3 ms·

> People are lazy, I get it No I don't think you do. We are dealing with a global crisis of obesity. We have a disease more prolific than ever before. There i

> People are lazy, I get it No I don't think you do. We are dealing with a global crisis of obesity. We have a disease more prolific than ever before. There is something about the human brain that is wrong or imcompatible with the modern surplus of food. Something about our reward centers doesn't work. Not with modern society. Addiction of this scale cannot be solved with individual actions. "Just stop" doesn't save an alcoholic, nor does it save a smoker. Fundamentally we need to rewrite how we view obesity. We need solutions. Not more of this "try harder" fluff. Because it just doesn't work. If what you're saying is true, we wouldn't be in this mess. Obesity is more complex than we give it credit. It goes back to the food industry, health industry, advertisement. We can't just ignore everything and continue our "do nothing" approach. This is not a discipline problem, this is a human problem. The solution MUST then target humans, not their actions. If that's a drug, for now, that's fine.

AtlasBarfed 2y ago
Except there are classes of people (often athletes or former athletes) that are spectacularly good at using exercise/staying fit. And there are examples like Iceland (this is secondhand from when Iceland made the World Cup, I don't have stats) where strongly enforced/encouraged sports participation leads to huge generational improvements in overall health. Exercise has a 1 month hump. You need to stick to it for 1 month before it sticks and your body's endorphin rush + increased pain tolerance overcomes the initial discomfort/shock of exercise. One month is obviously a long way. It does seem insurmountable to some degree based on decades of slow descent to the obesity valley that is America, but there are counterexamples in the world. But we also have never had a government that REALLY embraced comprehensive fitness and health policies over a generational timespan, despite ample evidence it would improve productivity, reduce health care costs, increase mental health, improve quality of life, increase intelligence, improve cooperation / social interaction / culture, and probably increase fecundity and turn around the demographic declines of advanced first world economies. That means extensive changes to schooling, heavily incentivizing the reconfiguration of urban centers for more human power transport, lots of facilities, probably a sea change of health care policy. There are huge and powerful lobbies that would probably kill those initiatives, from big corn syrup, big tobacco, big media, AMA, etc.
- consteval 2y ago
  > where strongly enforced/encouraged sports participation leads to huge generational improvements in overall health. You're describing a societal solution. Not an individual one. To be clear, you are agreeing with me. We need top-down big solution from the government and it needs to start in our schools. The trouble is societal change is very slow. Very. For now, a drug will do. Because the alternative will take 80 or so years to take effect.

AtlasBarfed 2y ago

Except there are classes of people (often athletes or former athletes) that are spectacularly good at using exercise/staying fit. And there are examples like Iceland (this is secondhand from when Iceland made the World Cup, I don't have stats) where strongly enforced/encouraged sports participation leads to huge generational improvements in overall health. Exercise has a 1 month hump. You need to stick to it for 1 month before it sticks and your body's endorphin rush + increased pain tolerance overcomes the initial discomfort/shock of exercise. One month is obviously a long way. It does seem insurmountable to some degree based on decades of slow descent to the obesity valley that is America, but there are counterexamples in the world. But we also have never had a government that REALLY embraced comprehensive fitness and health policies over a generational timespan, despite ample evidence it would improve productivity, reduce health care costs, increase mental health, improve quality of life, increase intelligence, improve cooperation / social interaction / culture, and probably increase fecundity and turn around the demographic declines of advanced first world economies. That means extensive changes to schooling, heavily incentivizing the reconfiguration of urban centers for more human power transport, lots of facilities, probably a sea change of health care policy. There are huge and powerful lobbies that would probably kill those initiatives, from big corn syrup, big tobacco, big media, AMA, etc.

consteval 2y ago
> where strongly enforced/encouraged sports participation leads to huge generational improvements in overall health. You're describing a societal solution. Not an individual one. To be clear, you are agreeing with me. We need top-down big solution from the government and it needs to start in our schools. The trouble is societal change is very slow. Very. For now, a drug will do. Because the alternative will take 80 or so years to take effect.