4 ms·

Who's going to give you the money to buy foods that have not been engineered to addict you, mess with your mental state, or otherwise screw with your health? W

Who's going to give you the money to buy foods that have not been engineered to addict you, mess with your mental state, or otherwise screw with your health? Who's going to tell you where the good foods are at, that have not been tampered with, and that are compatible with your body, vs the bad foods? Who's going to train you to cook? Who'se going to help you with your mental health? As far back as the 1800's Mormons running insane asylums knew fixing diet resolved mental health issues 50% of the time. Most obesity, especially people hundreds of pounds overweight, are due to mental health problems. And finally, if you're over the tipping point of these problems, how do you overcome them? A Diet for a 500ib person losing weight has to be engineered very differently than someone who's 200ibs looking to lose 10 pounds of belly fat. This is a complex subject, with an obecity epidemic, you should be asking the questions of "Who poisoned these people?" and also "Do we have a mental health crisis?". Follow those questions to their root and you'll find most of the answer.

JungleGymSam 8y ago
No. If you always look to external sources you'll never be free. The most important facet in the whole story is that each individual is responsible for what they put in their mouth. Everything else is an excuse. No one is being forced to eat a Big Mac. Or two. Or three.
- pbhjpbhj 8y ago
  But, there is a massive industry, employing carefully honed psychological tactics in order to get you to want their unhealthy food (and other unnecessary, unhelpful products). I'd warrant far more is spent tricking people to eat unhealthy food items than is spent on helping them to eat healthily. Companies know that once you push that button, and strongly associate their brand with the fuzzy-feel-good hormone hit, that they're on to major profits - a capitalist dream. "Oh, but an occasional bottle of pop [soda, sugar-y fizzy drink] is fine", for sure, but $BRAND aren't advertising to get you to have one of their drinks each month; they want you to reach for 3-a-day. [Mind you the major pop brands have modified their behaviour, removing regular sugars and pushing sweetener; I think they're worming their way out of being sued like the tobacco companies were. And there's good and bad in that.]

JungleGymSam 8y ago

No. If you always look to external sources you'll never be free. The most important facet in the whole story is that each individual is responsible for what they put in their mouth. Everything else is an excuse. No one is being forced to eat a Big Mac. Or two. Or three.

pbhjpbhj 8y ago
But, there is a massive industry, employing carefully honed psychological tactics in order to get you to want their unhealthy food (and other unnecessary, unhelpful products). I'd warrant far more is spent tricking people to eat unhealthy food items than is spent on helping them to eat healthily. Companies know that once you push that button, and strongly associate their brand with the fuzzy-feel-good hormone hit, that they're on to major profits - a capitalist dream. "Oh, but an occasional bottle of pop [soda, sugar-y fizzy drink] is fine", for sure, but $BRAND aren't advertising to get you to have one of their drinks each month; they want you to reach for 3-a-day. [Mind you the major pop brands have modified their behaviour, removing regular sugars and pushing sweetener; I think they're worming their way out of being sued like the tobacco companies were. And there's good and bad in that.]