TED Obesity Video

Off Topic
21

I think Mr. Oliver is on the right track, but I also agree with much of the commentary on the board about how it’s not really the governments’ responsibility to educate the masses on proper nutrition and health. Not to mention the labeling and directing what people should be eating.

Really, I believe it boils down to family values, which are diminishing in America as a whole. I remember back when I was personal training at a club, where at 5:00pm a very nice gal would come in (everyday mind you), with her two kids, and attend the spin class upstairs.

Now she was very fit and healthy, so it appeared, but what did she do for her kid’s dinners. McDonald’s Happy Meals! I about lost it with her one day…I mean comeon people when did cooking a home cooked meal happen maybe once or twice a week.

When I was growing up I always had a home cooked meal, waiting for me when my Dad and I got home. Or a healthy snack, like an apple and some milk, or a peanut butter and jelly sandwich when I got home from school, before dinner was ready.

We had oatmeal, eggs, cream of wheat, and/or toast in the mornings for breakfast. Cereal was like a treat that you got on Saturday mornings. And on Sundays we’d have pancakes or waffles. From ‘scratch’, not packaged crap.

Nowadays parents jus’ don’t give a frack. They want to get everything now, now, now and too easily. The sad thing is that it’s cheaper to eat unhealthy food, than it is to buy a salad and some meat. I think that’s where the government should intervene in some way to put the power back in people’s pocket books to afford healthy foods.

I’m not saying drive up taxes on unhealthy food, but they’re something wrong when it costs 2.00 for a fricking burger and soft drink at BK, and a salad is 6.00 bucks without any sort of protein. That part I believe the government can help with controlling.

And what happened to actually cooking. Like getting out a recipe book and all the ingrediants and cooking. Poeple don’t do this anymore. Half of my friends now who are in college or graduated don’t know how to cook, at least apart from boiling water and throwing some meat on the grill (which is at least a start).

While growing up I learned to cook at 6 years old. I was in the kitchen all the time helping my mom and my grandparents. I don’t think kids nowadays see there parents cooking anything so they never learn. They never get the values that it takes to have a home cooked meal. They think it’s a quick trip to the nearest fast food restaurant and getting it to go!

Both my mom and my two grandmother’s who insisted that I learned to cook. And nowadays people are always asking me for my recipes for when I sit down to eat my snacks during the day they’re like,“Hey, what did you bring? That smell’s good? What is that chicken curry? Holy hell, did you make that?” “Yeah, I sure did, it’s not that difficult get a skillet, some non-stick pan spray some meat and spices and go to work!”

This is a great topic, and I think I’m getting carried away with it, but it’s definately a problem. Bottom line, people should be teaching their kids that there is a right way to eat properly and live a healthier lifestyle. .

v/r

Gremlin

22

[quote]MarvelGirl wrote:
I’m all for personal responsibility but I do wish that the schools would stop selling shit to the kids. I had to bitch out several people at my school until they banned my son from the “snack shack”. This is an elementary school that literally allows kindergarteners to buy their own ice cream and candy bars throughout the day.

Apparently, I’m just a crazy bitch for thinking that five year olds shouldn’t have the freedom to eat chips and snickers bars all day. The other parents seem have no problem with it.[/quote]

No maam, I think you’re right on track! Exactly what I’m talking about. Talk to your kids that foods like this are a treat, and not an everyday event. Birthday cake and ice cream, hell yeah! But not for dinner every night.

A snack occassionally after a school sport or something like that, but you aren’t getting Skittles and a coke for a snack everyday. Nice work! I’m going to go lift heavy things. This thread is too good…

v/r

Gremlin

23

[quote]gremlin1267 wrote:
Really, I believe it boils down to family values[/quote]

What the hell does this even mean? Every family is different.

It’s lack of education, plain and simple. Parents who aren’t educated pass bad habits down to their kids, kids who aren’t educated make bad choices.

24

[quote]mrw173 wrote:
X, a few things:

  1. Concerning labels:

How about companies not having to report fat breakdown, like when companies did not have to report the amount of trans fatty acids in a food? How about BPA?
And yes, companies apparently do lie about this stuff:

http://www.jsonline.com/features/health/52128182.html[/quote]

This is the job of the FDA, to make sure they list what is in the container. I do not disagree with actual issues of lying in products and ingredients, but that is a far cry from regulation of what people can eat if they choose to. Trans fats are now regulated.

[quote]

  1. I never endorsed any blanket statements about food at all. That’s your assumption.[/quote]

How many possible outcomes can there be? If people really cared about their own health, you wouldn’t have to force feed the information to them.

The only conclusion is that people really don’t care that much UNTIL they get ill. Have you ever tried to educate someone on something truly complex (like their own biology) when they only have the attention span for bullet points?

Good luck on that fantasy where you give detailed INDIVIDUALIZED complex information on food to all people on a mass scale.

[quote]

[quote]

  1. As far as limiting availability, I should have been more specific. I was referring to in the schools exclusively. Hey, if you trust your 5 year old to make the right food choices when there’s a bunch of candy at the school, good for you. You must be so good at raising him that you should be teaching others how to do it. I am NOT proposing that we limit availability of food elsewhere.[/quote]

A 5 year old is a TODDLER. How about you be more realistic. I don’t expect a TODDLER to do more than what makes them happy instantly. In the case of small children, I am not against avoiding empty snacks in easy access vending machines.

I do believe I also already covered this in this thread already.

I asked you for specifics. Regulating all students in a high school from being able to eat fried chicken fingers if they want to is overkill. This is different than avoiding handing out donuts for lunch to 4th graders. At some point, they stop being toddlers in need of constant care at all times.

If we are discussing the contents of free school lunches, I am all for having healthier options, especially since in some poorer areas that may be the only meal they get that day. That doesn’t mean I am for regulating Wendy’s from selling their new triple bacon cheeseburger.

I am not sure why this is invisible above.

25

[quote]mrw173 wrote:
X, a few things:

  1. Concerning labels:

How about companies not having to report fat breakdown, like when companies did not have to report the amount of trans fatty acids in a food? How about BPA?
And yes, companies apparently do lie about this stuff:

http://www.jsonline.com/features/health/52128182.html[/quote]

This is the job of the FDA, to make sure they list what is in the container. I do not disagree with actual issues of lying in products and ingredients, but that is a far cry from regulation of what people can eat if they choose to. Trans fats are now regulated.

[quote]

  1. I never endorsed any blanket statements about food at all. That’s your assumption.[/quote]

How many possible outcomes can there be? If people really cared about their own health, you wouldn’t have to force feed the information to them.

The only conclusion is that people really don’t care that much UNTIL they get ill. Have you ever tried to educate someone on something truly complex (like their own biology) when they only have the attention span for bullet points?

Good luck on that fantasy where you give detailed INDIVIDUALIZED complex information on food to all people on a mass scale.

[quote]

  1. As far as limiting availability, I should have been more specific. I was referring to in the schools exclusively. Hey, if you trust your 5 year old to make the right food choices when there’s a bunch of candy at the school, good for you. You must be so good at raising him that you should be teaching others how to do it. I am NOT proposing that we limit availability of food elsewhere.[/quote]

A 5 year old is a TODDLER. How about you be more realistic. I don’t expect a TODDLER to do more than what makes them happy instantly. In the case of small children, I am not against avoiding empty snacks in easy access vending machines.

I do believe I also already covered this in this thread already.

I asked you for specifics. Regulating all students in a high school from being able to eat fried chicken fingers if they want to is overkill. This is different than avoiding handing out donuts for lunch to 4th graders. At some point, they stop being toddlers in need of constant care at all times.

If we are discussing the contents of free school lunches, I am all for having healthier options, especially since in some poorer areas that may be the only meal they get that day. That doesn’t mean I am for regulating Wendy’s from selling their new triple bacon cheeseburger.

26

Anyone looking towards the government to save them is already fucked.

27

X all the quotes have to be closed or else the post is invisible.

28

[quote]Makavali wrote:

[quote]gremlin1267 wrote:
Really, I believe it boils down to family values[/quote]

What the hell does this even mean? Every family is different.

It’s lack of education, plain and simple. Parents who aren’t educated pass bad habits down to their kids, kids who aren’t educated make bad choices.[/quote]

I see your point; however, there are plenty of examples of very well educated and informed people in the world, who are simply “too busy to cook their kids and themselves healthy food”.

What I’m getting at is that family’s don’t have regular sit down dinners anymore. They don’t sit down at the table and have dinner that mom or dad fixed, discussing this or that, and socializing. It’s gotten to the point where dinner is take out, fast food, etc., or a bowl of cereal and sitting around the television watching some lame reality television show.

You are correct Makavali, every family is different, and I’m generalizing for the most part, but I would be willing to bet hands down a lot of families nowadays don’t have regular meals with their children and instead let them either fend for themselves or feed them garbage junk food.

v/r

Gremlin

29

[quote]gremlin1267 wrote:

[quote]Makavali wrote:

[quote]gremlin1267 wrote:
Really, I believe it boils down to family values[/quote]

What the hell does this even mean? Every family is different.

It’s lack of education, plain and simple. Parents who aren’t educated pass bad habits down to their kids, kids who aren’t educated make bad choices.[/quote]

I see your point; however, there are plenty of examples of very well educated and informed people in the world, who are simply “too busy to cook their kids and themselves healthy food”.

What I’m getting at is that family’s don’t have regular sit down dinners anymore. They don’t sit down at the table and have dinner that mom or dad fixed, discussing this or that, and socializing. It’s gotten to the point where dinner is take out, fast food, etc., or a bowl of cereal and sitting around the television watching some lame reality television show.

You are correct Makavali, every family is different, and I’m generalizing for the most part, but I would be willing to bet hands down a lot of families nowadays don’t have regular meals with their children and instead let them either fend for themselves or feed them garbage junk food.

v/r

Gremlin[/quote]

I’ve never sat down at the dinner table to eat. Yet somehow I don’t eat cereal in front of the TV. I get what you are saying about good eating habits, but this whole sit down at the table and eat at the table thing is not needed (it’s nice, but unnecessary). All parents need to do is make sure their children know what is healthy, and make sure they can’t get their greasy paws on junk food outside of the house.

30

[quote]LankyMofo wrote:
Anyone looking towards the government to save them is already fucked.
[/quote]

x2 and the sad fact remains that this may be the majority of the population.

31

[quote]Professor X wrote:
A 5 year old is a TODDLER. How about you be more realistic. I don’t expect a TODDLER to do more than what makes them happy instantly. In the case of small children, I am not against avoiding empty snacks in easy access vending machines.

I do believe I also already covered this in this thread already.

I asked you for specifics. Regulating all students in a high school from being able to eat fried chicken fingers if they want to is overkill. This is different than avoiding handing out donuts for lunch to 4th graders. At some point, they stop being toddlers in need of constant care at all times.

If we are discussing the contents of free school lunches, I am all for having healthier options, especially since in some poorer areas that may be the only meal they get that day. That doesn’t mean I am for regulating Wendy’s from selling their new triple bacon cheeseburger.[/quote]

Then we are in agreement. I am advocating limiting availability for those who are too young to make choices for themselves. As you said, when they get to the high school level, they should be able to make choices for themselves.

I still don’t see what that has to do with parents educating their children about health and the school doing so. Like I said, ideally the education starts in the home. But the kids in the video couldn’t even identify a fucking tomato.

The biggest problem I have with the personal responsibility argument is that I never see any solutions to the problem cited along with it. It comes across as “Hey, it’s their problem. There’s nothing I can do.” It’s one thing to cite personal responsibility as the root of the problem but talk about how that can change, and another to cite it as the root of the problem just so that it can be swept under the rug.

32

[quote]mrw173 wrote:
The biggest problem I have with the personal responsibility argument is that I never see any solutions to the problem cited along with it. It comes across as “Hey, it’s their problem. There’s nothing I can do.” It’s one thing to cite personal responsibility as the root of the problem but talk about how that can change, and another to cite it as the root of the problem just so that it can be swept under the rug.
[/quote]

Agreed. The “personal responsibility” argument is a cop-out and nothing more. Public policy affects behaviour and to knowingly and willingly neglect using it as a tool to create positive behaviour change (or at the very least to dismantle policy that enables negative behaviours – such as corn subsidies leading to increased consumption of HFCS being one example) is an act of stupidity.

If “personal responsibility” were an adequate solution to societal problems, then there would be no problems in the first place. Individuals have very limited ability to affect the world outside of their own personal business. And even then, the overwhelming majority of people do not have the ability to fully control what actually goes on in their own personal business. When the world surrounds individuals who have a limited understanding of the world (that’s 100% of us), a limited capability to be 100% on-top-of-things at every moment of every day (again, that’s 100% of us), and there are still problems that affect a majority or a significant majority of us (this happens every single day), then there is a need for policy-makers to step in to see what we can do to change the situation.

It makes people uncomfortable to have to temporarily drop the illusion that they are 100% in control of their own lives.

33

[quote]mrw173 wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:
A 5 year old is a TODDLER. How about you be more realistic. I don’t expect a TODDLER to do more than what makes them happy instantly. In the case of small children, I am not against avoiding empty snacks in easy access vending machines.

I do believe I also already covered this in this thread already.

I asked you for specifics. Regulating all students in a high school from being able to eat fried chicken fingers if they want to is overkill. This is different than avoiding handing out donuts for lunch to 4th graders. At some point, they stop being toddlers in need of constant care at all times.

If we are discussing the contents of free school lunches, I am all for having healthier options, especially since in some poorer areas that may be the only meal they get that day. That doesn’t mean I am for regulating Wendy’s from selling their new triple bacon cheeseburger.[/quote]

Then we are in agreement. I am advocating limiting availability for those who are too young to make choices for themselves. As you said, when they get to the high school level, they should be able to make choices for themselves.

I still don’t see what that has to do with parents educating their children about health and the school doing so. Like I said, ideally the education starts in the home. But the kids in the video couldn’t even identify a fucking tomato.

The biggest problem I have with the personal responsibility argument is that I never see any solutions to the problem cited along with it. It comes across as “Hey, it’s their problem. There’s nothing I can do.” It’s one thing to cite personal responsibility as the root of the problem but talk about how that can change, and another to cite it as the root of the problem just so that it can be swept under the rug.
[/quote]

Personal responsibility means it is time to step up or deal with the consequences. If your middle school aged kids are now so fat they can’t run and you keep feeding them pastries until their asses take up entire bus seats, maybe it isn’t anyone else’s place to even SAVE you or your kids. That one lady they showed in the video sitting at her table with tons of donuts and pizzas piled around her as she cried…makes no logical sense.

Any time I got fat, I was in complete control of it. It didn’t happen by accident and was usually the result of trying to gain muscle but simply not being strict with my diet at times. People sitting at tab;es filled with food as they cry to themselves make no sense. They got fat because of their own actions. They can even get lean if they chose to do so…but they don’t. That takes really hard work and changing who you are at the core…and they may cry now but they really want no part of that.

Look, I am all for programs that HELP teach some healthy food habits, but once again, this is not something you do on a mass scale without screwing up basic concepts of food.

Look at our current food pyramid taught in schools. If most of us really ate like that, we would just get fatter especially if we had a goal of gaining in the first place. Hell, the average nutritionist with a PhD is overweight themselves while spouting crap like making sure no one eats more than 10% protein in a given day lest their body implodes.

If we can’t even settle on what “healthy” even is, how the living hell can it be taught on a mass scale to all people across the country?

Do you realize how many times I get told I am eating wrong by fat ladies?

You claim there is no solution offered…maybe because there really isn’t one.

If someone has a bad habit of sticking their wet fingers into light sockets, maybe in some cases that person doesn’t need a personal government paid baby sitter to keep them from doing it. Maybe they just need to get lit up.

34

[quote]Professor X wrote:
Personal responsibility means it is time to step up or deal with the consequences. If your middle school aged kids are now so fat they can’t run and you keep feeding them pastries until their asses take up entire bus seats, maybe it isn’t anyone else’s place to even SAVE you or your kids. That one lady they showed in the video sitting at her table with tons of donuts and pizzas piled around her as she cried…makes no logical sense.

Any time I got fat, I was in complete control of it. It didn’t happen by accident and was usually the result of trying to gain muscle but simply not being strict with my diet at times. People sitting at tab;es filled with food as they cry to themselves make no sense. They got fat because of their own actions. They can even get lean if they chose to do so…but they don’t. That takes really hard work and changing who you are at the core…and they may cry now but they really want no part of that.

Look, I am all for programs that HELP teach some healthy food habits, but once again, this is not something you do on a mass scale without screwing up basic concepts of food.

Look at our current food pyramid taught in schools. If most of us really ate like that, we would just get fatter especially if we had a goal of gaining in the first place. Hell, the average nutritionist with a PhD is overweight themselves while spouting crap like making sure no one eats more than 10% protein in a given day lest their body implodes.

If we can’t even settle on what “healthy” even is, how the living hell can it be taught on a mass scale to all people across the country?

Do you realize how many times I get told I am eating wrong by fat ladies?

You claim there is no solution offered…maybe because there really isn’t one.

If someone has a bad habit of sticking their wet fingers into light sockets, maybe in some cases that person doesn’t need a personal government paid baby sitter to keep them from doing it. Maybe they just need to get lit up.[/quote]

Don’t you think that we (as in the T-Nation community) represent a very small and biased sample in terms of the control one has over food? We probably aren’t the most representative group to refer to when it comes to control over diet.

Now, I do get your point. Ultimately responsibility does come down to the individual. Again, though, I fail to see how efforts that go beyond the level of the individual negate that fact.

You are citing the individual as the cause. That’s fine. May it be possible that one (of probably many) solutions has little to do with the cause?

As an example, you’re a dentist. I’m sure you see people on a regular basis who have lifestyles that make it more likely that they land in your office. One level of intervention is getting those people to alter that lifestyle. However, another level of intervention is to fix the problems that the lifestyle created: cavities, etc.

Would you argue that dental surgery and what you do is pointless because it fails to cite the personal responsibility of the individual as the real problem?

You make a very valid point regarding the content of what would be included in an educational program about diet in schools. The content would likely contain misinformation. However, even if it helped kids eat in a way consistent with the food pyramid, it’s probably better than what many kids are eating on a regular basis. Nonetheless, the validity of the information needs to be considered. Unfortunately, the ones making the decisions at the governmental and educational level are completely clueless.

Finally, I can’t come to terms with there “being no solution.” SOMETHING is responsible for the obesity problem. Rather, many things are likely responsible. And unfortunately, it does affect us all (healthcare costs, etc.).

35

[quote]ElbowStrike wrote:

[quote]mrw173 wrote:
The biggest problem I have with the personal responsibility argument is that I never see any solutions to the problem cited along with it. It comes across as “Hey, it’s their problem. There’s nothing I can do.” It’s one thing to cite personal responsibility as the root of the problem but talk about how that can change, and another to cite it as the root of the problem just so that it can be swept under the rug.
[/quote]

Agreed. The “personal responsibility” argument is a cop-out and nothing more. Public policy affects behaviour and to knowingly and willingly neglect using it as a tool to create positive behaviour change (or at the very least to dismantle policy that enables negative behaviours – such as corn subsidies leading to increased consumption of HFCS being one example) is an act of stupidity.

If “personal responsibility” were an adequate solution to societal problems, then there would be no problems in the first place. Individuals have very limited ability to affect the world outside of their own personal business. And even then, the overwhelming majority of people do not have the ability to fully control what actually goes on in their own personal business. When the world surrounds individuals who have a limited understanding of the world (that’s 100% of us), a limited capability to be 100% on-top-of-things at every moment of every day (again, that’s 100% of us), and there are still problems that affect a majority or a significant majority of us (this happens every single day), then there is a need for policy-makers to step in to see what we can do to change the situation.

It makes people uncomfortable to have to temporarily drop the illusion that they are 100% in control of their own lives.[/quote]

I doubt many on this planet really believe they are 100% in control of everything. You can die tomorrow despite how healthy you ate today. That isn’t even the point. Morbid obesity is not something that just happens by accident. It takes quite a bit of neglect for that to happen. No one wakes up weighing over 400lbs after eating nothing but tofu and working out everyday.

I am also willing to bet most of the people in this country understand they need to get regular exercises…yet what I really see is most people going to gyms so they can just sit on the equipment…or going to the gym but still eating the same and now using their gym time as an excuse to eat the same crap they were before.

What exactly do we need mass protection from? I am all for cracking down on companies that flat out lie about the ingredients of their products. I am not for some type of government sponsored mass eating plan because someone like you decided I was too dumb to think for myself.

36

[quote]mrw173 wrote:

Don’t you think that we (as in the T-Nation community) represent a very small and biased sample in terms of the control one has over food? We probably aren’t the most representative group to refer to when it comes to control over diet.[/quote]

Who cares? I’m not average. I’ve known that most of my life. I am all for helping people to a degree, but once you start thinking the solution is even more regulation of people and resources, you create a problem for those of us who CAN actually think for ourselves.

[quote]

Now, I do get your point. Ultimately responsibility does come down to the individual. Again, though, I fail to see how efforts that go beyond the level of the individual negate that fact.

You are citing the individual as the cause. That’s fine. May it be possible that one (of probably many) solutions has little to do with the cause?

As an example, you’re a dentist. I’m sure you see people on a regular basis who have lifestyles that make it more likely that they land in your office. One level of intervention is getting those people to alter that lifestyle. However, another level of intervention is to fix the problems that the lifestyle created: cavities, etc.

Would you argue that dental surgery and what you do is pointless because it fails to cite the personal responsibility of the individual as the real problem?[/quote]

My services are pointless to some people and I even tell them this to their faces. Literally, the conversation many times starts with, “Patient Y, you’ve told me you only brush your teeth on weekends (this actually happened) and now all of the teeth in the front of your mouth are decayed. It will literally be a waste of money and resources to spend the months it will take to fix all of this if you put no effort in to changing your personal habits”.

There isn’t anything I can do in my office that can overcome personal neglect. NOTHING. I can do my best work and spend all of my time correcting a problem and it will be wasted completely if the individual does not decide to change THEMSELVES.

That is the reality of life. It isn’t pleasant all of the time and people are largely the cause of their lot in life especially when it comes to food choices outside of environmental factors outside of their control.

[quote]

You make a very valid point regarding the content of what would be included in an educational program about diet in schools. The content would likely contain misinformation. However, even if it helped kids eat in a way consistent with the food pyramid, it’s probably better than what many kids are eating on a regular basis. Nonetheless, the validity of the information needs to be considered. Unfortunately, the ones making the decisions at the governmental and educational level are completely clueless.[/quote]

So why would we want to give them even more control over us?

Oh, I know exactly what is responsible. My guess is, you do too.

The real question is, why do you think it is the government’s place to step in and tell them what to do?

37

[quote]Professor X wrote:

Who cares? I’m not average. I’ve know that most of my life. I am all for helping people to a degree, but once you start thinking the solution is even more regulation of people and resources, you create a problem for those of us who CAN actually think for ourselves.

[/quote]

The point is that if we are talking about the degree of control people have over food intake, citing yourself as an example of control is irrelevant to the general population.

There may be a point at which the person’s own level of neglect makes it pointless for you to provide services, but the point remains: there are multiple levels of intervention. For the extreme case, yes, it might be best to not bother intervening. If you are arguing that we’re only dealing with the extreme example here, I’d disagree.

Just because the message that would be sent in education isn’t ideal does not mean it wouldn’t be helpful in targeting obesity. 3 oz. of whole grains may not be optimal for bodybuilding purposes, and the government may be misguided in recommending whole wheat bread over sources of protein, but that’s much better than a lot of the crap that people eat on a regular basis.

Just because something isn’t ideal doesn’t mean it’s useless. Ideals are rarely if ever achieved.

[quote]

Oh, I know exactly what is responsible. My guess is, you do too.

The real question is, why do you think it is the government’s place to step in and tell them what to do?[/quote]

Again, when did I state that it is “the government’s place to step in and tell them what to do?” If you think that providing education in the classrooms and not having a “snack shack” in elementary school is the government stepping in and telling you what to do, it seems like you are very misguided. Are you upset that the government is stepping in and requiring children to learn about biology and chemistry?

38

[quote]gremlin1267 wrote:
I see your point; however, there are plenty of examples of very well educated and informed people in the world, who are simply “too busy to cook their kids and themselves healthy food”.

What I’m getting at is that family’s don’t have regular sit down dinners anymore. They don’t sit down at the table and have dinner that mom or dad fixed, discussing this or that, and socializing. [/quote]

I’d like to respectfully call bullshit on this.

Parents who don’t care enough to put an emphasis on feeding their kids healthy foods, and instilling healthy habits, cannot be called “very well educated” or “informed”. In fact, I would call that ignorance. If you can’t make time to address your kids’ most basic needs - food and health - why the hell did you have kids in the first place?

Some people are very busy, yeah, but that’s hardly an excuse. I know the president and chief executive officer of a large local hospital. Highly educated, and remarkably busy and engaged woman. She had the foresight to hire a local chef to help prepare meals for her family when she herself was unable to do so. Lo and behold, her kids aren’t lumps of lard. Hmm…

And as far as the stereotypical family sitdown, what, you think clans of fatties don’t gather round the table to eat an out-of-the-box pizza, or spend a few hours every Friday devouring buckets of the Colonel’s Original Recipe? Time to stop blaming society and moral decay, and place the responsibility squarely on the individual or, if they’re too young, their family.

P.S.: And don’t throw the poverty thing in my face - I grew up in Siberia. Even shitty cafeteria meals were negated by physical activity and the cooking of our parents.

39

[quote]mrw173 wrote:

The point is that if we are talking about the degree of control people have over food intake, citing yourself as an example of control is irrelevant to the general population.[/quote]

Then this discussion is irrelevant unless you are about to claim to be the spokesman for all of the “general population”.

That isn’t what I said. It is not my responsibility or anyone else’s to make sure someone else has the desire to change. Not everyone around you even WANTS to change. In fact, you have much bigger issues than just food choices because many of these fat people don’t even think they are obese anymore. They’ve convinced themselves that they are normal now. I see it daily.

Once again, there is nothing wrong with trying to gear commercials towards teaching better eating habits, but once you take it a step further and imply that regulation of what people eat is what is needed, you have crossed a very important line…one that can erase any freedom we once thought we had and we will never get it back.

There is a reason the Patriot Act was a bad idea no matter who was in control of the White House…yet people cheered it on and cried, “if you have nothing to hide, why worry” as they did it.

So, your solution is what exactly? We teach half wrong information to the masses as if that alone won’t cause problems?

[quote]

Again, when did I state that it is “the government’s place to step in and tell them what to do?” If you think that providing education in the classrooms and not having a “snack shack” in elementary school is the government stepping in and telling you what to do, it seems like you are very misguided. Are you upset that the government is stepping in and requiring children to learn about biology and chemistry?[/quote]

What? Did you get flustered due to being challenged?

We have already been over this. If your kids are TODDLERS, let’s get rid of the “snack shack” and re-institute the PE classes that are being taken away from kids all over the country. However, if you really think the “snack shack” is the problem and not the fact that they have no PE classes and their parents don’t care about what foods they eat, you are the one who is misguided.

That means the only logical mass solution is some form of regulation…which I am NOT for.

Do you get it now?

What good are in school classes on nutrition going to do for middle school aged kids? They don’t buy the groceries. They don’t pay the bills. Your “class” flies out the window at 3:30 when they all pile in the mini-van and head to Taco Bell.

Yet THIS is your solution? The same crap we’ve been doing?

They taught me the food pyramid in elementary school. Why do you think it will do so much good now?

40

[quote]Professor X wrote:
Then this discussion is irrelevant unless you are about to claim to be the spokesman for all of the “general population”.
[/quote]

Nice logic there. Citing yourself as an example does not constitute proof of anything. My pointing out that it was a bad example doesn’t mean that generalities to behavior do not exist.

If you continue try to make your points by straw man arguments, I’m not going to engage. I already stated that I am NOT in favor of regulation beyond that which is applied to young children.

Let me say that again: I am NOT in favor of regulation beyond that level. So stop implying that I am.

Where did I insinuate that I had a solution? Like I’ve said several times in this thread, obesity is a complex issue with multiple causes and many reasons to believe that multiple points of intervention are necessary.

One of my arguments in the thread has been to point out that the “personal responsibility” argument is not only flawed but that it’s worthless in terms of generating solutions to the problem.

My other argument has been that limiting availability to small kids in the schools (something you are also for) as well as educational programs (nutrition, cooking, etc.) COULD be helpful. Whether or not it would be effective is an empirical question. I don’t pretend to have the answers before an intervention is tested.

[quote]
What? Did you get flustered due to being challenged?

We have already been over this. If your kids are TODDLERS, let’s get rid of the “snack shack” and re-institute the PE classes that are being taken away from kids all over the country. However, if you really think the “snack shack” is the problem and not the fact that they have no PE classes and their parents don’t care about what foods they eat, you are the one who is misguided.

That means the only logical mass solution is some form of regulation…which I am NOT for.

Do you get it now?

What good are in school classes on nutrition going to do for middle school aged kids? They don’t buy the groceries. They don’t pay the bills. Your “class” flies out the window at 3:30 when they all pile in the mini-van and head to Taco Bell.

Yet THIS is your solution? The same crap we’ve been doing?

They taught me the food pyramid in elementary school. Why do you think it will do so much good now?[/quote]

Again, the kids in the video couldn’t even identify a tomato and potato. Perhaps some basic education in the areas of food and cooking are warranted, especially how bad the parents are, as you said.

Again, though, your arguments have nothing at all to do with what I’m saying. There exists a possibility that interventions at the school level could have an effect on obesity. That does NOT imply that lack of education in the schools is the root of the problem. That does NOT imply that the “snack shack” is the root of the problem.