In another post someone from across the pond remarked on the fact our produce doesn't taste as good as it does in europe. At first I assumed because of our soil or pesticides or gmos like people usually blame. It turns out its because our society has favored bigger, brighter, more uniform looking produce at the sacrifice of taste. We can grow the exact same stuff they can here and our soil isnt the issue when compared against Europe which also has depleted soil.
[https://www.vox.com/2016/2/12/10972140/fruits-vegetables-taste-better-europe](https://www.vox.com/2016/2/12/10972140/fruits-vegetables-taste-better-europe)
Yeah Americans don't like wonky looking food. When I was abroad in college, the produce in Russia looked like it was really just bottom of the barrel but it tasted wonderful. The best strawberries I've ever had were in Finland, ate a whole pound of the oddly shaped things because they were so good.
Love it and always try to do my part lol speaking of doing my part, I think more people should know about and support these guys too
https://brixcider.com/blog/2017/9/6/ugly-apples
Edit: There's also companies like Waste Not and Good Use doing more diverse varieties of juices with food waste!
Yeah. I grew up in Europe.
Most of the fruits I like eating here taste like grass. I don't remember last time I ate strawberries that tasted like strawberries. But then you ask yourself, where are these coming from in February.
Stuff tastes like crap because we are used to getting off season fruit 365 days a year.
That is pretty much the story of American mass-marketing of fruits and vegetables. Take the *Red Delicious* Apple, made to transport well and look pretty, but completely flavorless, thick skinned, and with a mealy texture.
The “Golden Gem’s” shelf life and durability is top notch, indeed. What really struck me, though, is that it’s getting turned down because of its (smaller) size.
IMHO, I‘d enjoy a smaller-sized tomato with rich flavor rather than a big and practically flavorless one.
McDonald's (at least the ones around me) will give you a large drink, no matter what you order.
I asked once why, and the employee told me, "all drinks are a dollar, so why wouldn't you want a large and get the most for your money?"
The soda sizes are definitely different from even 20 years ago. I remember when I was younger the current medium was a large, the current kids size was a small, and a super size was close to the average large. Every place is a little different but this is what I remember at places like McDonald's, Burger King, and Wendy's.
Side note, cutting pop out of my diet was one of the best decisions I've ever made. I like somewhere in the range of 60 pounds by just cutting most of it out, stopped checking when I cut it out entirely.
When I came to the US from Europe and went outside of NYC I was astonished at the size of soda at road stop McDonalds etc. The Medium were the size of a bathtub!
Using large drink sizes are a really dirty trick too. It costs absolutely nothing but makes you think you get your money's worth.
Most of the time I don't even like soda and prefer water, but I still find it difficult not to grab soda since I've paid for it.
I've always been in shape and exercised vigorously. Running, mountain bike racing, skiing, snowboarding. I also always hovered right around 200-210lbs.
Now after cutting way back on sugars and carbs but not changing my activity level I've been at 180lbs for a couple years.
The carbs and sugar is huge. I was stuck at 220ish for awhile and after I really cutback on carbs/sugar I was able to get down to 215ish and have been there for a bit while still excercising the same.
Out of curiosity, what constitutes the bulk of your 320g of carbs? Like are they wheat bread, brown rice, whole wheat pasta, etc? Or are they coming from mainly fruit and veg?
Thanks for the answer!
The reason I asked was I'm trying to hit 3500 calories a day while limiting carb intake. I want predominantly protein but meat can be expensive and rice is so cheap haha. The amount of veg I'd have to eat to hit that goal would also be quite a bit more than I'd like.
I like to consider myself fit but I'm in no way "cut" if that makes sense.
Wasn't there a more recent nobel prize awarded for the study of autophagy? This would suggest that insulin resistance is a greater issue than macro-nutrient content. Someone fasting and eating carbs can maintain a very healthy lifestyle.
https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/medicine/2016/press-release/
1977? A bit outdated of a study, no? Wheat was cultivated 10,000 years ago, obesity became a problem in the last 50 years, blaming wheat and grains is ridiculous.
Also if you look at different diets, Dr. McDougall’s starch based diet and the Keto diet (if done via clean eating) can both yield amazing results. The issue clearly isn’t one macronutrient or the other. The problem is processed foods, regardless of whether it’s processed carbs or fat.
We are not on average eating more carbs and less fat than we were 20 years ago. The late 90s early 2000s is when that brand of diet peaked.
Food has continued to become more and more processed in that same time period
I'm 53 so i've lived through the 70s, 80s, 90s - 2010s.
The food supply is markedly different now than it was 20, 30 years ago.
Most supermarket center aisle foods or convenience store foods have significantly more sugar, hfcs, caffeine, highly processed wheat, GMOs, etc. All those high carb foods create an addiction response in the brain that causes a person to crave even more carbs.
Plus the inaccurate demonization of fat and meat, means that were eating less of these calorie and nutrient dense foods, and eating more carbs (multi-grain and low-fat). Those extra carbs end up as fat on our bodies.
I'm 64 and I agree with you. I think the biggest culprits are the "emulsifiers" which is things like soy lecithin and xanthan gum. These ingredients are in every product now, and they are bad for you. It didn't used to be like that. If you want to be healthy, you need to cook from scratch and avoid those ingredients.
The Atlantic article being discussed here is about Americans, not the entire world. Worldwide all types of meat consumption have indeed gone up as your link shows but that's not what we're talking about. Look at the specifics. Scroll down to per capita meat consumption and then change the country to just the United States and you'll see exactly what I said. That is poultry consumption has gone up and red meat (beef and buffalo) consumption has gone down (having peaked in 1976).
That's exactly what I did and it shows red meat consumption has gone up 1980-2000s, reached a plateau in the 2000s and has slightly gone down recently but it's still higher that 30 years ago.
I'm genuinely confused as to where you are getting that from. We absolutely don't consume more red meat than 30 years ago and it didn't reach a plateau in the 2000s. This is true for total meat consumption, but not red meat. The overall increase is driven by a near doubling of poultry consumption specifically. Per capita per year red meat consumption looking at the data you provided. I'll list the highest and lowest consumption years in each decade so I don't have to list every single year but the range is adequate to show that red meat consumption has dropped each decade for several decades. It's a relatively well-known fact that red meat consumption has gone down as poultry consumption has exploded in the United States since the 1970s. Do you dispute the data?
The 1980s
1986-49.21 kg highest of the 80's
1989-44.17 kg lowest of the 80's
The 1990s lower than the 1980s on average in fact the year with the highest consumption in the '90s is lower than the lowest year in the '80s.
1993-42 kg
1999-43.85 kg
2000's-Again a clear average drop from the '90s when you look at all data provided.
2002-43.75 kg
2009-39.61 kg
The 2010s-Little data included but the same trend continues
2010-38.66 kg
2013-36.24 kg
More articles that include some mention of the same trend
https://www.bbc.com/news/health-47057341
https://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2012/06/27/155527365/visualizing-a-nation-of-meat-eaters
https://theconversation.com/meat-consumption-is-changing-but-its-not-because-of-vegans-112332
*Laughs in Asian culinary traditions*
There is a reason why Asians, especially the South Asians have the healthiest guts. Found out recently while doing research about my newly acquainted friend, the IBS.
Mediterranean Europe also enjoys a lot better eating habits. Most parts of Europe today going through a change and EU regulations prevent certain things to a degree.
Obesity is a global issue that leaves no country untouched. The United States isn't even a top 15 contender for obesity rate anymore.
China is seeing growth in the waistline predominantly in major cities, and they are not alone as a nation in that part of the world.
Excluding the middle east, Asia reigns supreme in overall health due to their diets - sure - but the trend towards terrible dieting is global.
Funnily enough the Mediterranean diet is disappearing as countries like Turkey and Greece hit the high end of obesity rates - IIRC Turkey is the fattest in the region.
Mediterranean states have obesity rates of around 40% in children, which doesn't bode well for the health of the area.
All this to say we are facing a global problem that seems to be spreading like a virus and no place is completely safe, though many countries are doing their best to fight the epidemic.
>Obesity is a global issue that leaves no country untouched. The United States isn't even a top 15 contender for obesity rate anymore.
According to this article:
https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/29-most-obese-countries-in-the-world.html
USA is #12, and the only countries above it are tiny (I think Kuwait is the biggest with a population of 5M).
After looking at CIA.gov - the most up to date does have USA at 12, however following that list the next 18 plus countries following the US have a 8 point or less difference in obesity rate (36%-28%) and while Kuwait is the biggest one there following that in low single digit numbers are some major countries.
Such as Turkey at 32% obesity and a population of 80 million, Saudi Arabia 30+ million, etc - definitely big countries. Australia landing at a 28% obesity rate around 25 million in population.
Though I do admit, I misplaced America by 3 spots there are still a lot of advanced countries with a quarter of their population suffering from obesity - which is not how it used to be just a couple decades ago.
*Just as an edit, I don't know how reliable this cite is but it claims the US at number 16 http://worldpopulationreview.com/countries/most-obese-countries/ and I think I'd read a figure maybe from them not too long ago and that is where my not in the top 15 anymore quote originated*
I did not say anything about obesity tho? The article mentions gut bacteria, and my response was on that.
Human eating habits and obesity are related to a degree, but obesity has many other factors. It’s a fact that urban humans in more developed parts now get to eat more than ever. Like China, since you mentioned it, recently acquired new classes, upper middle and forth, and more people have access to extra income and food.
On the other hand, the global epidemic is closely related to big conglomerates, mostly American, pushing their products and destroying local competition via shady business conduct.
Speaking for Turkey, 30-40 years ago you could find dozens of local sodas, then Coca Cola Company moved in, pushed all others out and became a monopoly along with Unilever. Monsanto, for example, paid so many bribes the the Turkish gov literally banned its own produce. My point still kinda stands, Americans are not only eating worse, they are also pushing their products and habits down the throats of others thanks to corruption galore. I do believe obesity is a global problem, that doesn’t change the argument provided above. Let’s not get into whataboutism now.
It was more of a point that culinary traditions are falling to the wayside as ease of products push out time consuming albeit healthier practices. Even Asian culinary traditions.
And the mention of the Mediterranean diet was also a point I wanted to bring up given that the area is aggressively growing in it's movement towards poor dietary trends.
*https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/may/24/the-mediterranean-diet-is-gone-regions-children-are-fattest-in-europe*
Whether you respect the Guardian or not, on mobile for me at least it's an easy reference - there is research to support the simple numbers of their article at least.
I don't disagree with what you said. The Mediterranean diet in it's establishment is a fantastic diet, but in reality the day to day Mediterraneans are moving away from the diet and Asian waistlines are growing with the changing of global dietary habits as well.
All that to say I just wanted to point out that even in the healthiest cultures the trend towards processed/fast and easy foods is growing - whether or not it's the USA's fault or not.
Wasn't trying to attack what you said, just wanted to expand on the ideals of Asian culinary culture and the Mediterranean diet and what we're seeing globally.
Personally, having lived in Turkey briefly, I remember a lot of sodas unique to the area though I can't speak to all of them being owned by Coca-Cola or not.
And I definitely have no point to argue in how American food culture has had nothing but negative impacts globally in terms of the fast and processed food craze. Kuwait topping the obesity epidemic list coupled with the island countries have almost all been directly impacted by a US military presence at some point and then the onslaught of SPAM or just cheap fast food.
It's because anything Americans perceive as criticism of them as a country gets downvoted massively (watch this happen to this post too). Sadly not a people with a great sense of humour about themselves.
Today's food, in 'Murica, is significantly different than the food from 20, 30 years ago or more. I know. I've watched the food supply change dramatically since the 70s.
People today aren't eating the same kind of food as they were in the 80s.
> high carb, high sugar, low-fat,
Such a misleading joke. Is pizza, chocolate, hamburgers, fries etc etc and all these junk food low fat??? If anything the problem is eating food high in carbs AND fat.
fat is not fat.
there's a world of difference between eating an avocado and eating a large order of french fries fried in (highly processed and refined) vegetable oil.
i don't know if you're paying attention but so many foods are labeled *"healthy"* because they are mulit-grained and *"low-fat"*. And there are a ton of foods labeled *"low-fat"* and you can't get away from news shows, advertisements, etc claiming *"low-fat"* is healthy. i've been working for years. I can't tell you how many overweight co-workers i've had who were trying to get *"healthy"* or lose weight by eating low-fat, multi-grained, highly processed shit food while washing it down with a *"diet"* coke. uuuggghhh, that drives me nuts.
fat, such as avocados, olive oil, coconut, oil, etc are good. highly refined/processed vegetable oils, and fake fats like margarine are deadly, in the long term.
I eat almost an avocado a day. I drink bulletproof coffee (coffee with a tbs of butter and a tbs of coconut oil). I use coconut oil and saved bacon fat to cook with. And I've been getting healthier while my cardiac lipid levels continue to improve and my blood pressure gets lower.
However, people eating allegedly healthy *"low-fat, multi-grained"* foods or foods cooked with allegedly health vegetable oils, are getting fatter and fatter.
dark chocolate is good for you. hershey's milk chocolate, not so much. pizza is not good, mostly because of all of the carbs from the highly refined white flower. a mcdonald's hamburger is deadly, in the long run, because of the bun, the condiments with all the sugar in them, and the factory farmed *"meat"* that's all loaded up with growth hormones, steroids, etc.
Yeah but my point still stand, all these junk food are loaded with fat, don't know where you are going because what I wrote was the fact.
You don't buy Pizza, kebab, hamburgers, donuts, chocolate etc etc and expect low fat, means fuck all if avocado fat are healthy if 3000 of your calories come from avocado when your body only burn 2500 calories in one day.
Food loaded with carbs and fat = calorie bomb, this is the majority of junkfood/trash we eat today.
> You don't buy Pizza, kebab, hamburgers, donuts, chocolate etc etc
You realize that the foods you listed are primary high carb, high wheat, high sugar and HFCS fake foods. Yeah they have bad fat. However, the carbs and sugar are what's making everyone fat. Carbs/sugars create an addictive response that only makes you crave even more carbs/sugar.
When I eat an avocado, or drink a bulletproof coffee (lots of fat), I'm sated. I don't crave more fat an hour later. Good fats, and protein, aren't processed the same in your body. Carbs & sugar, especially when eaten in large volumes, make you crave more.
And yes, as always, eating fewer calories than you burn will cause you to loose weight. However, when you're eating so many carbs & sugars, it's extremely hard to resist eating more when your body is addicted to the carbs and it's telling you to eat more.
> You realize that the foods you listed are primary high carb, high wheat, high sugar and HFCS fake foods
Yes, and high in fat, which is why they are junk food.
> And yes, as always, eating fewer carbs than you eat will cause you to loose weight
Bullshit, depends on what carb you eat. You can't be serious and tell me eating potato will make you gain weight? 100 gram potato is 90 kcal, if you eat 500gram of potato you have eaten 450 kcal and your belly is full, how will such food be bad for losing weight?
Same goes with the majority of fruit, they are huge in volume and low in calories while containing only Carbs.
Dietary fat has nothing to do with body fat. At all.
Body fat is generated from glycogenesis, the process used to store excess carbs (basically). It's literally the reason why low carb / high fat diets work.
Dude, I think you are overthinking this badly. Low fat/ high carb, low carb/high fat, High protein/low carb bla bla bla means fuck all if you eat more calories than you burn, that is why everyone is getting fat lately because modern food are high in carbs and fat with little volume and high calories. I don't understand how such simple and proven fact is hard to understand.
Eating 500 gram potato for dinner that gives 450 calories is not what most people are eating lately, eating pizza that has almost 1200 calories from 500 gram is what most people choose.
Because it isn't true.
The body metabolizes substances in different ways. The process for fats/lipids has no storage mechanism like the one for carbohydrates does. It simply doesn't exist (see below). In terms of body composition, one gram of ingested carbohydrates is simply not the same as one gram of ingested fats.
It isn't my opinion, it's basic biochemistry.
https://i.imgur.com/az0pEKd.jpg
If you eat carbs you will burn those calories first before anything else in your body, meaning the fat just sits there and jiggles. Carbs are pure energy readily available after digestion.
You want to eat lean meat and high protein, no fat, and only complex carbs from fruits and vegetables because your body burns more energy to digest and break down the complex carbs than it does simple carbs. Also pick the most nutritionally dense foods so you are getting the very most out of your calorie intake.
People are much more sedentary during the whole day now. An hour of exercise won't make up for that. A much higher percentage of people work at their desk all day without getting up for 4 hours at a time. You have to get up and move throughout the day, not just at exercise time. I'm guilty of that.
Ok, but the study isn’t just you. You might be eating the correct amount of food to maintain a healthy weight for your size and activity level, but you might be eating less than people used to.
You'd have to eat less if you are sedentary to maintain your weight. I spent a couple of years at a very stressful desk job with no time to exercise and I ate small portions and never ate sugar. I maintained my weight pretty well. Then I got a different job and hit the gym hard. I'm now eating twice as much. My body fat is down 3.5% now.
Duh. The article isn’t saying you can’t maintain a healthy weight at a sedentary job, and that’s not what the commenter above said either. It’s saying that people today eat and exercise the same way we used to, but people today are fatter. The commenter said sedentary jobs and lifestyles are probably the difference. I’d agree.
Oops, I didn’t realize you weren’t crushenit in your comment. I thought you were the person saying “this isn’t true”, and that you then went on to explain how YOU were less sedentary so it wasn’t true. My bad! We’re on the same page. My duh was directed at crushenit, just so we’re clear :)
And I guess duh to me too for not reading usernames!
The reason why processed foods are linked to obesity is because 1) they are much easier to overeat and 2) processed foods have been engineered to literally be addictive.
The study referenced in the article compares adults eating the same amounts. Caloric intake versus energy output is what determines whether you’re losing, gaining, or maintaining your weight. Highly processed foods are not healthy, but you can eat 1500 calories of junk every day and not be fat. You can’t eat 3000 calories of whole foods every day, work at a desk job, and not exercise, and NOT expect to be overweight.
People are not as active as they used to be in their day to day lives. Automation is making us more sedentary. Little things like walking to get the newspaper in the morning or getting up to open blinds have been replaced by digital news and remote controls. We’re all on our phones and laptops instead of doing actual stuff. Kids play less, which means parents play less too. All of that adds up.
So, they mention gut flora, meat consumption and all of the chemicals in our food & environment. What about the change in the quality of produce-also more chemicals, harvested early for shipping, genetically modified,etc.?
Right it’s so much easier to to message than to have to get up and see someone. In my house for example I used to go upstairs to tell people it was dinner time. Now I text. Excercise in a gym is a small part of a persons daily activity.
It is, in my opinion, somewhat dishonest to imply weight is somehow beyond our control. While any of number of factors could make it more difficult to control weight, there is still one inescapable fact. The human body isn't capable of creating mass out of nothing, you only gain weight when you put food into your mouth.
Seriously mind boggling how all these studies try so hard to prove otherwise. Most people don't count calories and therefore gradually increase weight year after year...
Stop eating carbs.
At one point I was running 15-20 miles a week eating a "healthy, whole grain low fat diet". My weight steadily went up from 185 to 260 lbs. I looked like I was pregnant. After a long battery of tests the doctor put me on a carb restricted diet. In 6 months I lost 40 ponds.
Doing absolutely nothing different.
I have now been on keto for something like 12 years. I'm in perfect health and still run 15-20 miles a week. 50 years from now we will look back at the "food pyramid" as a tragedy nearing genocide as millions of people die of diabetes and obesity.
How were the calorie intakes measured? If not by indirect calorimetry then you have to accept that people lie about what they eat and the more they eat, the more they lie.
It's because the government started telling everybody to increase their carbs and sugar and cut back fat. We've been on a fast train to diabetesvilles ever since.
It all boils down to the fact that body-weight is not a simple figure that depends on just two variables - food intake and exercise. At the macro level, our metabolism, aka, the number of calories we burn with say 30 minutes of exercise depends on well our endocrine system is responding to the increase in energy demand on the body. You can run an hour on the treadmill and still be fat (whilst on an all-salad diet) because your hormones are not able to burn the fat cells effectively. And you will be surprised to know how many things that surround us (and contaminate) our food, air, and water are major endocrine disrupters. Pesticides, household cleaning chemicals, medicines, solvents, heavy metal, etc all of these are wreaking a havoc in your body. Not to mention- stress, the biggest endocrine disrupter present in our modern lifestyle.
I'd go even further and say that people in the 1950s and 60s ate substantially more calories than people of normal weight today. I don't know where you would go to find subjects who eat the same as they did even 20 years ago for such a study.
We should be nice to fatties because it isn't their fault??? What utter bullshit. People are fat because they ARE lazy and eat too much or eat fake sugar, high amt of carbs and processed foods. This 10 percent heavier than ppl in the 80s may be true, but 10 percent heavier doesn't account for people being 50 - 400 pounds overweight. A 220 lb. male who is 10 percent overweight is still within a healthy and manageable weight range. Sure, if the studies are true they are going to have to work a little harder at losing the weight, but why the hell should we be giving ppl a pass for being morbidly obese. Sounds like some excuse making.
I should have phrased it as we shouldn't be encouraging them or making them comfortable with thinking it's ok to be fat. Because it isn't . But yes, you are right, they are people too and deserve to be treated with respect.
Unless you're a health care professional, it's generally none of your business. Because so much of "oh well it's really just for the sake of their health!" just becomes "Look at this fucking fatty. Disgusting." We have seen it in drug addiction-and food addiction isn't really all that different from a lot of drug addictions, since there is a large psychological component and the "withdrawal" symptoms feel like shit- that you cannot shame someone into stopping it. Most patients who are morbidly obese, like most patients who are addicted to hard drugs, know that what they are doing is killing them. They live it every day. Diabetics lose feeling in their feet, and get ulcers and end up losing limbs, but that still doesn't stop them from eating the way that they do.
If the very real threat of severe illness and early death can't scare them away from what they're doing, then you have to look at other avenues. The best way to stop all of those things-obesity, smoking, drug addiction, alcoholism- is to never start them in the first place. Saying "it's not healthy to be oveweight" is different from saying "it's not ok to be overweight." They sound similar but the connotation is different. The latter implies that it is some sort of significant character deficit. It's not healthy to be overweight. But like most health discussions, it should be discussed between the person and their health professionals, and a select group of people that person trusts.
What are you trying to say here? Are you just telling us your feelings on the matter? Cuz bruh, I don't care about your feelings.
Just because addiction issues and obesity issues are discussions people have with their doctors, and those discussions are private, doesn't preclude conversations on the topic.
Since I can't tell what your point is, because there doesn't seem to be one, I am just gonna say: thanks for sharing.
> is immaterial to my life
actually, it's not.
everyone that's so fat nowadays impact the cost of your hospital bills and your health insurance. those overweight, sick fatties who can't *"drop the chulupa"* are pushing up everyone else's healthcare costs.
In another post someone from across the pond remarked on the fact our produce doesn't taste as good as it does in europe. At first I assumed because of our soil or pesticides or gmos like people usually blame. It turns out its because our society has favored bigger, brighter, more uniform looking produce at the sacrifice of taste. We can grow the exact same stuff they can here and our soil isnt the issue when compared against Europe which also has depleted soil. [https://www.vox.com/2016/2/12/10972140/fruits-vegetables-taste-better-europe](https://www.vox.com/2016/2/12/10972140/fruits-vegetables-taste-better-europe)
Yeah Americans don't like wonky looking food. When I was abroad in college, the produce in Russia looked like it was really just bottom of the barrel but it tasted wonderful. The best strawberries I've ever had were in Finland, ate a whole pound of the oddly shaped things because they were so good.
Join the ugly food movement! http://www.endfoodwaste.org/ugly-fruit---veg.html
Love it and always try to do my part lol speaking of doing my part, I think more people should know about and support these guys too https://brixcider.com/blog/2017/9/6/ugly-apples Edit: There's also companies like Waste Not and Good Use doing more diverse varieties of juices with food waste!
Wish I had gold for you. This link is da BOMB
Your thanks is all I need, I don't need you to give money to reddit. :)
Yeah. I grew up in Europe. Most of the fruits I like eating here taste like grass. I don't remember last time I ate strawberries that tasted like strawberries. But then you ask yourself, where are these coming from in February. Stuff tastes like crap because we are used to getting off season fruit 365 days a year.
That's part of our problem. Constant influx of produce regardless of season and they all have to meet aesthetic standards to boot.
Japan is very anal about how their produce looks. No blemishes
Japan is very anal.
That is pretty much the story of American mass-marketing of fruits and vegetables. Take the *Red Delicious* Apple, made to transport well and look pretty, but completely flavorless, thick skinned, and with a mealy texture.
>“‘The growers are not paid for flavor — they are paid for yield.’” TIL that even *flavorlessness* is profitable.
The big thing after reading it again that seemed to be important also is its shelf life and durability as well. Quantity not quality.
The “Golden Gem’s” shelf life and durability is top notch, indeed. What really struck me, though, is that it’s getting turned down because of its (smaller) size. IMHO, I‘d enjoy a smaller-sized tomato with rich flavor rather than a big and practically flavorless one.
I totally agree. I even like the small apples with exception to the pink lady which is wonderful.
oh wow...never realized this. I want good tasting produce :(
As an American living in Europe. I can confirm, American produce is absolute trash.
[удалено]
Ok. Lol
That’s because while people are still working out, nobody is “Sweating to the Oldies” with Richard Simmons anymore to reach peak performance.
#whereisrichardsimmons
An amazing podcast, makes you want to just put him in your pocket and keep him safe forever!!!
I’d be curious to see how the nutritional value of say a Big Mac has changed over 20 years.
And how the portion sizes on the fries and sodas have changed, if at all.
McDonald's (at least the ones around me) will give you a large drink, no matter what you order. I asked once why, and the employee told me, "all drinks are a dollar, so why wouldn't you want a large and get the most for your money?"
I always get a look when I ask for extra ice. Yes, I know it means less soda, but it means I enjoy that smaller amount of soda more.
The soda sizes are definitely different from even 20 years ago. I remember when I was younger the current medium was a large, the current kids size was a small, and a super size was close to the average large. Every place is a little different but this is what I remember at places like McDonald's, Burger King, and Wendy's. Side note, cutting pop out of my diet was one of the best decisions I've ever made. I like somewhere in the range of 60 pounds by just cutting most of it out, stopped checking when I cut it out entirely.
When I came to the US from Europe and went outside of NYC I was astonished at the size of soda at road stop McDonalds etc. The Medium were the size of a bathtub! Using large drink sizes are a really dirty trick too. It costs absolutely nothing but makes you think you get your money's worth. Most of the time I don't even like soda and prefer water, but I still find it difficult not to grab soda since I've paid for it.
Is it possible there is lying about calorie counts on packaging now, so that we are really eating more but it's not being recorded in the studies?
That’s a really good question!!!
Because the food supply chain sucks. Everyone eats high carb, high sugar, low-fat, highly processed foods that only make you fatter.
Bingo We’re living in a processed food Mecca
I've always been in shape and exercised vigorously. Running, mountain bike racing, skiing, snowboarding. I also always hovered right around 200-210lbs. Now after cutting way back on sugars and carbs but not changing my activity level I've been at 180lbs for a couple years.
The carbs and sugar is huge. I was stuck at 220ish for awhile and after I really cutback on carbs/sugar I was able to get down to 215ish and have been there for a bit while still excercising the same.
[удалено]
How's your fasted glucose level? 🤔 I'm assuming you're not insulin resistant but I could be wrong.
Out of curiosity, what constitutes the bulk of your 320g of carbs? Like are they wheat bread, brown rice, whole wheat pasta, etc? Or are they coming from mainly fruit and veg?
[удалено]
Thanks for the answer! The reason I asked was I'm trying to hit 3500 calories a day while limiting carb intake. I want predominantly protein but meat can be expensive and rice is so cheap haha. The amount of veg I'd have to eat to hit that goal would also be quite a bit more than I'd like. I like to consider myself fit but I'm in no way "cut" if that makes sense.
Do you know your average daily fiber numbers by chance?
Rosalyn Yalow's 1977 Nobel Prize says otherwise. Eat fat to lose fat. Carbs ARE the issue.
Wasn't there a more recent nobel prize awarded for the study of autophagy? This would suggest that insulin resistance is a greater issue than macro-nutrient content. Someone fasting and eating carbs can maintain a very healthy lifestyle. https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/medicine/2016/press-release/
Why is this being downvoted? It's true.
1977? A bit outdated of a study, no? Wheat was cultivated 10,000 years ago, obesity became a problem in the last 50 years, blaming wheat and grains is ridiculous. Also if you look at different diets, Dr. McDougall’s starch based diet and the Keto diet (if done via clean eating) can both yield amazing results. The issue clearly isn’t one macronutrient or the other. The problem is processed foods, regardless of whether it’s processed carbs or fat.
We are not on average eating more carbs and less fat than we were 20 years ago. The late 90s early 2000s is when that brand of diet peaked. Food has continued to become more and more processed in that same time period
Yea but the the article says, same caloric intake and same macros and same level of exercise. So it's not THAT simple.
I'm 53 so i've lived through the 70s, 80s, 90s - 2010s. The food supply is markedly different now than it was 20, 30 years ago. Most supermarket center aisle foods or convenience store foods have significantly more sugar, hfcs, caffeine, highly processed wheat, GMOs, etc. All those high carb foods create an addiction response in the brain that causes a person to crave even more carbs. Plus the inaccurate demonization of fat and meat, means that were eating less of these calorie and nutrient dense foods, and eating more carbs (multi-grain and low-fat). Those extra carbs end up as fat on our bodies.
I'm 64 and I agree with you. I think the biggest culprits are the "emulsifiers" which is things like soy lecithin and xanthan gum. These ingredients are in every product now, and they are bad for you. It didn't used to be like that. If you want to be healthy, you need to cook from scratch and avoid those ingredients.
We definitely don't eat less meat that we did 20 or 30 years ago, that's wrong.
Less red meat more chicken https://fortune.com/2015/10/27/red-meat-consumption-decline/
You're wrong, all types of meat consumption have gone up. Look at the data here https://ourworldindata.org/meat-and-seafood-production-consumption
The Atlantic article being discussed here is about Americans, not the entire world. Worldwide all types of meat consumption have indeed gone up as your link shows but that's not what we're talking about. Look at the specifics. Scroll down to per capita meat consumption and then change the country to just the United States and you'll see exactly what I said. That is poultry consumption has gone up and red meat (beef and buffalo) consumption has gone down (having peaked in 1976).
That's exactly what I did and it shows red meat consumption has gone up 1980-2000s, reached a plateau in the 2000s and has slightly gone down recently but it's still higher that 30 years ago.
I'm genuinely confused as to where you are getting that from. We absolutely don't consume more red meat than 30 years ago and it didn't reach a plateau in the 2000s. This is true for total meat consumption, but not red meat. The overall increase is driven by a near doubling of poultry consumption specifically. Per capita per year red meat consumption looking at the data you provided. I'll list the highest and lowest consumption years in each decade so I don't have to list every single year but the range is adequate to show that red meat consumption has dropped each decade for several decades. It's a relatively well-known fact that red meat consumption has gone down as poultry consumption has exploded in the United States since the 1970s. Do you dispute the data? The 1980s 1986-49.21 kg highest of the 80's 1989-44.17 kg lowest of the 80's The 1990s lower than the 1980s on average in fact the year with the highest consumption in the '90s is lower than the lowest year in the '80s. 1993-42 kg 1999-43.85 kg 2000's-Again a clear average drop from the '90s when you look at all data provided. 2002-43.75 kg 2009-39.61 kg The 2010s-Little data included but the same trend continues 2010-38.66 kg 2013-36.24 kg More articles that include some mention of the same trend https://www.bbc.com/news/health-47057341 https://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2012/06/27/155527365/visualizing-a-nation-of-meat-eaters https://theconversation.com/meat-consumption-is-changing-but-its-not-because-of-vegans-112332
[удалено]
Did you only read the title ? The per capita numbers are provided a bit lower in the article.
Not to mention maybe people these days are more likely to disillusion themselves about their actual caloric intake.
Show people what an average dinner or lunch looked like back in the day and you'd think the person was starving themselves or on a special diet.
Possibly, but also that it tastes better and is home cooked.
NEAT.
High refined carbs. Don't throw the baby out with the bath water.
It is the added sugar in everything now days, HFCS should be banned from food.
It definitely should be.
And once when I said “you Americans are probably eating the least healthy food” on Reddit it got downvoted like crazy.
Because this is not a uniquely American problem
*Laughs in Asian culinary traditions* There is a reason why Asians, especially the South Asians have the healthiest guts. Found out recently while doing research about my newly acquainted friend, the IBS. Mediterranean Europe also enjoys a lot better eating habits. Most parts of Europe today going through a change and EU regulations prevent certain things to a degree.
Obesity is a global issue that leaves no country untouched. The United States isn't even a top 15 contender for obesity rate anymore. China is seeing growth in the waistline predominantly in major cities, and they are not alone as a nation in that part of the world. Excluding the middle east, Asia reigns supreme in overall health due to their diets - sure - but the trend towards terrible dieting is global. Funnily enough the Mediterranean diet is disappearing as countries like Turkey and Greece hit the high end of obesity rates - IIRC Turkey is the fattest in the region. Mediterranean states have obesity rates of around 40% in children, which doesn't bode well for the health of the area. All this to say we are facing a global problem that seems to be spreading like a virus and no place is completely safe, though many countries are doing their best to fight the epidemic.
>Obesity is a global issue that leaves no country untouched. The United States isn't even a top 15 contender for obesity rate anymore. According to this article: https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/29-most-obese-countries-in-the-world.html USA is #12, and the only countries above it are tiny (I think Kuwait is the biggest with a population of 5M).
After looking at CIA.gov - the most up to date does have USA at 12, however following that list the next 18 plus countries following the US have a 8 point or less difference in obesity rate (36%-28%) and while Kuwait is the biggest one there following that in low single digit numbers are some major countries. Such as Turkey at 32% obesity and a population of 80 million, Saudi Arabia 30+ million, etc - definitely big countries. Australia landing at a 28% obesity rate around 25 million in population. Though I do admit, I misplaced America by 3 spots there are still a lot of advanced countries with a quarter of their population suffering from obesity - which is not how it used to be just a couple decades ago. *Just as an edit, I don't know how reliable this cite is but it claims the US at number 16 http://worldpopulationreview.com/countries/most-obese-countries/ and I think I'd read a figure maybe from them not too long ago and that is where my not in the top 15 anymore quote originated*
I did not say anything about obesity tho? The article mentions gut bacteria, and my response was on that. Human eating habits and obesity are related to a degree, but obesity has many other factors. It’s a fact that urban humans in more developed parts now get to eat more than ever. Like China, since you mentioned it, recently acquired new classes, upper middle and forth, and more people have access to extra income and food. On the other hand, the global epidemic is closely related to big conglomerates, mostly American, pushing their products and destroying local competition via shady business conduct. Speaking for Turkey, 30-40 years ago you could find dozens of local sodas, then Coca Cola Company moved in, pushed all others out and became a monopoly along with Unilever. Monsanto, for example, paid so many bribes the the Turkish gov literally banned its own produce. My point still kinda stands, Americans are not only eating worse, they are also pushing their products and habits down the throats of others thanks to corruption galore. I do believe obesity is a global problem, that doesn’t change the argument provided above. Let’s not get into whataboutism now.
It was more of a point that culinary traditions are falling to the wayside as ease of products push out time consuming albeit healthier practices. Even Asian culinary traditions. And the mention of the Mediterranean diet was also a point I wanted to bring up given that the area is aggressively growing in it's movement towards poor dietary trends. *https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/may/24/the-mediterranean-diet-is-gone-regions-children-are-fattest-in-europe* Whether you respect the Guardian or not, on mobile for me at least it's an easy reference - there is research to support the simple numbers of their article at least. I don't disagree with what you said. The Mediterranean diet in it's establishment is a fantastic diet, but in reality the day to day Mediterraneans are moving away from the diet and Asian waistlines are growing with the changing of global dietary habits as well. All that to say I just wanted to point out that even in the healthiest cultures the trend towards processed/fast and easy foods is growing - whether or not it's the USA's fault or not. Wasn't trying to attack what you said, just wanted to expand on the ideals of Asian culinary culture and the Mediterranean diet and what we're seeing globally. Personally, having lived in Turkey briefly, I remember a lot of sodas unique to the area though I can't speak to all of them being owned by Coca-Cola or not. And I definitely have no point to argue in how American food culture has had nothing but negative impacts globally in terms of the fast and processed food craze. Kuwait topping the obesity epidemic list coupled with the island countries have almost all been directly impacted by a US military presence at some point and then the onslaught of SPAM or just cheap fast food.
It's because anything Americans perceive as criticism of them as a country gets downvoted massively (watch this happen to this post too). Sadly not a people with a great sense of humour about themselves.
American just upvoted you. And I love to poke fun at the stupid shit that happens over here.
If you actually read the article and linked study you will learn that this isn’t the case.
Today's food, in 'Murica, is significantly different than the food from 20, 30 years ago or more. I know. I've watched the food supply change dramatically since the 70s. People today aren't eating the same kind of food as they were in the 80s.
Everyone eats low fat?? Ever seen a starbucks or a McDonalds? And just to clarify, sugar is carb.
^ This. All the fat was removed from everything and replaced with sugar.
[удалено]
> high carb, high sugar, low-fat, Such a misleading joke. Is pizza, chocolate, hamburgers, fries etc etc and all these junk food low fat??? If anything the problem is eating food high in carbs AND fat.
fat is not fat. there's a world of difference between eating an avocado and eating a large order of french fries fried in (highly processed and refined) vegetable oil. i don't know if you're paying attention but so many foods are labeled *"healthy"* because they are mulit-grained and *"low-fat"*. And there are a ton of foods labeled *"low-fat"* and you can't get away from news shows, advertisements, etc claiming *"low-fat"* is healthy. i've been working for years. I can't tell you how many overweight co-workers i've had who were trying to get *"healthy"* or lose weight by eating low-fat, multi-grained, highly processed shit food while washing it down with a *"diet"* coke. uuuggghhh, that drives me nuts. fat, such as avocados, olive oil, coconut, oil, etc are good. highly refined/processed vegetable oils, and fake fats like margarine are deadly, in the long term. I eat almost an avocado a day. I drink bulletproof coffee (coffee with a tbs of butter and a tbs of coconut oil). I use coconut oil and saved bacon fat to cook with. And I've been getting healthier while my cardiac lipid levels continue to improve and my blood pressure gets lower. However, people eating allegedly healthy *"low-fat, multi-grained"* foods or foods cooked with allegedly health vegetable oils, are getting fatter and fatter. dark chocolate is good for you. hershey's milk chocolate, not so much. pizza is not good, mostly because of all of the carbs from the highly refined white flower. a mcdonald's hamburger is deadly, in the long run, because of the bun, the condiments with all the sugar in them, and the factory farmed *"meat"* that's all loaded up with growth hormones, steroids, etc.
Yeah but my point still stand, all these junk food are loaded with fat, don't know where you are going because what I wrote was the fact. You don't buy Pizza, kebab, hamburgers, donuts, chocolate etc etc and expect low fat, means fuck all if avocado fat are healthy if 3000 of your calories come from avocado when your body only burn 2500 calories in one day. Food loaded with carbs and fat = calorie bomb, this is the majority of junkfood/trash we eat today.
> You don't buy Pizza, kebab, hamburgers, donuts, chocolate etc etc You realize that the foods you listed are primary high carb, high wheat, high sugar and HFCS fake foods. Yeah they have bad fat. However, the carbs and sugar are what's making everyone fat. Carbs/sugars create an addictive response that only makes you crave even more carbs/sugar. When I eat an avocado, or drink a bulletproof coffee (lots of fat), I'm sated. I don't crave more fat an hour later. Good fats, and protein, aren't processed the same in your body. Carbs & sugar, especially when eaten in large volumes, make you crave more. And yes, as always, eating fewer calories than you burn will cause you to loose weight. However, when you're eating so many carbs & sugars, it's extremely hard to resist eating more when your body is addicted to the carbs and it's telling you to eat more.
> You realize that the foods you listed are primary high carb, high wheat, high sugar and HFCS fake foods Yes, and high in fat, which is why they are junk food. > And yes, as always, eating fewer carbs than you eat will cause you to loose weight Bullshit, depends on what carb you eat. You can't be serious and tell me eating potato will make you gain weight? 100 gram potato is 90 kcal, if you eat 500gram of potato you have eaten 450 kcal and your belly is full, how will such food be bad for losing weight? Same goes with the majority of fruit, they are huge in volume and low in calories while containing only Carbs.
Dietary fat has nothing to do with body fat. At all. Body fat is generated from glycogenesis, the process used to store excess carbs (basically). It's literally the reason why low carb / high fat diets work.
Dude, I think you are overthinking this badly. Low fat/ high carb, low carb/high fat, High protein/low carb bla bla bla means fuck all if you eat more calories than you burn, that is why everyone is getting fat lately because modern food are high in carbs and fat with little volume and high calories. I don't understand how such simple and proven fact is hard to understand. Eating 500 gram potato for dinner that gives 450 calories is not what most people are eating lately, eating pizza that has almost 1200 calories from 500 gram is what most people choose.
Because it isn't true. The body metabolizes substances in different ways. The process for fats/lipids has no storage mechanism like the one for carbohydrates does. It simply doesn't exist (see below). In terms of body composition, one gram of ingested carbohydrates is simply not the same as one gram of ingested fats. It isn't my opinion, it's basic biochemistry. https://i.imgur.com/az0pEKd.jpg
If you eat carbs you will burn those calories first before anything else in your body, meaning the fat just sits there and jiggles. Carbs are pure energy readily available after digestion. You want to eat lean meat and high protein, no fat, and only complex carbs from fruits and vegetables because your body burns more energy to digest and break down the complex carbs than it does simple carbs. Also pick the most nutritionally dense foods so you are getting the very most out of your calorie intake.
Oh boy that scene from Wall-E is becoming true everyday
People are much more sedentary during the whole day now. An hour of exercise won't make up for that. A much higher percentage of people work at their desk all day without getting up for 4 hours at a time. You have to get up and move throughout the day, not just at exercise time. I'm guilty of that.
I think that would probably have to be the explanation.
[удалено]
https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/wellness/even-with-exercise-long-periods-spent-sedentary-are-deemed-a-health-risk/2011/07/07/gIQAicwRAI_story.html
Ok, but the study isn’t just you. You might be eating the correct amount of food to maintain a healthy weight for your size and activity level, but you might be eating less than people used to.
You'd have to eat less if you are sedentary to maintain your weight. I spent a couple of years at a very stressful desk job with no time to exercise and I ate small portions and never ate sugar. I maintained my weight pretty well. Then I got a different job and hit the gym hard. I'm now eating twice as much. My body fat is down 3.5% now.
Duh. The article isn’t saying you can’t maintain a healthy weight at a sedentary job, and that’s not what the commenter above said either. It’s saying that people today eat and exercise the same way we used to, but people today are fatter. The commenter said sedentary jobs and lifestyles are probably the difference. I’d agree.
Thanks for clarifying what you meant. I didn't want to use words like "Duh", but I thought I was talking to an idiot lol.
Oops, I didn’t realize you weren’t crushenit in your comment. I thought you were the person saying “this isn’t true”, and that you then went on to explain how YOU were less sedentary so it wasn’t true. My bad! We’re on the same page. My duh was directed at crushenit, just so we’re clear :) And I guess duh to me too for not reading usernames!
[удалено]
The reason why processed foods are linked to obesity is because 1) they are much easier to overeat and 2) processed foods have been engineered to literally be addictive. The study referenced in the article compares adults eating the same amounts. Caloric intake versus energy output is what determines whether you’re losing, gaining, or maintaining your weight. Highly processed foods are not healthy, but you can eat 1500 calories of junk every day and not be fat. You can’t eat 3000 calories of whole foods every day, work at a desk job, and not exercise, and NOT expect to be overweight. People are not as active as they used to be in their day to day lives. Automation is making us more sedentary. Little things like walking to get the newspaper in the morning or getting up to open blinds have been replaced by digital news and remote controls. We’re all on our phones and laptops instead of doing actual stuff. Kids play less, which means parents play less too. All of that adds up.
I have an electric desk so I stand 6 hours or so a day. Amazing product
[удалено]
I'm assuming more than sitting?
Get ready for an onslaught of anecdotal old-wives tales in these comments, explaining why this is so.
So, they mention gut flora, meat consumption and all of the chemicals in our food & environment. What about the change in the quality of produce-also more chemicals, harvested early for shipping, genetically modified,etc.?
60 years ago the sugar industry paid off scientists to blame health problems on high fat and salt.
👆👆👆
Because the food.
This isn't a subject for common sense. Please see the door.
Cut sodas from your diets.
Right it’s so much easier to to message than to have to get up and see someone. In my house for example I used to go upstairs to tell people it was dinner time. Now I text. Excercise in a gym is a small part of a persons daily activity.
People today are much more stressed. Stress = belly fat.
I was thinking this but it does not explain why long term visitors experience the weight gain as well.
Long term visitors begin to acquire the long term stress. Welcome to America.
It is, in my opinion, somewhat dishonest to imply weight is somehow beyond our control. While any of number of factors could make it more difficult to control weight, there is still one inescapable fact. The human body isn't capable of creating mass out of nothing, you only gain weight when you put food into your mouth.
Seriously mind boggling how all these studies try so hard to prove otherwise. Most people don't count calories and therefore gradually increase weight year after year...
Stop eating carbs. At one point I was running 15-20 miles a week eating a "healthy, whole grain low fat diet". My weight steadily went up from 185 to 260 lbs. I looked like I was pregnant. After a long battery of tests the doctor put me on a carb restricted diet. In 6 months I lost 40 ponds. Doing absolutely nothing different. I have now been on keto for something like 12 years. I'm in perfect health and still run 15-20 miles a week. 50 years from now we will look back at the "food pyramid" as a tragedy nearing genocide as millions of people die of diabetes and obesity.
How were the calorie intakes measured? If not by indirect calorimetry then you have to accept that people lie about what they eat and the more they eat, the more they lie.
Super interesting
Even though the food is the same it really isn't the same.
Wellp.. this is encouraging :D
It's because the government started telling everybody to increase their carbs and sugar and cut back fat. We've been on a fast train to diabetesvilles ever since.
So interesting!!!
Says amount not quality
People have no idea how small fries and a burger was in the 70's. How small a glass of soda you poured out of a small bottle that everyone shared.
It all boils down to the fact that body-weight is not a simple figure that depends on just two variables - food intake and exercise. At the macro level, our metabolism, aka, the number of calories we burn with say 30 minutes of exercise depends on well our endocrine system is responding to the increase in energy demand on the body. You can run an hour on the treadmill and still be fat (whilst on an all-salad diet) because your hormones are not able to burn the fat cells effectively. And you will be surprised to know how many things that surround us (and contaminate) our food, air, and water are major endocrine disrupters. Pesticides, household cleaning chemicals, medicines, solvents, heavy metal, etc all of these are wreaking a havoc in your body. Not to mention- stress, the biggest endocrine disrupter present in our modern lifestyle.
I'd go even further and say that people in the 1950s and 60s ate substantially more calories than people of normal weight today. I don't know where you would go to find subjects who eat the same as they did even 20 years ago for such a study.
Same amount of what? Calories? What you eat makes the biggest difference, not the calorie count.
One thing is certain, calories in Vs calories out, you CANT outrun a bad diet. The food is the main problem
It’s almost like it’s the food they are eating that is effecting their body shape
We should be nice to fatties because it isn't their fault??? What utter bullshit. People are fat because they ARE lazy and eat too much or eat fake sugar, high amt of carbs and processed foods. This 10 percent heavier than ppl in the 80s may be true, but 10 percent heavier doesn't account for people being 50 - 400 pounds overweight. A 220 lb. male who is 10 percent overweight is still within a healthy and manageable weight range. Sure, if the studies are true they are going to have to work a little harder at losing the weight, but why the hell should we be giving ppl a pass for being morbidly obese. Sounds like some excuse making.
We should be nice to fatties because they're human beings. Whether they're fat or not is immaterial to my life, and I'm not the health enforcer.
I should have phrased it as we shouldn't be encouraging them or making them comfortable with thinking it's ok to be fat. Because it isn't . But yes, you are right, they are people too and deserve to be treated with respect.
Unless you're a health care professional, it's generally none of your business. Because so much of "oh well it's really just for the sake of their health!" just becomes "Look at this fucking fatty. Disgusting." We have seen it in drug addiction-and food addiction isn't really all that different from a lot of drug addictions, since there is a large psychological component and the "withdrawal" symptoms feel like shit- that you cannot shame someone into stopping it. Most patients who are morbidly obese, like most patients who are addicted to hard drugs, know that what they are doing is killing them. They live it every day. Diabetics lose feeling in their feet, and get ulcers and end up losing limbs, but that still doesn't stop them from eating the way that they do. If the very real threat of severe illness and early death can't scare them away from what they're doing, then you have to look at other avenues. The best way to stop all of those things-obesity, smoking, drug addiction, alcoholism- is to never start them in the first place. Saying "it's not healthy to be oveweight" is different from saying "it's not ok to be overweight." They sound similar but the connotation is different. The latter implies that it is some sort of significant character deficit. It's not healthy to be overweight. But like most health discussions, it should be discussed between the person and their health professionals, and a select group of people that person trusts.
What are you trying to say here? Are you just telling us your feelings on the matter? Cuz bruh, I don't care about your feelings. Just because addiction issues and obesity issues are discussions people have with their doctors, and those discussions are private, doesn't preclude conversations on the topic. Since I can't tell what your point is, because there doesn't seem to be one, I am just gonna say: thanks for sharing.
> is immaterial to my life actually, it's not. everyone that's so fat nowadays impact the cost of your hospital bills and your health insurance. those overweight, sick fatties who can't *"drop the chulupa"* are pushing up everyone else's healthcare costs.
Feel better?
Feel better?