3 ms·
Who, and by what metric, determines what "unhealthy food" is? We've all seen plenty of disagreement within nutrition science. Many people take positions that ar
by bobwaycott 11y ago
Who, and by what metric, determines what "unhealthy food" is? We've all seen plenty of disagreement within nutrition science. Many people take positions that are somewhat more philosophical than scientific. Some foods may only be unhealthy in specific quantities, or in combination with other foods in specific quantities.
Furthermore, there are medical conditions--and even treatments for medical conditions--that can cause obesity that have nothing to do with a person's diet. Should the people suffering from these situations be charged more for their health insurance?
Here's a real-world example:
A friend of mine's wife was, at the time they discovered she was pregnant, diagnosed with leukemia. It has been the most awful thing I've witnessed in some time. A mid-five-foot woman, who probably barely weighed 120 pounds, after months of different treatments, wound up with a host of medical complications, then further treatments. This all wound up causing her to gain what looked like probably 100+ pounds. Last year, they paid over $18K in out-of-pocket medical expenses.
It seems unconscionable to me to advocate my friend and his wife should have to pay more for health insurance because she's now technically obese. They can already barely survive (she cannot work, and he spent 5 months unemployed last year).
Bottom line: very few things are simply black-and-white. There are so many shades of gray. The real world is full of myriad complications and counterexamples that ought to help us realize we can't just draw simplistic lines in the sand based on silly, poorly conceived premises. Oh sure, it sounds good when the idea pops in your head, especially when it doesn't affect you--always because your conception doesn't ever include you. But it's bound, like all things, to come down with undeserved and unbalanced harshness on somebody. And that leads to having to probe whether or not these ideas are just and fair. Oftentimes, they are not.
- adrianN 11y agoWe're somewhat off on a tangent now, but anyway: While there has been plenty of disagreement in nutrition science, there's also a lot of agreement. It's pretty well established that highly processed foods that are loaded with sugar, salt and fat are less healthy than fresh vegetables. When the science changes, laws can also change, and we don't have to have laws that are so specific as to make the "perfect" diet free and any other diet prohibitively expensive. Examples like your friend that have a hard time controlling their calorie intake due to medical complications are pretty rare. But indeed, as you say, things are not black and white, which is why, in general, laws are fairly complex and it needs lawyers to understand them. It's not like the current tax code doesn't have any special cases for exceptional circumstances. But figuring out all the special cases needed for a tax code that rewards healthy behaviour is probably way out of scope for a HN comment thread.