2 ms·

Obesity rate is completely uncorelated to poverty, in the US we're talking 40%+, 70%+ overweight It's not cheaper to eat junk food, it's just more convenient,

Obesity rate is completely uncorelated to poverty, in the US we're talking 40%+, 70%+ overweight It's not cheaper to eat junk food, it's just more convenient, I never spent so little on food than when I switched to vegetarian/bio, and I've never been so healthy in general. I very often make soup/stew that last 2-3 days for me and my gf for less than 15$

aradox66 4y ago
That doesn't seem right? https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/66/wr/mm6650a1.htm https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/66/wr/mm6650a1.htm sounds like the general trend is obesity declines with income and education, although more strongly for some demographics and negligibly for others
- djbebs 4y ago
  Obesity declining with income doesn't mean less calorically intense food is cheaper, it just means that higher income better educated people eat less calories.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - j33zusjuice 4y ago
    That still creates a correlation between income and obesity.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
brailsafe 4y ago
So you just eat stew constantly all the time and that means junkfood isn't cheaper? I have to imagine it only lasts 2-3 days because you're just having a bowl each or something. If you and her ate just that, you'd still be spending $120/month on just stew and probably undereating by a good amount, and also regretting full commitment to stew. You may still be right but it's a narrow example that sort of entirely depends on the season and region. What's cheaper? Canned stew. 3 days on canned stew and in the U.S it's probably less and way faster. Add in $3 worth of fried chicken from Walmart and that's a day's worth of food, and a fuck ton of salt. I don't think it's really an argument that holds up, but I would agree that it's a way better use of money to get good stuff if you can afford it and spend the time making it. I'm not where you are but a small bag (5lb) of potatoes at Safeway costs $6, add in something like 5 apples and you're already at $15. Bag of frozen fruit, another $6. It adds up quickly and goes away even quicker.

aradox66 4y ago

That doesn't seem right? https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/66/wr/mm6650a1.htm https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/66/wr/mm6650a1.htm sounds like the general trend is obesity declines with income and education, although more strongly for some demographics and negligibly for others

djbebs 4y ago
Obesity declining with income doesn't mean less calorically intense food is cheaper, it just means that higher income better educated people eat less calories.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- j33zusjuice 4y ago
  That still creates a correlation between income and obesity.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

brailsafe 4y ago

So you just eat stew constantly all the time and that means junkfood isn't cheaper? I have to imagine it only lasts 2-3 days because you're just having a bowl each or something. If you and her ate just that, you'd still be spending $120/month on just stew and probably undereating by a good amount, and also regretting full commitment to stew. You may still be right but it's a narrow example that sort of entirely depends on the season and region. What's cheaper? Canned stew. 3 days on canned stew and in the U.S it's probably less and way faster. Add in $3 worth of fried chicken from Walmart and that's a day's worth of food, and a fuck ton of salt. I don't think it's really an argument that holds up, but I would agree that it's a way better use of money to get good stuff if you can afford it and spend the time making it. I'm not where you are but a small bag (5lb) of potatoes at Safeway costs $6, add in something like 5 apples and you're already at $15. Bag of frozen fruit, another $6. It adds up quickly and goes away even quicker.