn’t heard. And as we learned last week, 42% of American adults will be obese by 2030, according to researchers at the Weight of the Nation conference sponsored by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

If that’s a party you’d rather miss, the grocery store is a place to start. Nutritionists often advise us to buy fresh food and stick to the perimeters of the store (instead of the middle aisles that are stocked with Oreos, Doritos and Froot Loops).

But there are thousands of products and many labels to wade through. And even the most determined shopper can have trouble resisting the thousands of cheap products with lots of sugar or fat.

Researchers in Arizona looked at whether a little education could change what goes in the supermarket basket. They recruited 153 people who were randomly selected at a supermarket in Phoenix.

Some shoppers got counseling from a nutrition educator, who offered an overview of labels and shelf signs in the store that tagged products as being a “healthier option” or “immune booster” or “calcium rich,” among other attributes set out in federal and American Heart Assn. guidelines. The educational sessions lasted last than 10 minutes.

The rest of the shoppers were left to use the shelf signs and labels on their own.

Study leader Brandy-Joe Milliron, who was part of the College of Nursing and Health Innovation at Arizona State University at the time, says that ads, coupons, recipes and demonstrations have shown a modest effect on what people buy. So she and two colleagues decided to test whether an intervention from a live person might make more of a difference.

After the volunteers shopped, researchers assessed their choices for fat, saturated fat, trans fat, fruit, vegetables, and dark green and bright yellow vegetables. The sessions didn’t have any effect on the total servings of vegetables purchased, nor did they influence the amount of total fat, saturated fat or trans fat they put in their carts. But the shoppers who got the counseling did buy twice as many dark green and yellow vegetables and 75% more fruit.

“Even these modest effects could translate into meaningful health benefits if sustained long term,” the researchers reported in the May-June issue of the Journal of Nutrition Education and Behavior. They concluded that more evaluations should be done to see whether shoppers’ purchases can be influenced.

You can read a summary of the study results online.

http://mobile.chicagotribune.com/p.p?m=b&a=rp&id=2133854&postId=2133854&postUserId=54&sessionToken=&catId=5576&curAbsIndex=2&resultsUrl=DID%3D6%26DFCL%3D1000%26DSB%3Drank%2523 desc%26DBFQ%3DuserId%253A54%26DFC%3Dcat1%252Ccat2% 252Ccat3%26DL.w%3D%26DL.d%3D10%26DQ%3DsectionId%25 3A5576%26DPS%3D0%26DPL%3D3

[coyotes_geek]

Stumbled across this and found it interesting. I don't really see it having much of an effect, but I applaud Disney's effort.


Disney to banish junk-food ads from kid shows
(http://finance.yahoo.com/news/disney-banish-junk-food-ads-141000293.html)

NEW YORK (AP) -- Disney says its programming will no longer be sponsored by junk food.

The Walt Disney Co. said Tuesday that it will become the first major media company to ban such ads for its TV channels, radio stations and websites intended for children. That means kids watching Saturday morning children's shows on Disney's ABC network will no longer see ads for fast foods and sugary cereals that don't meet company's nutrition standards.

The guidelines won't go into effect until 2015 because of existing advertising agreements.

[CosmicCowboy]

We had open campus back in the day, but I'd just grab a honeybun from the snack bar and a DP and go smoke dope on the football field.

[possessed]

However, if you subsitute carrots, banannas, broccoli, zuchini squash, snap peas for chips, crackers, cookies and other preservative-filled food, you will not see a difference in your grocery bill.


:vomit:

[boutons_deux]

Stumbled across this and found it interesting. I don't really see it having much of an effect, but I applaud Disney's effort.

There will be other advertizers to replace the crap food pushers. No loss to Disney.

When Disney stops selling insanely overpriced, lethal junk food in their amusement parks, then one could maybe be impressed. But that won't ever happen.

[z0sa]

There will be other advertizers to replace the crap food pushers. No loss to Disney.

When Disney stops selling insanely overpriced, lethal junk food in their amusement parks, then one could maybe be impressed. But that won't ever happen.

:lol If 42% of Americans are obese in 2030, it won't be because they eat dippin' dots at theme parks.

[coyotes_geek]

From the same link I quoted earlier...


The latest push by Disney is an extension of the internal nutrition guidelines the company launched in 2006, with the goal of making 85 percent of the food and drinks served at its parks and resorts healthy. The remaining 15 percent was reserved for special treats, such as cake for birthday celebrations. The company also stopped using toys in kids meals to advertise its movies, Iger said.

Visitors to parks and resorts were also given the option of trading out soda and fries for low-fat milk and fruit. Disney says 60 percent of the meals served are now with those healthier options.

The company on Tuesday also introduced its "Mickey Check" seal of approval for nutritious foods sold in stores, online and at its parks and resorts.

[Drachen]

This is true for me. It is rare that I eat processed food, or eat out. I eat a cooked dinner with veggies 6 times out of the week. I eat healthy cereal (special K or kashi go lean crunch) for breakfast. For lunch I usually eat sandwiches and fruit. I still fluctuate between 220 and 230. I have started (in mid march) to ride a bike at least once a week (school/work/family doesn't allow for much more), and can now ride about 15 miles at once doing about 12 mph on a mountain bike (but annoyingly still get out of breath going up more than one flight of stairs). All of this to say, my issue is portion size. I am not perfect and the above explained diet isn't followed 100% of the time, but more like 80-85% of the time, however no matter how good I eat, I like to eat. I like big portions, not only of meat and pasta, but also of broccoli and green beans. I think that once I can kill that, I will see a major change in weight.

When, though, will I be able to breath after taking more than 5 steps, THAT fucking sucks. I quit smoking over a year ago, and I have ridiculously mild asthma (so mild that I haven't owned an inhaler for about a decade and I never used it). I figured once I could ride 15 freaking miles that my cardio-vascular system would catch up a little.

Edit: I am not totally out of breath, but it is enough to notice, it fucking sucks and I am tired of it. I am 5'10'' and barrel chested, so it is not like I am some complete slug.

12 days ago I started to track my food and set a 2000 calorie daily intake limit for myself. With that being said, pretty much all of the above is a lie. It wasn't intentional. It was more one of those things that I remember what I want to believe. I did eat a home cooked meal with veggies about 5-6 times a week, but I ate out for lunch more than I would like to admit, and I would only eat cereal probably about half the time. On a bad day I would probably knock out 2500 calories by the end of lunch time, on a good day about 1800. It is funny what a little knowledge can do.
A couple days before I started tracking my calories, I also committed to riding 40 miles a week and since then I have lost 11 lbs.

[boutons_deux]

:lol If 42% of Americans are obese in 2030, it won't be because they eat dippin' dots at theme parks.

And Disney won't do anything EFFECTIVE to slow the obesity/disease epidemic.

[boutons_deux]

"healthy cereal (special K or kashi go lean crunch) for breakfast."

Grains are 90% fast carbs, and unnecessary.

And Kashi is lying to you, Kashi is just another corporate fraud, about aboit being organic. Kashi uses cheap GMO soy as filler.

[Drachen]

"healthy cereal (special K or kashi go lean crunch) for breakfast."

Grains are 90% fast carbs, and unnecessary.

And Kashi is lying to you, Kashi is just another corporate fraud, about aboit being organic. Kashi uses cheap GMO soy as filler.

I bought kashi because it has a ton of fiber, fiber is filling, so I would eat less (was the plan). Plus it was better than the near 1100 calories of 2 bacon or sausage, egg, and cheese sandwiches that I would eat when I didn't eat cereal (cheaper too) Also, almost everything sold in the US is GMO at this point even what you grow in your garden, I am not going to say that it is a great thing, but whatever you are eating is likely GMO, because even if you use seeds that are decendant from plants your grandmother raised (before GMO), the pollen from your neighbor's garden has an extrmemly HIGH probability that IT is GMO. I am sorry to say, but you pointing out one product that is GMO when pretty much everything you eat is likely GMO is a little hypocritical. Face it, the US is a lab when it comes to this you don't have to be happy about it, but don't single out ONE product for it.

[Blake]

There will be other advertizers to replace the crap food pushers. No loss to Disney.

I'm betting it will still be the same advertisers, just that now they will be pushing items that meet the Disney criteria.

[Blake]

And Disney won't do anything EFFECTIVE to slow the obesity/disease epidemic.

diet vs exercise aside, it's hilarious to me when Disney Channel runs a ”get outside and exercise” bit right before running an ad for the show that's coming up next.

I'd start to be impressed if they start a mickey mouse P90X show.

[CosmicCowboy]

I lost about 20 pounds just switching from beer to vodka and diet 7up

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Whole grains take longer to be absorbed bu the lining of your gut. Sure once they are trough the lining then they are just as easily metabolised but its the difference of fine ground stuff thats metabolized in 15 mins and something that takes 3 hours.

If you are being active you want to eat a small amount about once every 3 hours.

No carb is 'necessary' as our body can generate ATP without them but relying exclusively on glycogen is not a great thing when you are pushing yourself.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

I lost about 20 pounds just switching from beer to vodka and diet 7up

Nexium or ulcer?

[boutons_deux]

Whole grains take longer to be absorbed bu the lining of your gut. Sure once they are trough the lining then they are just as easily metabolised but its the difference of fine ground stuff thats metabolized in 15 mins and something that takes 3 hours.

If you are being active you want to eat a small amount about once every 3 hours.

No carb is 'necessary' as our body can generate ATP without them but relying exclusively on glycogen is not a great thing when you are pushing yourself.

If you don't chew whole grains, yes, they can take a lot longer to digest and even pass right through. But most "whole grains" aren't served whole or eaten unchewed.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

If you don't chew whole grains, yes, they can take a lot longer to digest and even pass right through. But most "whole grains" aren't served whole or eaten unchewed.

Its still better than the fine ground stuff by miles. Its a function of how much fiber is left. Basically if there aren't chunks then its a fraud.

[boutons_deux]

my point is, not really by miles.

There are additional nutrients in germ and skin, but the main bulk of the grain is carbohydrate.

The pervasive "whole grain" scam is as bad as the cholesterol, low-fat, BigPharma scams.

Big Picture is that Americans don't fucking know how to eat and depend on marketing from BigFood, USDA, etc. (which is why they are a nation of fat-ass, diseased, greasbags.

[CosmicCowboy]

Its still better than the fine ground stuff by miles. Its a function of how much fiber is left. Basically if there aren't chunks then its a fraud.

I must be doing good. There was a bunch of corn floating in the bowl this morning after I dropped a load.

[lefty]

its simple, the red meat based diet and processed/sugary foods have to go. its too damn expensive to actually buy real food, and no one has time to do so while working 60 hours a week to barely keep their heads above water. good luck making real food affordable.
You can buy lean cuts of red meat

[lefty]

"healthy cereal (special K or kashi go lean crunch) for breakfast."

Grains are 90% fast carbs, and unnecessary.

And Kashi is lying to you, Kashi is just another corporate fraud, about aboit being organic. Kashi uses cheap GMO soy as filler.
The only breakfast cereal that I eat is plain oats

Not the flavored shit