5 ms·

This reply is so "American" I find it hard to believe it's not satire. The, IMO, logical solution would be to change the underlying problem. Maybe even through

by berkes 2y ago

This reply is so "American" I find it hard to believe it's not satire. The, IMO, logical solution would be to change the underlying problem. Maybe even through some "national emergency". Force the food industry to change, help people to make healthy decisions, punish/rewards etc. But no: let's put everyone on medication. I could imagine the latter to be a legitimate option if a country's people have some genetic trait that makes obesity harder to fight. But I don't believe that's the case in the US.

mft_ 2y ago
I fundamentally agree with you. However, I’m struggling to imagine how centralised actions would work. e.g.: * Food and food ingredients are probably part of the problem, yet lots of people in America also manage to not be obese. There are some low-hanging fruit (eg high fructose corn syrup and saturated fats), but how far to go and where to stop? Also, this would generate a huge fight with those industries affected. * We could create economic incentives or disincentives, but give there’re links between obesity and lower socioeconomic status, this would hit poor people harder and potentially exacerbate inequality. * Education also seems like a rational response, but agreeing the ‘truth’ to educate people with would be a difficult fight! As in, the ‘Standard American Diet’ pyramid taught for generations and supported by “experts” is arguably a very bad diet to teach people to follow, yet misaligned incentives and economic influences meant that it persisted for generations. If that dogma was changed, where to go: low carb, vs. plant-based, vs. calorie counting, vs. paleo/primal, vs. intermittent fasting…? And ultimately, as we saw during the pandemic, large groups of people are able to be stubborn and make scientifically bad decisions, especially in this world of ever-more polarised politics. You really think the anti-maskers will cope well with centralised (“communist”) meddling with their freedoms around food and drink?
- idoubtit 2y ago
  > However, I’m struggling to imagine how centralised actions would work. Don't imagine, just have a look at what is happening in other countries. Overlooking the world outside of the USA is also very "American". Chile has the same problem with obesity. Some national policies where introduced, including mandatory information on food packages and a sugar tax. Of course, it did not magically solve the problem, but the obesity pandemic is decelerating, and the sales of unhealthy food have dropped, especially for children. Other countries have introduced similar rules for mandatory package labels. In this domain, Mexico and Canada are ahead of the USA.
- berkes 2y ago
  I'd say that "centralized" action should first and foremost counter the "centralized systems" that cause this. food lobby, medicine lobby, car manufacturers. All their marketing, sales and "information supply". One can argue that e.g. Coca Cola or Mac Donalds are mere players in a vast decentralised market, but everyone knows they are at best oligopolies and at worst centralized monopolies with a clear financial incentive to sell their inherently unhealthy products. Your local farmer, selling stuff for home cooked meals isn't anything close to a true competitor to these multinationals.
- llamaimperative 2y ago
  Tax land to increase urban and suburban density Eliminate zoning to enable functional walkable communities Tax sugar (and eliminate subsidies for corn that goes into corn syrup) The anti-maskers are going to be crybabies about literally anything. If we invented yellow paint today they’d insist it couldn’t be put on roads because they sometimes prefer to drive on the left side. We can’t let our country be permanently held hostage by the tyranny of the minority.
- cloverich 2y ago
  Adding one can of soda to your diet, and changing nothing else, will see you gain 10lbs in a year, or 50 in five. Sugar alone explains a substantial portion of the obesity epidemic. A sugar tax, were there political will for it, would go a long way and be far and away the simplest approach. Our political system is just so dysfunctional right now, it shard to imagine it happening anytime soon at scale.
iknowstuff 2y ago
The fittest american cities are roughly the most walkable ones. Its gonna take a few generations to reverse sprawl
- oblio 2y ago
  That's assuming people want to revert the sprawl, which doesn't seem the case.
  - berkes 2y ago
    Nobody wants their car infrastructure taken away or reduced. But everyone loves living in the places where car infrastructure was taken away or reduced. It's a well-known conundrum. One that takes strong political will, leaders, a crisis or all of that. I live in the Netherlands, which in the '70s and '80s was just as car infested as any place. Part luck, part timing and part political caused it to turn away from that, invest in bikes. And not top-down, nor bottom-up, just an accidental "perfect storm". We're now a in a situation where PT, car and bike infrastructure are a complex network that co-exists and is highly efficient. Where virtually everyone has (at least) one bike, takes that to work/school on average almost daily and also travels by car, train and other PT a lot. But where, above all, this is commonly seen as something good and people do feel really happy in it. And even here, still, removing stroads or parking lots to turn them into parks, restaurant-areas or pedestrianized areas, will always meet a lot of resistance from people who think the cars are crucial to their lives/businesses/shops/schools. Yet when it's pushed through, generally, even those opposing it, often are much happier with the space after cars were removed from it.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
foogazi 2y ago
Agree, I thought they would suggest communal aerobic exercise

by berkes 2y ago

mft_ 2y ago

I fundamentally agree with you. However, I’m struggling to imagine how centralised actions would work. e.g.: * Food and food ingredients are probably part of the problem, yet lots of people in America also manage to not be obese. There are some low-hanging fruit (eg high fructose corn syrup and saturated fats), but how far to go and where to stop? Also, this would generate a huge fight with those industries affected. * We could create economic incentives or disincentives, but give there’re links between obesity and lower socioeconomic status, this would hit poor people harder and potentially exacerbate inequality. * Education also seems like a rational response, but agreeing the ‘truth’ to educate people with would be a difficult fight! As in, the ‘Standard American Diet’ pyramid taught for generations and supported by “experts” is arguably a very bad diet to teach people to follow, yet misaligned incentives and economic influences meant that it persisted for generations. If that dogma was changed, where to go: low carb, vs. plant-based, vs. calorie counting, vs. paleo/primal, vs. intermittent fasting…? And ultimately, as we saw during the pandemic, large groups of people are able to be stubborn and make scientifically bad decisions, especially in this world of ever-more polarised politics. You really think the anti-maskers will cope well with centralised (“communist”) meddling with their freedoms around food and drink?

idoubtit 2y ago
> However, I’m struggling to imagine how centralised actions would work. Don't imagine, just have a look at what is happening in other countries. Overlooking the world outside of the USA is also very "American". Chile has the same problem with obesity. Some national policies where introduced, including mandatory information on food packages and a sugar tax. Of course, it did not magically solve the problem, but the obesity pandemic is decelerating, and the sales of unhealthy food have dropped, especially for children. Other countries have introduced similar rules for mandatory package labels. In this domain, Mexico and Canada are ahead of the USA.
berkes 2y ago
I'd say that "centralized" action should first and foremost counter the "centralized systems" that cause this. food lobby, medicine lobby, car manufacturers. All their marketing, sales and "information supply". One can argue that e.g. Coca Cola or Mac Donalds are mere players in a vast decentralised market, but everyone knows they are at best oligopolies and at worst centralized monopolies with a clear financial incentive to sell their inherently unhealthy products. Your local farmer, selling stuff for home cooked meals isn't anything close to a true competitor to these multinationals.
llamaimperative 2y ago
Tax land to increase urban and suburban density Eliminate zoning to enable functional walkable communities Tax sugar (and eliminate subsidies for corn that goes into corn syrup) The anti-maskers are going to be crybabies about literally anything. If we invented yellow paint today they’d insist it couldn’t be put on roads because they sometimes prefer to drive on the left side. We can’t let our country be permanently held hostage by the tyranny of the minority.
cloverich 2y ago
Adding one can of soda to your diet, and changing nothing else, will see you gain 10lbs in a year, or 50 in five. Sugar alone explains a substantial portion of the obesity epidemic. A sugar tax, were there political will for it, would go a long way and be far and away the simplest approach. Our political system is just so dysfunctional right now, it shard to imagine it happening anytime soon at scale.

iknowstuff 2y ago

The fittest american cities are roughly the most walkable ones. Its gonna take a few generations to reverse sprawl

oblio 2y ago
That's assuming people want to revert the sprawl, which doesn't seem the case.
- berkes 2y ago
  Nobody wants their car infrastructure taken away or reduced. But everyone loves living in the places where car infrastructure was taken away or reduced. It's a well-known conundrum. One that takes strong political will, leaders, a crisis or all of that. I live in the Netherlands, which in the '70s and '80s was just as car infested as any place. Part luck, part timing and part political caused it to turn away from that, invest in bikes. And not top-down, nor bottom-up, just an accidental "perfect storm". We're now a in a situation where PT, car and bike infrastructure are a complex network that co-exists and is highly efficient. Where virtually everyone has (at least) one bike, takes that to work/school on average almost daily and also travels by car, train and other PT a lot. But where, above all, this is commonly seen as something good and people do feel really happy in it. And even here, still, removing stroads or parking lots to turn them into parks, restaurant-areas or pedestrianized areas, will always meet a lot of resistance from people who think the cars are crucial to their lives/businesses/shops/schools. Yet when it's pushed through, generally, even those opposing it, often are much happier with the space after cars were removed from it.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

foogazi 2y ago

Agree, I thought they would suggest communal aerobic exercise