4 ms·
Completely agree. As usual most people blame meat rather than the processed sugar content. It’s also cheaper to eat badly because processed foods that are high
by neonhomer 12y ago
Completely agree. As usual most people blame meat rather than the processed sugar content.
It’s also cheaper to eat badly because processed foods that are high in fats and sugars are often cheaper than fresh produce.
This is just like the US, where it's cheaper to eat BAD fats and sugar-laden food.
- JoeAltmaier 12y agoI thought the good/bad fat controversy had been laid to rest? Fat is good for you, insofar as it doesn't contribute to obesity which is the real demon.
- lackbeard 12y agoIt seems that the low-carb/paleo alliance is turning that controversy on on its head by theorizing that the polyunsaturated vegetable oils (e.g. corn, canola, peanut, soybean) are really bad for you. http://www.fathead-movie.com/index.php/2013/02/07/surprise-surprise-animal-fat-beats-vegetable-oil-in-rediscovered-study/ http://www.fathead-movie.com/index.php/2013/02/07/surprise-s...
- jessaustin 12y ago...obesity which is the real demon. I've heard that, but then I've also heard that moderate obesity (obviously not 2x "normal" weight, but say 1.25x) is actually associated with longer lifetimes than normal weight. There doesn't actually seem to be much consensus in these areas.
- tormeh 12y agoI thought there were multiple tentative results showing that starvation (to the degree that menstruation etc. stops) increases life expectancy. Anyway, the consensus is that obesity is very bad, but I'm not sure if 1.25x is obese.