• Welcome to the Internet Infidels Discussion Board.

Poor people are fat because they can't afford healthy food

Our current obesity levels did not occur because of poor choices. The rise in obesity can be traced back to a specific time and specific events and has little if anything to do with individual choice.

Since 1900, the energy requirements for daily life have decreased substantially with the advent of labor-saving devices and automobiles, yet American weights remained stable until the 1970s. Dr. Boyd A. Swinburn, an obesity researcher at Deakin University in Melbourne, Australia, and his co-authors in one Lancet paper call that decade the “tipping point.”

As more women entered the work force, the food industry, noting a growing new market, mass-produced convenience foods with palate appeal. The foods were rich in sugar, salt and fat, substances that humans are evolutionarily programmed to crave.

“Women were spending a lot less time on food preparation, but the industry figured out ways to make food more readily available for everybody,” Steven L. Gortmaker, a sociologist at the Harvard School of Public Health, said in an interview. “The industry made it easier for people to consume more calories throughout the day.”

As Dr. Swinburn and his co-authors wrote, “The 1970s saw a striking rise in the quantity of refined carbohydrates and fats in the U.S. food supply, which was paralleled by a sharp increase in the available calories and the onset of the obesity epidemic. Energy intake rose because of environmental push factors, i.e., increasingly available, cheap, tasty, highly promoted obesogenic foods.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/13/health/13brody.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
 
Our current obesity levels did not occur because of poor choices. The rise in obesity can be traced back to a specific time and specific events and has little if anything to do with individual choice.

Since 1900, the energy requirements for daily life have decreased substantially with the advent of labor-saving devices and automobiles, yet American weights remained stable until the 1970s. Dr. Boyd A. Swinburn, an obesity researcher at Deakin University in Melbourne, Australia, and his co-authors in one Lancet paper call that decade the “tipping point.”

As more women entered the work force, the food industry, noting a growing new market, mass-produced convenience foods with palate appeal. The foods were rich in sugar, salt and fat, substances that humans are evolutionarily programmed to crave.

“Women were spending a lot less time on food preparation, but the industry figured out ways to make food more readily available for everybody,” Steven L. Gortmaker, a sociologist at the Harvard School of Public Health, said in an interview. “The industry made it easier for people to consume more calories throughout the day.”

As Dr. Swinburn and his co-authors wrote, “The 1970s saw a striking rise in the quantity of refined carbohydrates and fats in the U.S. food supply, which was paralleled by a sharp increase in the available calories and the onset of the obesity epidemic. Energy intake rose because of environmental push factors, i.e., increasingly available, cheap, tasty, highly promoted obesogenic foods.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/13/health/13brody.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

That's like me saying I cheated on my girlfriend because the girl that moved in next door is really, really, really, hot.
 
Our current obesity levels did not occur because of poor choices. The rise in obesity can be traced back to a specific time and specific events and has little if anything to do with individual choice.

Since 1900, the energy requirements for daily life have decreased substantially with the advent of labor-saving devices and automobiles, yet American weights remained stable until the 1970s. Dr. Boyd A. Swinburn, an obesity researcher at Deakin University in Melbourne, Australia, and his co-authors in one Lancet paper call that decade the “tipping point.”

As more women entered the work force, the food industry, noting a growing new market, mass-produced convenience foods with palate appeal. The foods were rich in sugar, salt and fat, substances that humans are evolutionarily programmed to crave.

“Women were spending a lot less time on food preparation, but the industry figured out ways to make food more readily available for everybody,” Steven L. Gortmaker, a sociologist at the Harvard School of Public Health, said in an interview. “The industry made it easier for people to consume more calories throughout the day.”

As Dr. Swinburn and his co-authors wrote, “The 1970s saw a striking rise in the quantity of refined carbohydrates and fats in the U.S. food supply, which was paralleled by a sharp increase in the available calories and the onset of the obesity epidemic. Energy intake rose because of environmental push factors, i.e., increasingly available, cheap, tasty, highly promoted obesogenic foods.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/13/health/13brody.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

I agree, this seems to be the main reason. Evolutionary speaking people are "designed" to be hungry all the time.
It works fine when there is food scarcity and clearly does not work well when there is abundance of food all the time.
 
Last edited:
Our current obesity levels did not occur because of poor choices. The rise in obesity can be traced back to a specific time and specific events and has little if anything to do with individual choice.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/13/health/13brody.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

That's like me saying I cheated on my girlfriend because the girl that moved in next door is really, really, really, hot.

No, it's not. People eat from the choices provided, and the choices provided to the entirety of population beginning in the 1970s were infused with cheap sugars, fats and a lot of salt. Now we would all love to be excellent managers of time and money and have perfect knowledge about everything, but we all fall short of the glory. And when you are poor you have little time or money.
 
That's like me saying I cheated on my girlfriend because the girl that moved in next door is really, really, really, hot.

No, it's not. People eat from the choices provided, and the choices provided to the entirety of population beginning in the 1970s were infused with cheap sugars, fats and a lot of salt. Now we would all love to be excellent managers of time and money and have perfect knowledge about everything, but we all fall short of the glory. And when you are poor you have little time or money.

In 1980 breast implants really took off and in the 90s women started shaving their who ha and I just can't help myself.

Not all foods were infused with shit. And healthy food is cheaper than ever. Yes, life is a lot harder for poor people. I can understand the value of looking at trends from an academic point of view, but what is the solution? If you remove personal responsibility as part of the equation it's never gonna work.

Anyhow, you are kind of proving my point, poor people aren't fat because they can't afford healthy food, they are fat because there are too many easy and attractive options that are bad.
 
No, it's not. People eat from the choices provided, and the choices provided to the entirety of population beginning in the 1970s were infused with cheap sugars, fats and a lot of salt. Now we would all love to be excellent managers of time and money and have perfect knowledge about everything, but we all fall short of the glory. And when you are poor you have little time or money.

In 1980 breast implants really took off and in the 90s women started shaving their who ha and I just can't help myself.

Not all foods were infused with shit. And healthy food is cheaper than ever. Yes, life is a lot harder for poor people. I can understand the value of looking at trends from an academic point of view, but what is the solution? If you remove personal responsibility as part of the equation it's never gonna work.

Anyhow, you are kind of proving my point, poor people aren't fat because they can't afford healthy food, they are fat because there are too many easy and attractive options that are bad.

In 2002, I wore a woman's size 28 and weighed in at over 300 lb.

Today, I weight under 200 lb. and about to make the move from a misses size 14 to 12. In the twelve years in between, I learned to maintain my weight, and with one major regain (65 lb.) in 2006 due to quitting a 20+ year smoking habit, I have become quite expert about obesity, personal responsibility and quite a few other buzz words. So, there isn't a whole lot you are going to tell me about obesity in America I don't already know. I also came to know one truth.

Everybody ain't me.

And I have learned a few more things.

They don't have to be and I don't have right to try to make them, or look down on them because they ain't me.

I gave up on the lie that if I could just make everybody else perfect, my life would be better. And I learned to see social problems as just that, SOCIAL PROBLEMS in need of SOCIAL SOLUTIONS. I don't call myself a libertarian but I am real big on individual rights. I don't have the right to tell a grown person s/he can't or even shouldn't eat Oreo cookies, but I do have the right to demand that Nabisco label their food, not pump said food full of toxins, and not advertise said food to small children because these thing are matters of public health.

I choose to work where I am allowed to work and not try to micromanage the lives and rights of my fellow citizens.
 
So what solutions do we have? Should obese people be required to pay more for their healthcare? I'm a big fan of positive reinforcement; how about a tax credit for a healthy BMI?
 
So what solutions do we have? Should obese people be required to pay more for their healthcare? I'm a big fan of positive reinforcement; how about a tax credit for a healthy BMI?

You are always going to have obese people. Before the 1970s, about 15 percent of the population was obese. The cause of the increase is due to the food that was made available. The solution is in the food that is made available. That means reforming our food production, preservation, and distribution. Tax credits ain't gonna get it.

Think about it like this. We can legislate and monitor the behavior of say, 300 food companies, or 300,000,000 citizens. Which do you think is more cost efficient?
 
So what solutions do we have? Should obese people be required to pay more for their healthcare? I'm a big fan of positive reinforcement; how about a tax credit for a healthy BMI?

You are always going to have obese people. Before the 1970s, about 15 percent of the population was obese. The cause of the increase is due to the food that was made available. The solution is in the food that is made available. That means reforming our food production, preservation, and distribution. Tax credits ain't gonna get it.

Think about it like this. We can legislate and monitor the behavior of say, 300 food companies, or 300,000,000 citizens. Which do you think is more cost efficient?

I don't like restricting what people can sell or buy. Maybe a sin tax on shit food like we do on cigarets and alcohol. Normally, I'd say it's not my problem, but with social medicine it becomes my problem. Offer discounts for healthy BMI or charge more for Obesity. I wouldn't discount the power of the IRS to massively change behavior. The home mortgage deduction has changed the landscape of the US.
 
You are always going to have obese people. Before the 1970s, about 15 percent of the population was obese. The cause of the increase is due to the food that was made available. The solution is in the food that is made available. That means reforming our food production, preservation, and distribution. Tax credits ain't gonna get it.

Think about it like this. We can legislate and monitor the behavior of say, 300 food companies, or 300,000,000 citizens. Which do you think is more cost efficient?

I don't like restricting what people can sell or buy. Maybe a sin tax on shit food like we do on cigarets and alcohol. Normally, I'd say it's not my problem, but with social medicine it becomes my problem. Offer discounts for healthy BMI or charge more for Obesity. I wouldn't discount the power of the IRS to massively change behavior. The home mortgage deduction has changed the landscape of the US.
It's going to take a lot as people won't change that easy.
 
That's like me saying I cheated on my girlfriend because the girl that moved in next door is really, really, really, hot.

No, it's not. People eat from the choices provided, and the choices provided to the entirety of population beginning in the 1970s were infused with cheap sugars, fats and a lot of salt. Now we would all love to be excellent managers of time and money and have perfect knowledge about everything, but we all fall short of the glory. And when you are poor you have little time or money.
People used to subsist on what was available, which wasn't much, was limited, and involved much work to acquire. Most people are ignorant of that fact, rich, poor, whatever. The rest is natural selection.

So I guess I'm saying people are fat because they're poor, but it hasn't anything to do with wealth.
 
You are always going to have obese people. Before the 1970s, about 15 percent of the population was obese. The cause of the increase is due to the food that was made available. The solution is in the food that is made available. That means reforming our food production, preservation, and distribution. Tax credits ain't gonna get it.

Think about it like this. We can legislate and monitor the behavior of say, 300 food companies, or 300,000,000 citizens. Which do you think is more cost efficient?

I don't like restricting what people can sell or buy.
Don't you want poor people to eat better? Would that not mean restricting their diet to healthy food? Of do you just want them to continue eating bad food and then you can complain about it? Help me out here.
Maybe a sin tax on shit food like we do on cigarets and alcohol. Normally, I'd say it's not my problem, but with social medicine it becomes my problem.
An unhealthy population is your problem now. Costs in sick days, insurance premiums, early death, all ripple throughout society.
Offer discounts for healthy BMI or charge more for Obesity. I wouldn't discount the power of the IRS to massively change behavior. The home mortgage deduction has changed the landscape of the US.
So you want to use the GOVT to restrict the diets of millions of citizens? But you don't want the food industry to improve what it offers?
 
So you want to use the GOVT to restrict the diets of millions of citizens? But you don't want the food industry to improve what it offers?

I choose freedom. If you want to be fat that is your right. If you want to sell 2000 calorie hamburgers that is also your right.

The science of weight gain is settled. If you consume more calories than you use, you store those excess calories as fat. The evidence this is happening to you is readily available by scale, clothes or mirror. Choose accordingly.
 
So you want to use the GOVT to restrict the diets of millions of citizens? But you don't want the food industry to improve what it offers?

I choose freedom. If you want to be fat that is your right. If you want to sell 2000 calorie hamburgers that is also your right.
Then you see no point to this conversation. So why are you in it?
The science of weight gain is settled. If you consume more calories than you use, you store those excess calories as fat. The evidence this is happening to you is readily available by scale, clothes or mirror. Choose accordingly.
You think healthy living is that simple? The the consequences of an unhealthy population don't matter?

I ask again, why are you even in this conversation?
 
Last edited:
So you want to use the GOVT to restrict the diets of millions of citizens? But you don't want the food industry to improve what it offers?

I choose freedom. If you want to be fat that is your right. If you want to sell 2000 calorie hamburgers that is also your right.

The science of weight gain is settled. If you consume more calories than you use, you store those excess calories as fat. The evidence this is happening to you is readily available by scale, clothes or mirror. Choose accordingly.

But with freedom comes responsibility.
 
I choose freedom. If you want to be fat that is your right. If you want to sell 2000 calorie hamburgers that is also your right.

The science of weight gain is settled. If you consume more calories than you use, you store those excess calories as fat. The evidence this is happening to you is readily available by scale, clothes or mirror. Choose accordingly.

But with freedom comes responsibility.

Right. You are responsible for putting down the fork.
 
I choose freedom. If you want to be fat that is your right. If you want to sell 2000 calorie hamburgers that is also your right.
Then you see no point to this conversation. So why are you in it?
The science of weight gain is settled. If you consume more calories than you use, you store those excess calories as fat. The evidence this is happening to you is readily available by scale, clothes or mirror. Choose accordingly.
You think healthy living is that simple? The the consequences of an unhealthy population don't matter?

I ask again, why are you even in this conversation?

I'm here to remind you that not every problem, pseudo problem and non problem require the government to tell people what to do.

Maybe think of this position as avoiding the thread where a police officer chokes a fat person for eating an illegal burrito.
 
But with freedom comes responsibility.

Right. You are responsible for putting down the fork.

OOH witty, you must own a television. But I would go beyond that to say you are responsible for your health beyond eating which means getting proper exercise and sleep and proper preventative measures. We of course cannot legislate this, but we can as a culture encourage this.
 
Back
Top Bottom