> I don't think it's possible to "reduce access to the harmful thing" when that thing is "food". If you look at obesity, it was a very stable problem until the

> I don't think it's possible to "reduce access to the harmful thing" when that thing is "food". If you look at obesity, it was a very stable problem until the 80s, when it suddenly skyrocketed across all age groups and both sexes. So unless we had some sort of mass infection of a discipline-destroying virus, another factor must be at work. Which, rather clearly, is food engineering. So miss me with 'the thing you don't want me to have access to is "food"..'. No, the thing I want is for food to to back to being more natural and not tweaked to the microgram to elicit the highest hormonal response. So no, I do not want to reduce access to "food". > I don't understand this desire to say "people should suffer!" instead of taking something that helped them. Cute strawman. I didn't say anywhere that people should just "tough it out". Food can be addictive just like alcohol or cocaine. There is the nit that people using GLP drugs think those that control weight the normal way do it happily, resting on the couch or in bed smilingly as their stomach grumbles. We don't. We suffer too. It's not easy for us.