4 ms·
So, from the tone of your message I infer the following opinions of yours - We shouldn't eat chemical non-food (whatever that means) - We shouldn't eat meat
by bruce343434 3y ago
So, from the tone of your message I infer the following opinions of yours
- We shouldn't eat chemical non-food
(whatever that means)
- We shouldn't eat meat and diary
So then how do you get a balanced diet? "Chemical" non-food supplements? Expensive (both ecological, and for my personal wallet) vegan options such as nuts?
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- cko 3y agoThese sorts of submissions are sure to attract armchair nutritionists and epidemiologists. Judging by the comments so far, they've predictably come in droves.
- armada651 3y agoWhat always bothers me is that HN immediately starts discussing these submission as if it were a personal responsibility issue rather than a public health issue. You're not even going to make a dent in these cancer numbers by appealing to people's personal responsibility to follow a healthier diet.
- bodiekane 3y agoEat food. Not too much. Mostly plants. Rice, beans, potatoes, lentils, other cereal grains are cheap and have a low ecological footprint compared to other foods. Other vegetables, fruits, nuts, eggs can round out a diet and provide nutrients, flavors, textures, etc. Basically, eat like every human on earth throughout history other than Western-diet in the past 40 years.
- asveikau 3y agoA lot of those earlier humans had moderate meat consumption. Making bacon is an old school preservation method from before refrigeration. Also, when I think of American diets 40 years ago I think of a lot of meat. I think that figure needs to go further back.
- Notatheist 3y ago>vegan options such as nuts? Yep! Trade them with uncontacted tribes in New Guinea! Seriously though I think we can be upset about unhealthy food without need to offer up a solution to the problem of corporate accountability.