9 ms·

Some of this is the byproduct of the world's industrial food complex. Foods are being processed and manipulated for maximum addiction. And most of the most addi

Some of this is the byproduct of the world's industrial food complex. Foods are being processed and manipulated for maximum addiction. And most of the most addictive foods are the cheapest. Healthy and fresh unprocessed foods are more expensive than other shelf stable options.

chmod775 2y ago
> And most of the most addictive foods are the cheapest. Healthy and fresh unprocessed foods are more expensive than other shelf stable options. I've heard this multiple times, yet I get the opposite picture at any supermarket. Buying about 14k calories of well-balanced food (oats, bread, high-protein cheeses, some meat, some veggies, fruit, nuts, noodles, yoghurt, milk, whatever) costs me around 30 Euro. Suppose I could've bought nothing but 5kg of the cheapest wiener sausages to get that same number of calories, but even they are 6 Euro/kg, so exactly the same price. Getting 14k calories buying BigMacs at McDonald's would've cost me 150 Euro (6 Euro / 500kcal). What the fuck are people buying to live unhealthily for less? Raw sugar? Since you also mentioned "most addictive", I now picture that people have diets consisting mostly of candy. Cheap candy. The fact remains that a healthy diet is perfectly affordable - I can cover the basics for less than 150 Euro / month, and I'm not price conscious, even opting for the expensive options in the fruit/vegetable department. That amount of money is nothing in a country where the minimum wage is 1600 Euro / month (4k/mo average). So yes, I'd tentatively agree on "addictive", but not so much on "expensive". At the end of the day humans are supposed to be 'addicted' to food - it's called hunger. Eating oats will get rid of that craving just like eating gummy bears will, but the gummy bears are just bad decision-making. You had to physically go out of your way to buy those over something else, just so you had them on you the next time you are hungry.
- snarf21 2y ago
  I see that this is a US versus Europe issue. It is also a problem with "normal". People grow up eating overly sugary foods and that becomes normal to them. A lot of the US "whole grain" breads have more sugar than the white bread versions. Our "no fat" yogurts are filled with sugar. People drink monstrous "coffee" drinks that are 1200 calories. Our food pyramid was developed by the Department of Agriculture, NOT the Department of Health. There is corn syrup in almost everything. "Not just sweetened soda, but many other packaged foods sold in the US contain up to twice as much sugar as their European counterparts." [https://medium.com/wise-well/us-foods-often-pack-more-sugar-than-uk-and-eu-counterparts-9daaa959b33a https://medium.com/wise-well/us-foods-often-pack-more-sugar-...]
- spywaregorilla 2y ago
  1) You have a supermarket and not a shitty dollar tree 2) You have a fridge to put those spoil prone foods 3) You have time to prepare those foods 4) You have transportation for the raw foods or can drive them and buy in bulk
  - chmod775 2y ago
    > 1) You have a supermarket and not a shitty dollar tree Assuming that means "dollar store", fair. I live in a country where supermarkets are within walking distance for most of the population and vastly outnumber random convenience stores that sell mostly candy, so my perspective on this may be skewed. > 2) You have a fridge to put those spoil prone foods In a developed country everyone does. If you can afford an expensive weight loss drug, you probably own one too! The local equivalent of craigslist has used full-sized fridges for 50 bucks and if you really need new, you can buy a crappy model on Amazon for 120 Euro. From traveling a fair bit I can tell you that refrigeration was ubiquitous even in the poorest places I've visited. > 3) You have time to prepare those foods I hate cooking and preparing food. The most I do is eggs, noodles, or throwing some stuff in a store-bought soup base. That takes 15 minutes of cooking and 5 minutes of cleaning. > 4) You have transportation for the raw foods or can drive them and buy in bulk I have 4 supermarkets within a 15 minute walking distance. I don't own a car. The aforementioned shopping list feeds me for about a week and I can carry that home just fine. If I couldn't, I could have it delivered - add ten bucks, it's still nothing. My grandparents live on the country side. They each only have one supermarket in walking distance, but they do own a car to get around anyways, since it's the countryside. They also could have their groceries delivered (and many old people do). I recognize that there may be situations where you're just screwed and it's physically impossible to have a healthy diet, but that is true for maybe 0.05% of the population? In any case if you can't have a healthy diet where you live, the solution isn't to start taking expensive drugs to compensate. If you have $1k/month to pay for Ozempic, you have money to move. Or get a car. Or a fridge. Ozempic would just be a band-aid and you're gonna bounce right back once you stop taking it. So in conclusion, both the environment and the money argument is nonsense as long as we're talking about a stupidly expensive drug.
    - 2y ago

chmod775 2y ago

> And most of the most addictive foods are the cheapest. Healthy and fresh unprocessed foods are more expensive than other shelf stable options. I've heard this multiple times, yet I get the opposite picture at any supermarket. Buying about 14k calories of well-balanced food (oats, bread, high-protein cheeses, some meat, some veggies, fruit, nuts, noodles, yoghurt, milk, whatever) costs me around 30 Euro. Suppose I could've bought nothing but 5kg of the cheapest wiener sausages to get that same number of calories, but even they are 6 Euro/kg, so exactly the same price. Getting 14k calories buying BigMacs at McDonald's would've cost me 150 Euro (6 Euro / 500kcal). What the fuck are people buying to live unhealthily for less? Raw sugar? Since you also mentioned "most addictive", I now picture that people have diets consisting mostly of candy. Cheap candy. The fact remains that a healthy diet is perfectly affordable - I can cover the basics for less than 150 Euro / month, and I'm not price conscious, even opting for the expensive options in the fruit/vegetable department. That amount of money is nothing in a country where the minimum wage is 1600 Euro / month (4k/mo average). So yes, I'd tentatively agree on "addictive", but not so much on "expensive". At the end of the day humans are supposed to be 'addicted' to food - it's called hunger. Eating oats will get rid of that craving just like eating gummy bears will, but the gummy bears are just bad decision-making. You had to physically go out of your way to buy those over something else, just so you had them on you the next time you are hungry.

snarf21 2y ago
I see that this is a US versus Europe issue. It is also a problem with "normal". People grow up eating overly sugary foods and that becomes normal to them. A lot of the US "whole grain" breads have more sugar than the white bread versions. Our "no fat" yogurts are filled with sugar. People drink monstrous "coffee" drinks that are 1200 calories. Our food pyramid was developed by the Department of Agriculture, NOT the Department of Health. There is corn syrup in almost everything. "Not just sweetened soda, but many other packaged foods sold in the US contain up to twice as much sugar as their European counterparts." [https://medium.com/wise-well/us-foods-often-pack-more-sugar-than-uk-and-eu-counterparts-9daaa959b33a https://medium.com/wise-well/us-foods-often-pack-more-sugar-...]
spywaregorilla 2y ago
1) You have a supermarket and not a shitty dollar tree 2) You have a fridge to put those spoil prone foods 3) You have time to prepare those foods 4) You have transportation for the raw foods or can drive them and buy in bulk
- chmod775 2y ago
  > 1) You have a supermarket and not a shitty dollar tree Assuming that means "dollar store", fair. I live in a country where supermarkets are within walking distance for most of the population and vastly outnumber random convenience stores that sell mostly candy, so my perspective on this may be skewed. > 2) You have a fridge to put those spoil prone foods In a developed country everyone does. If you can afford an expensive weight loss drug, you probably own one too! The local equivalent of craigslist has used full-sized fridges for 50 bucks and if you really need new, you can buy a crappy model on Amazon for 120 Euro. From traveling a fair bit I can tell you that refrigeration was ubiquitous even in the poorest places I've visited. > 3) You have time to prepare those foods I hate cooking and preparing food. The most I do is eggs, noodles, or throwing some stuff in a store-bought soup base. That takes 15 minutes of cooking and 5 minutes of cleaning. > 4) You have transportation for the raw foods or can drive them and buy in bulk I have 4 supermarkets within a 15 minute walking distance. I don't own a car. The aforementioned shopping list feeds me for about a week and I can carry that home just fine. If I couldn't, I could have it delivered - add ten bucks, it's still nothing. My grandparents live on the country side. They each only have one supermarket in walking distance, but they do own a car to get around anyways, since it's the countryside. They also could have their groceries delivered (and many old people do). I recognize that there may be situations where you're just screwed and it's physically impossible to have a healthy diet, but that is true for maybe 0.05% of the population? In any case if you can't have a healthy diet where you live, the solution isn't to start taking expensive drugs to compensate. If you have $1k/month to pay for Ozempic, you have money to move. Or get a car. Or a fridge. Ozempic would just be a band-aid and you're gonna bounce right back once you stop taking it. So in conclusion, both the environment and the money argument is nonsense as long as we're talking about a stupidly expensive drug.
  - 2y ago