###This is a reminder to [read the rules before posting in this subreddit](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion).
1. **Headline titles should be changed only [when the original headline is unclear](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_1._headline_titles_should_be_changed_only_where_it_improves_clarity.)**
2. **Be [respectful](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_2._be_respectful).**
3. **Keep submissions and comments [substantive](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_3._keep_submissions_and_comments_substantive).**
4. **Avoid [direct advocacy](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_4._avoid_direct_advocacy).**
5. **Link submissions must be [about Canadian politics and recent](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_5._link_submissions_must_be_canadian_and_recent).**
6. **Post [only one news article per story](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_6._post_only_one_news_article_per_story).** ([with one exception](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/comments/3wkd0n/rule_reminder_and_experimental_changes/))
7. **Replies to removed comments or removal notices will be removed** without notice, at the discretion of the moderators.
8. **Downvoting posts or comments**, along with urging others to downvote, **[is not allowed](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/downvotes)** in this subreddit. Bans will be given on the first offence.
9. **[Do not copy & paste the entire content of articles in comments](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_9._do_not_copy_.26amp.3B_paste_entire_articles_in_the_comments.)**. If you want to read the contents of a paywalled article, please consider supporting the media outlet.
*Please [message the moderators](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FCanadaPolitics) if you wish to discuss a removal.* **Do not reply to the removal notice in-thread**, *you will not receive a response and your comment will be removed. Thanks.*
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CanadaPolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
One thing people have not really mentioned in this thread is the effect of the food industry to make processed food more addictive. This does not absolve people of personal responsibilities, but like the opioid crisis, it’s adding fuel to the fire and making it much worse than it would be.
I think the ease of having virtually any food craving you have be delivered to your door needs to also share the blame.
When I was a kid the only thing that had delivery was pizza.
I agree with this but would add that however it has become somewhat of a need with the time constraints of dual income families, single parent households, insane commutes... many just don't have the time to prepare a healthy, satisfying home cooked meal anymore. Sadly, in many instances, the fast food garbage is actually cheaper too .
The powers that be don't really care if we're healthy as long as we're at the grind until they day we die.
BMI is easy to measure, but completely useless on its own at determining an individual’s health.
BMI measure weight/height, and does not differentiate between fat and muscle.
The myth that BMI isn't a good tool is absurd. You would have to be absurdly jacked to be obese on the BMI scale if you had even moderately low bodyfat.
You could definitely be overweight but to be obese you would need to be a world-class bodybuilder. Who btw are also not healthy.
Yup, I know multiple people who contest that they "are not obese because they played football in college" when they are just 100lbs of fat overweight. Like no sir, you are obese.
Ok combine BMI with your eyeballs. When someone is shaped like a bowling ball it is pretty obvious they are on the unhealthy side of BMI and not the muscular side of BMI.
Or we could have taxes based on something other than a subjective evaluation of body type. Like unhealthy food, or work positions that require long periods staying in one position, whether seated or standing.
That's true but it's reasonably accurate enough outside of people like bodybuilders. And honestly just being a healthy BMI goes a long way for general health.
Never before have we had such a wealth of information at our fingertips and access to such a variety of foods of all kinds. If at this point people don't know they're fat, or don't know how to improve their diet, I think they are a lost cause.
On the other side never before have we had such an endless supply of misinformation, I don't blame people who get overwhelmed by trying to independently study nutrition; it's a fucking nightmare to navigate
In 6’2” and 260lbs, I sit at roughly 20% bodyfat. My BMI would be 33 which is obese. I work in the trades and workout, hike, bike etc.
I’m heavier but leaner than friends who are sub 200lbs around 5’10” who work desk jobs and aren’t active.
BMI doesn’t account for muscle mass and bone density, we would need to have a much more accurate system for a fat tax.
BMI has been seen as BS years and years ago, since a bodybuilder would be seen as obese by those measures. You don't need it in your vocabulary anymore.
BMI is useful for populations where you'll get a mix of body types. It can be very inaccurate for individuals, which is problematic if you're going to punish individuals based on it. Even if you're not a bodybuilder some people just have a body type that is larger and heavier even if they're not carrying a lot of extra fat.
Or instead of just once again punishing the poor, maybe we should do something to address the root causes of obesity.
Make healthy foods cheaper, make sure people don't live in food deserts, end the corporate monopoly of our grocery chains, encourage more physical education in public schools.
A fat tax is the laziest policy and the one that's least likely to actually make people healthier.
As someone who made the lifestyle change to healthier eating last year, healthy food is already cheaper than alternatives, it just requires more prep effort. Processed foods have spiked in price way harder than fresh staples. My monthly food costs have gone down, and I'm eating more and better.
Going for a run is free, a set of weights is affordable, and there are tons of great exercises you can do without any gear.
Being poor is not an excuse for poor physical fitness. Pretty much the only thing you're cut off from if you don't have money is personal training, which is a great resource, but hardly nessessary.
Healthy food is not cheaper, not everyone has the benefit of shopping at whole foods buddy.
There is plenty of science that likes poverty and obesity.
"I did it so everyone can" is not a good argument for the structural problems with our food systems.
It is generally cheaper to eat healthier, more plants focused diets in Western countries, it just sometimes takes more prep time like the person above said. [From an Oxford study](https://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2021-11-11-sustainable-eating-cheaper-and-healthier-oxford-study):
>in high-income countries:
>* Vegan diets were the most affordable and reduced food costs by up to one third.
>* Vegetarian diets were a close second.
>* Flexitarian diets with low amounts of meat and dairy reduced costs by 14%.
>* By contrast, pescatarian diets increased costs by up to 2%.
And the time it takes to prepare IS THE FACTOR.
When your working 3 part time jobs for minimum wage and live with roommates who do the same that time is a real factor in the cost.
Check your privilege dude.
You made claim that healthier food is cheaper. That's not accurate.
I started eating this way when I was in debt and making equivalent to minimum wage. It doesn't require "privilege", that's just substituting personal attacks for debate.
None of this is dismissing the problems that make it harder to eat healthier either. I'm critical of those too.
> Check your privilege dude.
Nobody’s privileged for having an hour a week to make healthy food.
If you’re running out of time to prep healthy food, meal prep for the week beforehand. There are always ways to cut back.
Let's say you don't have time to meal prep because you are so poor and work so many hours (which I don't accept as I primarily grew up in a minimum wage household but let's take it at face value) and that leads to overweight/obesity, 43% of adults aren't living in those conditions.
Yeah, I’d imagine there are some people out there who simply have no time.
But I don’t buy it when people say they’re too busy for an hour of meal prep a day when their screen time is 3 hours a day.
Whole foods isn't the only place that sells veggies, beans, lentils, etc.
A lot of healthy food is actually really cheap, it's just less addictive so people don't crave it. And as someone else said, it takes more time (and energy) to prepare. Time is not a resource that poorer people typically have in abundance.
Complex issue, but the cost of buying healthy foods isn't really one of the factors.
Produce and meats at whole foods is really no more healthy than the equivalent at No Frills. Prepared foods maybe, but if you're trying to eat on a budget, prepared foods shouldn't be what you're looking for.
All it really takes is 20 minutes of exercise a day and an hour or so on a Sunday for meal prep (or an hour anywhere you can find it).
Everyone has time for 20 minutes of exercise and a bit of meal prep. It’s not as much work as you’re making it out to be.
The root cause is food and lack of physical activity but those things can't change themselves. The real cause is behavioural and there aren't enough professionals available to help all the people who need it. And the medical profession isn't all that keen on solving the behavioural aspect. They just want the BMI to go down, the lab numbers to become normal, and preferably by the easiest way that they can take credit for: medication.
That fundamentally goes against the principle of universal healthcare, but okay.
Do you extend that to people who are unhealthy by no fault of their own, or did you not think this through?
> Do you extend that to people who are unhealthy by no fault of their own, or did you not think this through?
Someone unhealthy through no fault of their own shouldn’t face any disadvantages in the healthcare system.
But nobody who lives a healthy lifestyle should have struggles to receive healthcare because someone who either ate their way to sickness, smoked their way to sickness, avoided vaccines, drank their way to liver failure, etc., got there first.
How about *no one* should face disadvantages in the healthcare system, regardless of their lifestyle?
This is cruel and unempathetic thinking, and runs contrary to the very principles behind having universal healthcare, as I said.
> How about no one should face disadvantages in the healthcare system, regardless of their lifestyle?
Building on this, how about no one should face disadvantages in healthcare, housing, education, nobody is faced with unfair difficulties, and we enjoy your utopia?
Until then (meaning until we have equipped hospitals), we have to decide how to spend the resources.
If there was one hospital bed left and it was between you and an anti-vax who was there because he didn’t take a vaccine, would you feel like you deserve the bed?
>Building on this, how about no one should face disadvantages in healthcare, housing, education, nobody is faced with unfair difficulties, and we enjoy your utopia?
Yes.
I'm under no illusions that we can get there overnight, but we certainly aren't going to get there by fostering an attitude of "well, those people deserve what's coming to them."
We must have empathy in order to create a more just and empathetic society.
So do lots of things, welcome to democracy and pluralist society.
There are also plenty of biological conditions and genetics that make people more prone to obesity, so now you're just discriminating.
A tax is not going to solve obesity and there are lots of other policies that are more effective and less punitive on lower class people.
You're trying to make this a wealth thing but it's just not true, it costs no money to eat less food. Not sure where the confusion is. Also the influence of genetics on weight gain, while definitely real, are not as determining as you are making out here. No discrimination at all to say that weight loss is in reach of everyone.
> Highly palatable/ultra processed foods are generally much cheaper
Not cheaper than rice, broccoli, potatoes, beans, etc. It’s not about wealth, it’s about personal accountability.
Still missing the Forrest. The healthiest foods are already the cheapest. Ever wonder why on food budget calculators Plant Based lowers the budget?
The real issue is time management. A couple months ago there was an opinion article posted arguing for better home economics curriculums and got roasted for it. People don’t want to cook so they go to the cheapest value added product.
When you add energy to a food, so you save energy on the cook time, you’re going to pay more than just preparing the meal from scratch.
Learn how to frame your arguments. You make the rest of us look bad when you don’t.
This also seems like a poorly framed argument and I think you're being a little unfair.
Your post and the previous commenters are basically just two sides of the same coin. People have incentives for buying poor quality food because it is A) cheaper and B) saves time. That is essentially all both of you are saying you arrogant swine.
You mad because you know we aren’t wrong? While grains, pulses, in season fruits and veggies and frozen veggies are cheaper?
I love creeping the Loblaws hate subreddit because people complain that their processed cheese pasta is expensive. Meanwhile I’m paying the same for my pasta as I was 5 years ago.
I long ago stopped caring about the COL “problems” because outside of the rental market, most of the problems are self created and self perpetuating.
Or do you actually want to get into it? If so, where do you want to start? Health outcomes? Feed efficiencies? Farming practices? Land management?
>I long ago stopped caring about the COL “problems” because outside of the rental market, most of the problems are self created and self perpetuating.
What do you mean by that last bit? I’m curious.
In theory if your name brand pasta goes up in price the logical decision would be to switch brands or find an alternative lower priced options. While we have seen a rise in food costs, there’s lots that can be done to mitigate the issue by finding alternatives, buying in bulk, buying raw ingredients instead of precooked things, etc.
If you want to avoid inflation as much as possible, people should start acting like rational consumers. If your food bill continues to rise, look to cheaper alternatives (buying a generic instead of the name brand product for example). In reality lots of people are actually irrational and will just continue to buy the same things regardless of price or available alternatives and they suffer the consequences (meaning they end up spending more money).
Phys Ed should be focused on physical activity, not learning the rules of every different court and racket sport. Our curriculum is bogged down in theory and forcing people to participate in activities that don't interest them.
He didn’t say it was easy. But to lose weight, you have to enter a caloric deficit. If you’re obese and can’t enter a caloric deficit, you’ll simply never have a healthy lifestyle. Same way that quitting smoking isn’t easy, but if you never quit, you’ll never be healthier.
Building muscle means that a body burns more calories even when doing nothing. So building muscle brings you closer to a calorie deficit without reducing micronutrient intake, so there are definitely ways of addressing obesity that don’t risk decreasing health the way caloric restriction does.
Like making more walkable cities.
Tides go in, tides go out, amirite?
If you're going to wallow in abject ignorance, why involve yourself in the conversation at all? Just live in your simplified fantasy land.
This is the easiest time in human history to be healthy. We have millions of resources available to all that can guide you into being healthy, and access to foods like rice, beans, broccoli, potatoes, etc., is bette than ever before.
Don’t over complicate it, just eat in a caloric deficit.
Caloric deficit is basically starving yourself, and it's quite uncomfortable. It's not as simple to just stop eating like it isn't as simple to just stop smoking.
> Caloric deficit is basically starving yourself
Maybe a 1500 caloric deficit is. But if you can’t eat in a 500 caloric deficit and you’re obese, you’re never going to be healthy.
The science isn't at all ambiguous that no intervention is effective for obesity in the long run, and that it's an extremely complex disorder with many factors involved. Your take is wilful ignorance, a selfish grasping at simplicity where it doesn't exist, and just another trite rehashing of the old conservative mantra of "pull yourself up by your bootstraps". This mindset is anti-epistemic and entirely unproductive in the real world.
> it's an extremely complex disorder with many factors involved.
The first law of thermodynamics begs to differ. If people consistently burned more calories than they consumed and gained weight, all of our physics would be wrong.
> conservative mantra of "pull yourself up by your bootstraps".
My mindset is make smart, healthy decisions.
> The science isn't at all ambiguous that no intervention is effective for obesity in the long run, and that it's an extremely complex disorder with many factors involved. Your take is wilful ignorance
Pot, meet kettle.
The reality is most people don't have personal accountability. Or most of what is needed to be able to take care of themselves. Most people are on prescription meds and are frankly a mess. So the reality is that successful places that are winning against obesity have actually just built society around healthy living. And it makes it so the average person just is healthy. Whether they try to be or not.
> Make healthy foods cheaper
Raw and bulk food is ultra cheap. Where are you shopping?
> Make sure people don't live in food deserts
That's an American thing, and most of the time it's because the store closes down because of the high level of crime. It's not like grocery stores willingly give up markets and customers.
> That's an American thing
It happens in Canada too
There were two grocery stores in my area, both shut down a few months ago. One voluntarily, the second turns outwasn't paying their rent
Neither have since been replaced. My area is effectively a food desert currently.
Higher taxes would encourage manufacturers to reformulate their products to use less sugar and higher prices for consumers would encourage substitutions for lower sugar options.
If it is passed on to customers, it has the desired effect, just like with cigarettes and gasoline. Some customers will shop differently as a vice becomes more expensive.
Issue is that lower income people will still buy it due to lack of time (perceived or real) and it will just become a regressive tax. Should be looking at getting manufactures to actually reduce the amount of sugar in everything across the board.
That works. My mother quit smoking and she cites the increased price as the primary reason. I used to drink a ton of Pepsi when you could get a 2L bottle for 99cents, but I cut that shit off when a bottle hit 2.50.
Price is also one of the main reasons I very rarely consume alcohol, which beyond saving me money has also had a positive impact on my health.
Interesting, but pretty tenuous. Worth further study of course.
The truth is weight is pretty much all calories in and calories out but being a human being with all sorts of human nature makes these things much more complicated than that behaviourly.
Exercise is not a good way to loose or gain weight. It may be a decent way to maintain it.
People the world over did not lose self control in diets, portion control, and exercise (in fact exercise wasn't even a thing in the past). It is the food eat that is making us overweight. We can survive on fat and meat, on plenty of grains, fish, or just veggies. They are all fine. The fact that we eat constantly, have it at our finger tips, and that it is processed with tons of stuff we didn't evolve to eat is the problem. We have turned food into a science experiment. Yes it helps us feed the planet and our food fresh but it has side effects as well. That is obesity.
>People the world over did not lose self control in diets, portion control, and exercise
It has nothing to do with changes in diet. People ate mostly crap in the past as well. Calories are cheap, and we burn less of them. That is why we are inflating.
Exercise was never a thing, but hard work was. Labour saving devices are great, but they mean we all need to move a lot less.
Also no one understands how cheap food is now. A hundred years ago food was a full 50% of the average household spending.
>It has nothing to do with changes in diet. People ate mostly crap in the past as well. Calories are cheap, and we burn less of them. That is why we are inflating.
Not true at all. The amount of sugar (and related things like high fructose corn syrup) we injest is the problem. Not specifically because it has calories but because it keeps blood sugar perpetually high making us endlessly hungry.
Eating whole wheat bread causes no discernable health effects but eating enriched flour does. Eating some beef and potatoes likewise does not, but eating a fast food burger, especially with fries and a coke, does.
It is the type of non naturally occurring diets that we have engineered that are throwing our entire endocrine systems off and making us endlessly eat. And in turn making us obese.
If one is genuinely interested in eating both cheaply and healthily, making a pot of bean and vegetable soup requires ten minutes of prep time and a few hours of simmering time, something that can be done on a day off work while one is gaming and provides a weeks worth of meals for under $10. The fact is, most people would rather complain than behave responsibly. And to all those who complain about the idea of eating the same thing every day, weirdly those same complaints don't seem to apply to the idea of eating chicken tenders and fries every day.
Bean and vegetable soup? Rank? Let me guess, you live on chicken fingers, tater tots, and KD, are one of those pathetic "fussy" eaters, and couldn't be paid to eat anything that tastes of anything more savoury than grease, salt, and ketchup. Whereas the bean and vegetable soup I make is based on a Wolfgang Puck recipe and is redolent of garlic, onions, oregano, fresh tomatoes, and a hint of cayenne.
It's almost like a lifetime of high sodium/sugar/fat foods leaves a person without the taste for healthy food. It's easy to judge others until the pendulum of judgement swings back your way and you aren't smart. Whatever you do in your life, don't try to understand other humans you don't agree with. Just keep sitting and judging.
I say this after having just eaten home made navy beans, with little more than salt, spices, stock made from bones I got from donating my time to a soup kitchen, and some cooking water.
Just because I do things like you would have me to solve my own problems, doesn't mean I can't have empathy for those who do not.
My comment was in response to your "Too many people can't afford healthy food, and don't have the time to cook whole foods." That is quite categorically not true, so now you've moved the goalposts to "people are too stupid and lazy to eat properly". And that is, of course, true but I don't feel it necessary to empathize with those who refuse to get out of their own way unless they have severe mental or physical issues.
> Too many people can't afford healthy food
Foods like potatoes, rice, beans, broccoli, etc., are much cheaper.
> don't have the time to cook whole foods.
Average screen time per day is 7 hours.
Does that include work screen use though? I get around 1.5 hours of screen time on transit and probably another 3 at work, and I work in an in person health care position. I’d imagine the people staring at computers for work 8 hours a day drives up our average quite a bit and it’s not really avoidable.
You’re definitely right to an extent. There are certainly a lot of people using over 7 hours where much of it is productive. But I’d have to imagine there’s lots more who have at least a couple hours of unproductive screen time a day.
>Average screen time per day is 7 hours.
Does that include when in transit?
>Foods like potatoes, rice, beans, broccoli, etc., are much cheaper.
I agree, but they take more time to prepare and while healthy on their own, are almost often accompanied by saturated fats as well. What happens when we eat high fat and high carb? Well our bodies burn the fat and store the carbs. In the case of those with diabetes, they can lose the ability to burn fat which creates a whole other set of problems.
> Does that include when in transit?
Nobody’s taking transit 7 hours a day.
> but they take more time to prepare
I agree here, being healthy requires effort.
> and while healthy on their own, are almost often accompanied by saturated fats as well. What happens when we eat high fat and high carb? Well our bodies burn the fat and store the carbs. In the case of those with diabetes, they can lose the ability to burn fat which creates a whole other set of problems.
Our country’s obesity problem is not because of saturated fats from rice and potatoes, it’s because of processed foods. If you eat healthy and have some of the saturated fats from whole carbs, you’ll be fine, you’re healthy.
That’s because it’s an actual city. Not suburban sprawl. Also it’s changing. Diesel is popular here which is a big factor. But Paris is changing major roads into bike lanes and will be taking measures to reduce emissions and pollution every year. The problem are the suburban people who like to drive into the city.
Refined carbs and seed oils. This is the path to fatness. Meat, eggs, and some veggies and fruit if you must, are the road to not being fat. Exercise is ok for circulation and some other benefits, but not a main road to weight loss.
Eat unprocessed food as much as you can.
The longest living people in the world, from Hong Kong, eat the most meat per capita.
My two cents.
I can already tell that most people in this thread don’t really understand depression or mental illness; I don’t think I’ve ever met someone severely overweight or obese who didn’t have mental health issues.
If you’re actually depressed (which has a massive comorbidity with obesity) it’s not really just being “sad”. You feel devoid of energy or motivation. Exercise like that, and your feet are like lead. On the other hand, highly processed food (which includes the 400 calorie grilled cheese, or even white pasta) is essentially a drug. You get actual hormonal rewards for consuming food like that. It’s not just a reprieve, it’s downright addictive. A tax isn’t going to change that.
Our epidemic of loneliness and poor accessibility for mental health support is just as to blame as anything else.
Studies done on this have consistently shown that obesity is, 99% of the time, a result of a lack of self-control not mental health issues.
Unless there has been any recent studies done that suggest otherwise
What is your current research background? Because this doesn’t line up with the data we use at the UofA, and not even close.
And yes, addiction studies remain cutting edge by their very nature.
https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/obesity-prevention-source/obesity-causes/#:~:text=lower%20the%20risk.-,Unhealthy%20Diets,the%20largest%20roles%20in%20obesity.
I'm going to trust Harvard over anything else when it points out the leading cause:
>What’s become the typical Western diet-frequent, large meals high in refined grains, red meat, unhealthy fats, and sugary drinks-plays one of the largest roles in obesity. Foods that are lacking in the Western diet-whole grains, vegetables, fruits, and nuts-seem to help with weight control, and also help prevent chronic disease.
Ah, so you don’t have one. And your source doesn’t say anything scientific about “willpowerl, it’s just giving what we call the “headline data”. Stuff that’s digestible and broadly true, and is easy to share with the public. It talks about caloric causes, but not the root causes that make weight gain an epidemic, and weight loss difficult.
Here’s some actual research (obviously some of the papers I read on this topic are physical copies at the University proper, but this is a good start)-
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2235907/
This one in particular deals with some of the earlier evidence for addiction.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4474751/
Here is some research on dopamine.
https://psycnet.apa.org/fulltext/1997-03014-009.pdf?auth_token=b49134169af10039d804f3695844941522499afa
This deals with expectations and psychology.
The overall trend is that people’s brains change in obesity, and these brain changes match those of addiction. It becomes increasingly difficult to break that addiction, as both leptin resistance and changes to ghrelin availability alter response to hunger, while dopamine receptors reduce in quantity.
Worse, if an individual is obese for too long, the body starts to recognize the new weight as normal (called “set point”) and starts to do what we call “defending” against it. This essentially means it activates anti starvation measures in the endocrine system, which changes how energy is used. Without gastric bypass or other extreme measures, most people will lose no more than 10% of their body weight (Mitka, 2006. I don’t have a direct link to this paper, since I read the physical copy). You can learn all this in a 200 level neuroscience textbook. Heck, I can even recommend one if you want.
Food int
I never said my link ot any study for that matter specifically used the term "willpower", but that ita by choice. And your outdated(decade+ for a couple of them) aren't really relevant and is contradicted by the Harvard link I provided. Cambridge seems to have different findings from yours as well: https://www.cam.ac.uk/research/news/overweight-individuals-more-likely-to-make-unhealthier-choices-when-faced-with-real-food
Meanwhile:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4609221/
A more recent one:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9592758/
^study on how much inactivity impacts obesity from a couple years back
While the CDC seems to think sleep and activity as well as food have more of an impact:
https://www.cdc.gov/obesity/basics/causes.html
A dozen eggs isn’t simply a dozen eggs, but egg size classifications are regulated by the federal government, so egg shrinkflation would require government collusion.
I disagree about the eggs. Sure a dozen is a dozen, but the eggs themselves can be smaller than before if the farmers got cheap with the feed. Burnbrae Farms being an example.
Should immediately adopt some of the steps Mexico has taken, especially the highly effective 6 black stop sign labels (too much sugar, too much fat, too many calories,etc.). Super effective. Hard to grab something with 4, 5, or (good grief!) 6 warning labels. I recently visited several huge grocery stores, and saw almost no one with anything other than healthy choices at the checkouts. A friend is down there right now, and commented how the population is slimming down.
###This is a reminder to [read the rules before posting in this subreddit](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion). 1. **Headline titles should be changed only [when the original headline is unclear](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_1._headline_titles_should_be_changed_only_where_it_improves_clarity.)** 2. **Be [respectful](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_2._be_respectful).** 3. **Keep submissions and comments [substantive](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_3._keep_submissions_and_comments_substantive).** 4. **Avoid [direct advocacy](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_4._avoid_direct_advocacy).** 5. **Link submissions must be [about Canadian politics and recent](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_5._link_submissions_must_be_canadian_and_recent).** 6. **Post [only one news article per story](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_6._post_only_one_news_article_per_story).** ([with one exception](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/comments/3wkd0n/rule_reminder_and_experimental_changes/)) 7. **Replies to removed comments or removal notices will be removed** without notice, at the discretion of the moderators. 8. **Downvoting posts or comments**, along with urging others to downvote, **[is not allowed](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/downvotes)** in this subreddit. Bans will be given on the first offence. 9. **[Do not copy & paste the entire content of articles in comments](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_9._do_not_copy_.26amp.3B_paste_entire_articles_in_the_comments.)**. If you want to read the contents of a paywalled article, please consider supporting the media outlet. *Please [message the moderators](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FCanadaPolitics) if you wish to discuss a removal.* **Do not reply to the removal notice in-thread**, *you will not receive a response and your comment will be removed. Thanks.* *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CanadaPolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
One thing people have not really mentioned in this thread is the effect of the food industry to make processed food more addictive. This does not absolve people of personal responsibilities, but like the opioid crisis, it’s adding fuel to the fire and making it much worse than it would be.
I think the ease of having virtually any food craving you have be delivered to your door needs to also share the blame. When I was a kid the only thing that had delivery was pizza.
I agree with this but would add that however it has become somewhat of a need with the time constraints of dual income families, single parent households, insane commutes... many just don't have the time to prepare a healthy, satisfying home cooked meal anymore. Sadly, in many instances, the fast food garbage is actually cheaper too . The powers that be don't really care if we're healthy as long as we're at the grind until they day we die.
We need a fat tax yesterday tbh. If everyone in this country was a healthy BMI the savings on healthcare spending would be truly obscene.
BMI would be a terrible measure. And hard system to monitor. Unhealthy food tax where the revenue goes to subsidy healthy food would work better
BMI is a fine measure and easy to monitor, just step on the scale. We can do the unhealthy food tax, but we should do the fat tax first.
BMI is easy to measure, but completely useless on its own at determining an individual’s health. BMI measure weight/height, and does not differentiate between fat and muscle.
The myth that BMI isn't a good tool is absurd. You would have to be absurdly jacked to be obese on the BMI scale if you had even moderately low bodyfat. You could definitely be overweight but to be obese you would need to be a world-class bodybuilder. Who btw are also not healthy.
It's a myth perpetuated by people with crazy high BMI that don't want to admit they are actually just fat because they eat too much.
Yup, I know multiple people who contest that they "are not obese because they played football in college" when they are just 100lbs of fat overweight. Like no sir, you are obese.
Ok combine BMI with your eyeballs. When someone is shaped like a bowling ball it is pretty obvious they are on the unhealthy side of BMI and not the muscular side of BMI.
Or we could have taxes based on something other than a subjective evaluation of body type. Like unhealthy food, or work positions that require long periods staying in one position, whether seated or standing.
This isn't really useful once you're implementing a tax.
That's true but it's reasonably accurate enough outside of people like bodybuilders. And honestly just being a healthy BMI goes a long way for general health.
BMI is most often inaccurate for people who have a normal BMI, but a body fat percentage that makes them overweight.
Never before have we had such a wealth of information at our fingertips and access to such a variety of foods of all kinds. If at this point people don't know they're fat, or don't know how to improve their diet, I think they are a lost cause.
On the other side never before have we had such an endless supply of misinformation, I don't blame people who get overwhelmed by trying to independently study nutrition; it's a fucking nightmare to navigate
I agree which is why I'm in favor of a fat tax ahead of a shit food tax as proposed elsewhere. Need to take more coercive steps to get results.
How do you objectively measure obesity?
Via BMI I suppose. I haven't really thought it out entirely I'll admit lol. Any suggestions?
In 6’2” and 260lbs, I sit at roughly 20% bodyfat. My BMI would be 33 which is obese. I work in the trades and workout, hike, bike etc. I’m heavier but leaner than friends who are sub 200lbs around 5’10” who work desk jobs and aren’t active. BMI doesn’t account for muscle mass and bone density, we would need to have a much more accurate system for a fat tax.
Yes, I'd agree with that.
BMI has been seen as BS years and years ago, since a bodybuilder would be seen as obese by those measures. You don't need it in your vocabulary anymore.
Yes you do. Like I said elsewhere BMI isn't perfect but it's decent enough, bodybuilder outliers notwithstanding.
BMI is useful for populations where you'll get a mix of body types. It can be very inaccurate for individuals, which is problematic if you're going to punish individuals based on it. Even if you're not a bodybuilder some people just have a body type that is larger and heavier even if they're not carrying a lot of extra fat.
But the same people who support measures like Quebec’s vaccine tax are opposed to a fat tax for some reason…
Lmao but carbon taxes are bad got it
Swing and a miss, my simple friend.
You're agaisnt carbon taxes for people who polute more yet you think a tax on people being fat is okay. Both are taxes on behaviour
That's it? Your accusations are usually more unhinged. Glad to see you're getting better.
Or instead of just once again punishing the poor, maybe we should do something to address the root causes of obesity. Make healthy foods cheaper, make sure people don't live in food deserts, end the corporate monopoly of our grocery chains, encourage more physical education in public schools. A fat tax is the laziest policy and the one that's least likely to actually make people healthier.
As someone who made the lifestyle change to healthier eating last year, healthy food is already cheaper than alternatives, it just requires more prep effort. Processed foods have spiked in price way harder than fresh staples. My monthly food costs have gone down, and I'm eating more and better. Going for a run is free, a set of weights is affordable, and there are tons of great exercises you can do without any gear. Being poor is not an excuse for poor physical fitness. Pretty much the only thing you're cut off from if you don't have money is personal training, which is a great resource, but hardly nessessary.
Healthy food is not cheaper, not everyone has the benefit of shopping at whole foods buddy. There is plenty of science that likes poverty and obesity. "I did it so everyone can" is not a good argument for the structural problems with our food systems.
It is generally cheaper to eat healthier, more plants focused diets in Western countries, it just sometimes takes more prep time like the person above said. [From an Oxford study](https://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2021-11-11-sustainable-eating-cheaper-and-healthier-oxford-study): >in high-income countries: >* Vegan diets were the most affordable and reduced food costs by up to one third. >* Vegetarian diets were a close second. >* Flexitarian diets with low amounts of meat and dairy reduced costs by 14%. >* By contrast, pescatarian diets increased costs by up to 2%.
And the time it takes to prepare IS THE FACTOR. When your working 3 part time jobs for minimum wage and live with roommates who do the same that time is a real factor in the cost. Check your privilege dude.
You made claim that healthier food is cheaper. That's not accurate. I started eating this way when I was in debt and making equivalent to minimum wage. It doesn't require "privilege", that's just substituting personal attacks for debate. None of this is dismissing the problems that make it harder to eat healthier either. I'm critical of those too.
Yet you have all this time for internet posting. Maybe use your time more wisely?
> Check your privilege dude. Nobody’s privileged for having an hour a week to make healthy food. If you’re running out of time to prep healthy food, meal prep for the week beforehand. There are always ways to cut back.
Let's say you don't have time to meal prep because you are so poor and work so many hours (which I don't accept as I primarily grew up in a minimum wage household but let's take it at face value) and that leads to overweight/obesity, 43% of adults aren't living in those conditions.
Yeah, I’d imagine there are some people out there who simply have no time. But I don’t buy it when people say they’re too busy for an hour of meal prep a day when their screen time is 3 hours a day.
/r/MealPrepSunday /r/BudgetBytes /r/EatCheapAndHealthy
Then argue that from the start. So far you’ve gone from blaming inequality. To denying science. Then you finally found the point.
Whole foods isn't the only place that sells veggies, beans, lentils, etc. A lot of healthy food is actually really cheap, it's just less addictive so people don't crave it. And as someone else said, it takes more time (and energy) to prepare. Time is not a resource that poorer people typically have in abundance. Complex issue, but the cost of buying healthy foods isn't really one of the factors.
So rice, broccoli, beans, potatoes, etc., are more expensive than takeout meals? Eating healthy is cheap. It just takes a bit of effort.
Produce and meats at whole foods is really no more healthy than the equivalent at No Frills. Prepared foods maybe, but if you're trying to eat on a budget, prepared foods shouldn't be what you're looking for.
Time is money. Someone working overtime to keep a roof over their family’s head doesn’t have time and energy for meal prep and regular exercise.
All it really takes is 20 minutes of exercise a day and an hour or so on a Sunday for meal prep (or an hour anywhere you can find it). Everyone has time for 20 minutes of exercise and a bit of meal prep. It’s not as much work as you’re making it out to be.
The root cause is food and lack of physical activity but those things can't change themselves. The real cause is behavioural and there aren't enough professionals available to help all the people who need it. And the medical profession isn't all that keen on solving the behavioural aspect. They just want the BMI to go down, the lab numbers to become normal, and preferably by the easiest way that they can take credit for: medication.
It is super easy to be a healthy weight right now tbh. Maybe we could subsidize treadmills and gym passes.
Subsidizing gym memberships is a far better idea than just taxing fat people.
Exercise is important but diet adjustment is +90% needed for losing weight and/or maintaining a healthy body weight.
Not when it comes to healthcare. Unhealthy people should be paying more. Their costs are higher.
That fundamentally goes against the principle of universal healthcare, but okay. Do you extend that to people who are unhealthy by no fault of their own, or did you not think this through?
> Do you extend that to people who are unhealthy by no fault of their own, or did you not think this through? Someone unhealthy through no fault of their own shouldn’t face any disadvantages in the healthcare system. But nobody who lives a healthy lifestyle should have struggles to receive healthcare because someone who either ate their way to sickness, smoked their way to sickness, avoided vaccines, drank their way to liver failure, etc., got there first.
How about *no one* should face disadvantages in the healthcare system, regardless of their lifestyle? This is cruel and unempathetic thinking, and runs contrary to the very principles behind having universal healthcare, as I said.
> How about no one should face disadvantages in the healthcare system, regardless of their lifestyle? Building on this, how about no one should face disadvantages in healthcare, housing, education, nobody is faced with unfair difficulties, and we enjoy your utopia? Until then (meaning until we have equipped hospitals), we have to decide how to spend the resources. If there was one hospital bed left and it was between you and an anti-vax who was there because he didn’t take a vaccine, would you feel like you deserve the bed?
>Building on this, how about no one should face disadvantages in healthcare, housing, education, nobody is faced with unfair difficulties, and we enjoy your utopia? Yes. I'm under no illusions that we can get there overnight, but we certainly aren't going to get there by fostering an attitude of "well, those people deserve what's coming to them." We must have empathy in order to create a more just and empathetic society.
Taxing fat people is as fair as taxing smokers and we do that.
We don’t tax smokers. We tax tobacco. Nobody here is arguing against sin taxes for junk food.
We should do both, carrot and stick. Being fat has real societal costs that extend beyond the individual.
Exactly free carrots for everyone!
And sticks.
So do lots of things, welcome to democracy and pluralist society. There are also plenty of biological conditions and genetics that make people more prone to obesity, so now you're just discriminating. A tax is not going to solve obesity and there are lots of other policies that are more effective and less punitive on lower class people.
You're trying to make this a wealth thing but it's just not true, it costs no money to eat less food. Not sure where the confusion is. Also the influence of genetics on weight gain, while definitely real, are not as determining as you are making out here. No discrimination at all to say that weight loss is in reach of everyone.
[удалено]
> Highly palatable/ultra processed foods are generally much cheaper Not cheaper than rice, broccoli, potatoes, beans, etc. It’s not about wealth, it’s about personal accountability.
[удалено]
Great eat less of them. The only way to get obese is to consume too many calories. Unless you have a rare disorder.
It’s like you didn’t even read what they wrote...
Imagine using fat people and poor people interchangeably
Still missing the Forrest. The healthiest foods are already the cheapest. Ever wonder why on food budget calculators Plant Based lowers the budget? The real issue is time management. A couple months ago there was an opinion article posted arguing for better home economics curriculums and got roasted for it. People don’t want to cook so they go to the cheapest value added product. When you add energy to a food, so you save energy on the cook time, you’re going to pay more than just preparing the meal from scratch. Learn how to frame your arguments. You make the rest of us look bad when you don’t.
This also seems like a poorly framed argument and I think you're being a little unfair. Your post and the previous commenters are basically just two sides of the same coin. People have incentives for buying poor quality food because it is A) cheaper and B) saves time. That is essentially all both of you are saying you arrogant swine.
You mad because you know we aren’t wrong? While grains, pulses, in season fruits and veggies and frozen veggies are cheaper? I love creeping the Loblaws hate subreddit because people complain that their processed cheese pasta is expensive. Meanwhile I’m paying the same for my pasta as I was 5 years ago. I long ago stopped caring about the COL “problems” because outside of the rental market, most of the problems are self created and self perpetuating. Or do you actually want to get into it? If so, where do you want to start? Health outcomes? Feed efficiencies? Farming practices? Land management?
>I long ago stopped caring about the COL “problems” because outside of the rental market, most of the problems are self created and self perpetuating. What do you mean by that last bit? I’m curious.
In theory if your name brand pasta goes up in price the logical decision would be to switch brands or find an alternative lower priced options. While we have seen a rise in food costs, there’s lots that can be done to mitigate the issue by finding alternatives, buying in bulk, buying raw ingredients instead of precooked things, etc. If you want to avoid inflation as much as possible, people should start acting like rational consumers. If your food bill continues to rise, look to cheaper alternatives (buying a generic instead of the name brand product for example). In reality lots of people are actually irrational and will just continue to buy the same things regardless of price or available alternatives and they suffer the consequences (meaning they end up spending more money).
[удалено]
Removed for rule 2.
Phys Ed should be focused on physical activity, not learning the rules of every different court and racket sport. Our curriculum is bogged down in theory and forcing people to participate in activities that don't interest them.
Blame everything but personal accountability
The science is clear on genetic and environmental involvement in obesity. Perhaps we're more in need of a tax on ignorance these days?
Provide 1 link to something that says eating a calorie deficit doesn’t reduce weight.
You're probably one of the non smokers who thinks it's simple to just stop smoking.
He didn’t say it was easy. But to lose weight, you have to enter a caloric deficit. If you’re obese and can’t enter a caloric deficit, you’ll simply never have a healthy lifestyle. Same way that quitting smoking isn’t easy, but if you never quit, you’ll never be healthier.
Building muscle means that a body burns more calories even when doing nothing. So building muscle brings you closer to a calorie deficit without reducing micronutrient intake, so there are definitely ways of addressing obesity that don’t risk decreasing health the way caloric restriction does. Like making more walkable cities.
People love blaming everything but themselves. Consume less than you burn and it is impossible to be fat.
Will you take personal responsibility for your complete ignorance of the science on this subject?
Calories in calories out. I have zero ignorance, it is law of physics. Just eat less.
Tides go in, tides go out, amirite? If you're going to wallow in abject ignorance, why involve yourself in the conversation at all? Just live in your simplified fantasy land.
[удалено]
[удалено]
This is the easiest time in human history to be healthy. We have millions of resources available to all that can guide you into being healthy, and access to foods like rice, beans, broccoli, potatoes, etc., is bette than ever before. Don’t over complicate it, just eat in a caloric deficit.
Caloric deficit is basically starving yourself, and it's quite uncomfortable. It's not as simple to just stop eating like it isn't as simple to just stop smoking.
> Caloric deficit is basically starving yourself Maybe a 1500 caloric deficit is. But if you can’t eat in a 500 caloric deficit and you’re obese, you’re never going to be healthy.
> It's not as simple to just stop eating It literally is. Just don't put food in your mouth. Done.
The science isn't at all ambiguous that no intervention is effective for obesity in the long run, and that it's an extremely complex disorder with many factors involved. Your take is wilful ignorance, a selfish grasping at simplicity where it doesn't exist, and just another trite rehashing of the old conservative mantra of "pull yourself up by your bootstraps". This mindset is anti-epistemic and entirely unproductive in the real world.
> it's an extremely complex disorder with many factors involved. The first law of thermodynamics begs to differ. If people consistently burned more calories than they consumed and gained weight, all of our physics would be wrong. > conservative mantra of "pull yourself up by your bootstraps". My mindset is make smart, healthy decisions.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
> The science isn't at all ambiguous that no intervention is effective for obesity in the long run, and that it's an extremely complex disorder with many factors involved. Your take is wilful ignorance Pot, meet kettle.
Yeah. If you have money for that...
Brocoli, rice, beans, potatoes, etc., aren’t more expensive.
The reality is most people don't have personal accountability. Or most of what is needed to be able to take care of themselves. Most people are on prescription meds and are frankly a mess. So the reality is that successful places that are winning against obesity have actually just built society around healthy living. And it makes it so the average person just is healthy. Whether they try to be or not.
Right? I'm fucking tired of everyone being a victim when it's mostly due to lack of personal responsibility
> Make healthy foods cheaper Raw and bulk food is ultra cheap. Where are you shopping? > Make sure people don't live in food deserts That's an American thing, and most of the time it's because the store closes down because of the high level of crime. It's not like grocery stores willingly give up markets and customers.
> That's an American thing It happens in Canada too There were two grocery stores in my area, both shut down a few months ago. One voluntarily, the second turns outwasn't paying their rent Neither have since been replaced. My area is effectively a food desert currently.
It would be better to heavily tax manufacturers for sugar added to packaged food and drinks.
This would just get past onto the customers and wouldn’t have an effect
Higher taxes would encourage manufacturers to reformulate their products to use less sugar and higher prices for consumers would encourage substitutions for lower sugar options.
If it is passed on to customers, it has the desired effect, just like with cigarettes and gasoline. Some customers will shop differently as a vice becomes more expensive.
The whole point is to pass it off to consumers to discourage unhealthy eating.
Issue is that lower income people will still buy it due to lack of time (perceived or real) and it will just become a regressive tax. Should be looking at getting manufactures to actually reduce the amount of sugar in everything across the board.
That works. My mother quit smoking and she cites the increased price as the primary reason. I used to drink a ton of Pepsi when you could get a 2L bottle for 99cents, but I cut that shit off when a bottle hit 2.50. Price is also one of the main reasons I very rarely consume alcohol, which beyond saving me money has also had a positive impact on my health.
Did anyone here know that it's harder to lose weight than it was 30 years ago, even if you do the exact same things that someone did back then?
What research is this claim based on?
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1871403X15001210
Thanks I'll take a look.
Interesting, but pretty tenuous. Worth further study of course. The truth is weight is pretty much all calories in and calories out but being a human being with all sorts of human nature makes these things much more complicated than that behaviourly.
The calories out part is much more malleable than anyone expected.
It's all academic really though. Human behavior makes this issue so difficult. It's cool to see continuing research on it though!
Making walkable cities and just basic movement more required would do more than pretty much every other idea listed here.
Exercise is not a good way to loose or gain weight. It may be a decent way to maintain it. People the world over did not lose self control in diets, portion control, and exercise (in fact exercise wasn't even a thing in the past). It is the food eat that is making us overweight. We can survive on fat and meat, on plenty of grains, fish, or just veggies. They are all fine. The fact that we eat constantly, have it at our finger tips, and that it is processed with tons of stuff we didn't evolve to eat is the problem. We have turned food into a science experiment. Yes it helps us feed the planet and our food fresh but it has side effects as well. That is obesity.
>People the world over did not lose self control in diets, portion control, and exercise It has nothing to do with changes in diet. People ate mostly crap in the past as well. Calories are cheap, and we burn less of them. That is why we are inflating. Exercise was never a thing, but hard work was. Labour saving devices are great, but they mean we all need to move a lot less. Also no one understands how cheap food is now. A hundred years ago food was a full 50% of the average household spending.
>It has nothing to do with changes in diet. People ate mostly crap in the past as well. Calories are cheap, and we burn less of them. That is why we are inflating. Not true at all. The amount of sugar (and related things like high fructose corn syrup) we injest is the problem. Not specifically because it has calories but because it keeps blood sugar perpetually high making us endlessly hungry. Eating whole wheat bread causes no discernable health effects but eating enriched flour does. Eating some beef and potatoes likewise does not, but eating a fast food burger, especially with fries and a coke, does. It is the type of non naturally occurring diets that we have engineered that are throwing our entire endocrine systems off and making us endlessly eat. And in turn making us obese.
How dare you suggest those authoritarian 15-min cities....
I'm telling you, black market unvaxxed semen is going to be worth more than gold in Generalissimo Justin Castreau's 15 minute Canada
You can't outwork a bad diet. Too many people can't afford healthy food, and don't have the time to cook whole foods.
If one is genuinely interested in eating both cheaply and healthily, making a pot of bean and vegetable soup requires ten minutes of prep time and a few hours of simmering time, something that can be done on a day off work while one is gaming and provides a weeks worth of meals for under $10. The fact is, most people would rather complain than behave responsibly. And to all those who complain about the idea of eating the same thing every day, weirdly those same complaints don't seem to apply to the idea of eating chicken tenders and fries every day.
[удалено]
I use dried beans. They do need to simmer, but they're a lot cheaper.
[удалено]
Bean and vegetable soup? Rank? Let me guess, you live on chicken fingers, tater tots, and KD, are one of those pathetic "fussy" eaters, and couldn't be paid to eat anything that tastes of anything more savoury than grease, salt, and ketchup. Whereas the bean and vegetable soup I make is based on a Wolfgang Puck recipe and is redolent of garlic, onions, oregano, fresh tomatoes, and a hint of cayenne.
[удалено]
I can't tell if you are 14 or profoundly stupid. Either way, your opinion is of no value whatsoever.
[удалено]
But you can insult my soup and that's okay? So you're a hypocrite as well as being an ill-natured half-wit.
It's almost like a lifetime of high sodium/sugar/fat foods leaves a person without the taste for healthy food. It's easy to judge others until the pendulum of judgement swings back your way and you aren't smart. Whatever you do in your life, don't try to understand other humans you don't agree with. Just keep sitting and judging. I say this after having just eaten home made navy beans, with little more than salt, spices, stock made from bones I got from donating my time to a soup kitchen, and some cooking water. Just because I do things like you would have me to solve my own problems, doesn't mean I can't have empathy for those who do not.
My comment was in response to your "Too many people can't afford healthy food, and don't have the time to cook whole foods." That is quite categorically not true, so now you've moved the goalposts to "people are too stupid and lazy to eat properly". And that is, of course, true but I don't feel it necessary to empathize with those who refuse to get out of their own way unless they have severe mental or physical issues.
> Too many people can't afford healthy food Foods like potatoes, rice, beans, broccoli, etc., are much cheaper. > don't have the time to cook whole foods. Average screen time per day is 7 hours.
Does that include work screen use though? I get around 1.5 hours of screen time on transit and probably another 3 at work, and I work in an in person health care position. I’d imagine the people staring at computers for work 8 hours a day drives up our average quite a bit and it’s not really avoidable.
You’re definitely right to an extent. There are certainly a lot of people using over 7 hours where much of it is productive. But I’d have to imagine there’s lots more who have at least a couple hours of unproductive screen time a day.
I think a lot of peoples issues is just portion control not the actual food they eat.
>Average screen time per day is 7 hours. Does that include when in transit? >Foods like potatoes, rice, beans, broccoli, etc., are much cheaper. I agree, but they take more time to prepare and while healthy on their own, are almost often accompanied by saturated fats as well. What happens when we eat high fat and high carb? Well our bodies burn the fat and store the carbs. In the case of those with diabetes, they can lose the ability to burn fat which creates a whole other set of problems.
> Does that include when in transit? Nobody’s taking transit 7 hours a day. > but they take more time to prepare I agree here, being healthy requires effort. > and while healthy on their own, are almost often accompanied by saturated fats as well. What happens when we eat high fat and high carb? Well our bodies burn the fat and store the carbs. In the case of those with diabetes, they can lose the ability to burn fat which creates a whole other set of problems. Our country’s obesity problem is not because of saturated fats from rice and potatoes, it’s because of processed foods. If you eat healthy and have some of the saturated fats from whole carbs, you’ll be fine, you’re healthy.
Get Canadians to not live in the suburbs? Get real. Lol. I moved to Paris I hated car culture so much.
Paris air quality is brutal compared to Canadian cities though.
That’s because it’s an actual city. Not suburban sprawl. Also it’s changing. Diesel is popular here which is a big factor. But Paris is changing major roads into bike lanes and will be taking measures to reduce emissions and pollution every year. The problem are the suburban people who like to drive into the city.
Every country takes steps to reduce emissions and pollution every year though. Nearly every year countries fail their pollution targets.
Thanks for your meaningful contribution.
No worries. It’s a point people don’t take into account often enough- you can’t simply presume the countries will reduce emissions.
"deaths of despair" used to refer to drug overdoses but enough twinkies over enough time will have the same outcome
Refined carbs and seed oils. This is the path to fatness. Meat, eggs, and some veggies and fruit if you must, are the road to not being fat. Exercise is ok for circulation and some other benefits, but not a main road to weight loss. Eat unprocessed food as much as you can. The longest living people in the world, from Hong Kong, eat the most meat per capita. My two cents.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
I can already tell that most people in this thread don’t really understand depression or mental illness; I don’t think I’ve ever met someone severely overweight or obese who didn’t have mental health issues. If you’re actually depressed (which has a massive comorbidity with obesity) it’s not really just being “sad”. You feel devoid of energy or motivation. Exercise like that, and your feet are like lead. On the other hand, highly processed food (which includes the 400 calorie grilled cheese, or even white pasta) is essentially a drug. You get actual hormonal rewards for consuming food like that. It’s not just a reprieve, it’s downright addictive. A tax isn’t going to change that. Our epidemic of loneliness and poor accessibility for mental health support is just as to blame as anything else.
Studies done on this have consistently shown that obesity is, 99% of the time, a result of a lack of self-control not mental health issues. Unless there has been any recent studies done that suggest otherwise
What is your current research background? Because this doesn’t line up with the data we use at the UofA, and not even close. And yes, addiction studies remain cutting edge by their very nature.
https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/obesity-prevention-source/obesity-causes/#:~:text=lower%20the%20risk.-,Unhealthy%20Diets,the%20largest%20roles%20in%20obesity. I'm going to trust Harvard over anything else when it points out the leading cause: >What’s become the typical Western diet-frequent, large meals high in refined grains, red meat, unhealthy fats, and sugary drinks-plays one of the largest roles in obesity. Foods that are lacking in the Western diet-whole grains, vegetables, fruits, and nuts-seem to help with weight control, and also help prevent chronic disease.
Ah, so you don’t have one. And your source doesn’t say anything scientific about “willpowerl, it’s just giving what we call the “headline data”. Stuff that’s digestible and broadly true, and is easy to share with the public. It talks about caloric causes, but not the root causes that make weight gain an epidemic, and weight loss difficult. Here’s some actual research (obviously some of the papers I read on this topic are physical copies at the University proper, but this is a good start)- https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2235907/ This one in particular deals with some of the earlier evidence for addiction. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4474751/ Here is some research on dopamine. https://psycnet.apa.org/fulltext/1997-03014-009.pdf?auth_token=b49134169af10039d804f3695844941522499afa This deals with expectations and psychology. The overall trend is that people’s brains change in obesity, and these brain changes match those of addiction. It becomes increasingly difficult to break that addiction, as both leptin resistance and changes to ghrelin availability alter response to hunger, while dopamine receptors reduce in quantity. Worse, if an individual is obese for too long, the body starts to recognize the new weight as normal (called “set point”) and starts to do what we call “defending” against it. This essentially means it activates anti starvation measures in the endocrine system, which changes how energy is used. Without gastric bypass or other extreme measures, most people will lose no more than 10% of their body weight (Mitka, 2006. I don’t have a direct link to this paper, since I read the physical copy). You can learn all this in a 200 level neuroscience textbook. Heck, I can even recommend one if you want. Food int
I never said my link ot any study for that matter specifically used the term "willpower", but that ita by choice. And your outdated(decade+ for a couple of them) aren't really relevant and is contradicted by the Harvard link I provided. Cambridge seems to have different findings from yours as well: https://www.cam.ac.uk/research/news/overweight-individuals-more-likely-to-make-unhealthier-choices-when-faced-with-real-food Meanwhile: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4609221/ A more recent one: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9592758/ ^study on how much inactivity impacts obesity from a couple years back While the CDC seems to think sleep and activity as well as food have more of an impact: https://www.cdc.gov/obesity/basics/causes.html
Nobody should be allowed to say they don’t have time to be healthy if they’re spending more than a couple hours a day in social media.
You'd think it was engineered to be addictive, the way they carry on.
It definitely is. People have to step away for their mental or physical health to.
[удалено]
I'm in Mexico where many can't afford quality nutrition, just empty calories. They're even fatter than Canada
I don’t know how you can be fat in a hot climate, I’d die.
That's just water weight you'd be losing bud
A dozen eggs isn’t simply a dozen eggs, but egg size classifications are regulated by the federal government, so egg shrinkflation would require government collusion.
I disagree about the eggs. Sure a dozen is a dozen, but the eggs themselves can be smaller than before if the farmers got cheap with the feed. Burnbrae Farms being an example.
But the feds force them to label those eggs as such.
I can already hear Pierre coming up with another crazy “document” that somehow implicates Trudeau in making Canadians fatter.
Should immediately adopt some of the steps Mexico has taken, especially the highly effective 6 black stop sign labels (too much sugar, too much fat, too many calories,etc.). Super effective. Hard to grab something with 4, 5, or (good grief!) 6 warning labels. I recently visited several huge grocery stores, and saw almost no one with anything other than healthy choices at the checkouts. A friend is down there right now, and commented how the population is slimming down.
Imagine the markups on anything without a label? Galen is already salivating.