5 ms·
I'm absolutely not shuffling around the question rather than answering it. In a practical sense, the question doesn't matter at all to people trying to live he
by theboss 12y ago
I'm absolutely not shuffling around the question rather than answering it.
In a practical sense, the question doesn't matter at all to people trying to live healthier lives.
The reason we have fatter people is we have more calorically dense foods readily available (meaning greater calories in) while people live more sedentary lifestyles (means less calories out).
This function to lose weight is so incredibly simple (paging jacques chester and his steam machine blog post).
- jasallen 12y agoA proper solution involves solving the 'Willpower Issue'. We want to address the problem in a way that can be nearly invisible to those who want to spend their willpower and intellect elsewhere. As someone in the nutrition industry, I spend a lot of my time considering what I eat, but we also have to solve the problem so that everyone can eat healthy without it having to also be a full time hobby.
- scoofy 12y agoYea, it seems that people have this historical fantasy that people used to just exercise all day, and voila... were thinner. I've lived in Boston, NYC, and SF... all of which have had transit systems for a century, and people presumably lived extremely similar lives as far as passive exercise is concerned (though air conditioning is an obvious change). Still, many people in these cities are incredibly obese. The biggest difference is the automobile (for which i'm assuming these cities would be good control groups), after that, the clearest difference is food. More of it, yes, but why are people eating so much more... cost doesn't fit. It's not as though my stomach says, well these are cheap calories, better get my money's worth. No, it just doesn't make much sense if the food itself isn't causing the increased consumption.