Welcome to Debate Club! Please be aware that this is a space for respectful debate, and that your ideas will be challenged here. Please remember to critique the argument, not the author.
We're not responsible for being obese?
Replies
-
NorthCascades wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »
A few months later, my husband broke his wrist in a fall. In the emergency room, they gave him a prescription for the exact type of painkiller mentioned in the story. Based on the news story combined with the level of pain that he was feeling, he decided not to fill the prescription. Knowing the overall trend allowed him to make a better decision. I don't doubt his personal responsibility and will power for a minute, but knowing there are all sorts of people struggling with addiction problems with the US I'm glad we were aware and could avoid unnecessarily bringing a highly addictive substance into our lives (we both come from families with histories of addiction).lemurcat12 wrote: »The article is annoying, but I think it's important to distinguish between two separate things:
(1) Are you ultimately responsible for your choices and are there things you should and can do to help yourself make better choices? Do you have a significant degree of choice in what you do, including (of course) what you eat? Yes, and that is important for people to realize when it comes to weight loss and maintenance.
(2) Are there also societal (cultural and other) influences on how people as a group act, on average that may affect what we do? Of course this is also true. We aren't just fatter now because we got lazy and weak compared to people in the past. Put us in the same situations as them, and them as us, and you'd probably get the exact same results as you have now (and did then) -- it's not that people are different, but that circumstances do affect behavior. (This can be such things as having no option but to move more, less food availability (which is not inherently good, obviously), and different cultural norms and taught behaviors.) To compare something like addiction (which the CNN piece did, I'm not convinced that's a great comparison here), clearly people ARE responsible for their own behaviors, but that doesn't change the fact that cultural norms and attitudes and availability and family background WILL make a statistical difference in behavior on average. We can acknowledge this and think about whether there is anything that can be done to tilt outcomes in a better direction without absolving people of responsibility. In fact, understanding what the influences are can be very helpful.
I would have filled the prescription, and if I didn't need it immediately, put it away in my backpack. If anything ever happens when I'm ten miles from the nearest road...
I've done that same exact thing.
When the med expires, it's discarded.4 -
So sick of people blaming “corporations” for their problems. It’s like the idiots who listen to politicians who promise free eveything. Someone else will pay. If you are too stupid to come out of the the rain then you deserve to get wet. People know the risks of eating tons of junk. They know the risk of taking medications. It’s not the doctors fault. I have had doctors give me too many pain pills. Guess what?? I didn’t take the ones I didn’t needed. I followed the instructions and when the pain was gone I stopped. It’s not hard. Our society is filled with snowflakes and babies.17
-
When it comes down to obesity, I belive there are two pathways of blame: the person or his/her metabolic system. Here’s my logic:
Some obese people have no control over their weight due to some metabolic issue despite making every attempt in resolving it. Mind you, in good cases people with for example half or no thyroid have found a way to keep their weight under control - diet and excercise. Regardless of that, there are still those who are simply stuck with what they have.
In that path, it isn’t their fault.
Some obese people have no metabolic issue, or a metabolic issue that doesn’t contribute to weight gain. They become obese because they eat too much and are sedentary - they eat because it gives them that addicting dopamine rush. It pleases them, so they eat more and more and, in consequense, become obese. This is despite seeing the physical change in their bodies, which makes it safe to say that it is in a way their fault for being the way they are. They chose their pleasure to be food, while those with serious metabolic issues have no choice.
There is certainly a grey area in this debate - whether or not diet education is a factor. For example, it is being discovered that fat does not make you fat- it is in fact sugar and carbohydrates that do. Yet for a long time the food industry has convinced us that fat is the number one enemy. More than 70% of my macros has been fat for over three years. My LDL Cholesterol level is normal and I’m now 5’9 150lbs and 8% fat. If the American guidelines were so great, why are 1/3 of us obese? The problem in some cases is not metabolics or life choices, it’s the beurcracy of the food industry influencing the population on what to eat that gives them profit in exchange for their health.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=9rWjb7t8cfo 21 -
Sugar and carbs don't make you fat either. Eating in a calorie surplus does. It doesn't matter whether it's donuts, pasta, sweet potatoes, or skinless boneless chicken that puts you over. And, since I doubt anyone here is on a true mono-diet, it's almost definitely a combination. There is no food or macro that makes you fat.11
-
... That liberalizing pendulum swing brought us where we are now, with too many opioid deaths, too much opioid addiction, and leaving me (and others) concerned that hysterical over-correction, fueled in part by public outrage, may again leave people in unnecessary pain through too-tight restriction.
I agree. In the United States, we still have a puritanical attitude toward the use of drugs, particularly among those on the political right. That's why Jeff Sessions, who once said "Good people don't smoke marijuana", would like to shut down its medical use.I'm not very sympathetic to the idea that we first-world moderns have uniquely meaningless lives, and that that's a reason/excuse for addiction. It's a simple explanation, therefore likely incomplete at best.
Lab rats become addicted to drugs when they're given to them, and I doubt they ever think about the meaning of their lives -- or are capable of doing so. Animals in the wild will eat fermented fruit until they're staggering drunk and easy prey for predators (I've seen both songbirds and squirrels do this)....Dependency is not a matter of loose morals, bad choices, or ethnic background. Substance abuse is a direct result of modifications in hardwiring of the brain. ... addiction involves changes in particular synapses of the reward pathway that rewire around the substance through the process of LTP [long-term potentiation...
(Neuroscience for Clinicians, Simpkins and Simpkins, p. 305)
I agree with this as an explanation of the mechanism of addiction - but humans can also think rationally about their choices - it's bad choices that got the addict to a bad place in his/her life, and it's replacing them with good choices that will get him/her to get help and break the bonds of addiction. My abuse of alcohol was my own choice, as was my choice not to seek help until my life was falling apart. Ditto with my being overweight for years without doing anything about it.2 -
So you're a competition level male physique competitor? and you chose that as your profile pic. Amazing. Oh and all the healthiest, leanest, and longest living populations are high carb low fat traditional cultures. No cultures are keto, not even the eskimos.TyTravis007 wrote: »When it comes down to obesity, I belive there are two pathways of blame: the person or his/her metabolic system. Here’s my logic:
Some obese people have no control over their weight due to some metabolic issue despite making every attempt in resolving it. Mind you, in good cases people with for example half or no thyroid have found a way to keep their weight under control - diet and excercise. Regardless of that, there are still those who are simply stuck with what they have.
In that path, it isn’t their fault.
Some obese people have no metabolic issue, or a metabolic issue that doesn’t contribute to weight gain. They become obese because they eat too much and are sedentary - they eat because it gives them that addicting dopamine rush. It pleases them, so they eat more and more and, in consequense, become obese. This is despite seeing the physical change in their bodies, which makes it safe to say that it is in a way their fault for being the way they are. They chose their pleasure to be food, while those with serious metabolic issues have no choice.
There is certainly a grey area in this debate - whether or not diet education is a factor. For example, it is being discovered that fat does not make you fat- it is in fact sugar and carbohydrates that do. Yet for a long time the food industry has convinced us that fat is the number one enemy. More than 70% of my macros has been fat for over three years. My LDL Cholesterol level is normal and I’m now 5’9 150lbs and 8% fat. If the American guidelines were so great, why are 1/3 of us obese? The problem in some cases is not metabolics or life choices, it’s the beurcracy of the food industry influencing the population on what to eat that gives them profit in exchange for their health.
8 -
As a chronic pain sufferer I can tell you that we are often looked at as pill seekers by doctors and treated like addicts. I am not an addict nor will I ever be. I am seen at a pain clinic and they took me off dilaudid and put me on pregabalin which isn't doing much and will be starting something else soon that we aren't allowed to discuss on this board
I am not an addict but I was dependent. I was on sub q dilaudid 62 days in the hospital before seeing the pain dr who put me on the equivalent dose of hydromorph contin (sustained release diladid) for 2 weeks while increasing the pregabalin and withdrawl was hell. I thought I was dying. I have a bottle of 2mg dilaudid plus tylenol 1s and tramadol (from different prescriptions) here that I take when my pain goes from the usual 7 to a 9-10. I think dependency is more common than addiction for those with chronic pain. If i was addicted I'd have none left. I believe my pain dr said it takes a week for it to change your brain chemistry.7 -
russelljam08 wrote: »So you're a competition level male physique competitor? and you chose that as your profile pic. Amazing. Oh and all the healthiest, leanest, and longest living populations are high carb low fat traditional cultures. No cultures are keto, not even the eskimos.
Thanks, though I don’t consider myself as someone who is “competition level” when it comes to physique. It is always good to aspire to be healthy though! I’m glad my good health shows in my senior portrait.
I would love to read a few studies that shows longevity in terms of diet, though that really has nothing to do with this topic in general. If you have any studies in particular you’d like to discuss, shoot me a PM!0 -
estherdragonbat wrote: »Sugar and carbs don't make you fat either. Eating in a calorie surplus does. It doesn't matter whether it's donuts, pasta, sweet potatoes, or skinless boneless chicken that puts you over. And, since I doubt anyone here is on a true mono-diet, it's almost definitely a combination. There is no food or macro that makes you fat.
Per livestrong: “If sugar calories are not used as energy shortly after they are consumed, however, they are converted into stored body fat by a process known as lipogenesis. One form of sugar in particular, fructose, may be more dangerous and likely to be stored as body fat than other types of sugar, such as sucrose, or table sugar.”
A factor I believe we aren’t considering is physical activity. Often times I see people become obese because they consume a lot of food (whether it be fats, carbs, protein, etc) and do nothing to work it off.
14 -
Wall of text ahead:
I think this type of discussion often misses the point of not "blaming" ourselves for becoming overweight, and instead "blaming" our environment (as you can see, I don't think very highly of using "blame" in this context -- it just strikes me as so besides-the-point).
Call me a cynic -- and I know some people will -- but I really don't have that much faith in your average person's "will power". It's plain to see that the vast majority of people want to change something about themselves but simply don't, and it's not for lack of wanting. I don't view that as a negative judgment, however. It's like expecting a dog to walk on two legs -- sure, it might happen, but would you bet money on it happening? Is it a bad dog for not walking on two legs?
Most people's daily behaviors are a product of their environment. Myself included. They do not develop most of their habits deliberately, nor are they often conscious of their responses to the cues around them, but habits and cues are one of the main drivers in predictable long-term behavior. Your brain saves you the energy of having to make a million decisions every day by automating some of these decisions into what we call habits. However, it can only work with the input it's got, so maladaptive behaviors develop all the time. You're not to "blame" for this, and if you are, then we are all guilty.
Some of you might be thinking at this point that I am saying we can't change ourselves because it's all hardwired, so it's useless to try. This is not what I am saying. Obviously, if I thought that, I wouldn't be on here, trying to and succeeding in losing weight. I am saying that your environment matters way more than people are willing to acknowledge. We did not used to have an obesity crisis and it's not because human nature has somehow rapidly changed in the last 100 years from having will power to not having it. Whole countries do not skirt the obesity crisis by sheer power of will -- trust me, I've been to them, they're full of ordinary humans. However, their culture and environment regarding food is different than what I encounter at home in the US -- it was easy not to overeat there as you don't have to think about it.
We can conclude from this that, if at all possible, you should try to manipulate your environment first. Influence the inputs your brain has to work with when it's automating your decisions. It's the difference between "buy your usual bag of chips but try not to eat the whole bag at 7 PM when you come home super stressed from work and too tired to make dinner", and "just don't buy the chips, you can't eat them if they're not there" or "if you're going to buy the chips and nothing can stop you, buy the small bag". Which do you think is more likely to happen?
I think if more people let go of the whole "lose weight by sheer power of will" self-flagellating atonement superman crap (which, in my opinion, is more about ego than it is about results), they might have some more success. That attitude works for relatively few people. If it doesn't work for you, don't hold on to it. My advice to most people (who ask), above all else, is "don't set yourself up". Will power is a muscle, and a relatively small one at that. It gets tired. Don't put yourself in situations where you'll probably make a bad choice and hope will power gets you out of it. Don't pile on a bunch of restrictions on yourself suddenly all at once. Don't pin your whole strategy on some behavior or set of behaviors that historically has not worked for you. This time probably WON'T be different. Make small changes that are realistic for you. Know yourself and work with it.
TL;DR: "Blame" is dumb and unproductive, will power is unreliable, don't set yourself up, your environment matters so be mindful of it, be realistic with yourself, make small changes.9 -
TyTravis007 wrote: »estherdragonbat wrote: »Sugar and carbs don't make you fat either. Eating in a calorie surplus does. It doesn't matter whether it's donuts, pasta, sweet potatoes, or skinless boneless chicken that puts you over. And, since I doubt anyone here is on a true mono-diet, it's almost definitely a combination. There is no food or macro that makes you fat.
Per livestrong: “If sugar calories are not used as energy shortly after they are consumed, however, they are converted into stored body fat by a process known as lipogenesis. One form of sugar in particular, fructose, may be more dangerous and likely to be stored as body fat than other types of sugar, such as sucrose, or table sugar.”
A factor I believe we aren’t considering is physical activity. Often times I see people become obese because they consume a lot of food (whether it be fats, carbs, protein, etc) and do nothing to work it off.
You don't store fat in a calorie deficit, though. Physical activity is part of the equation, sure. If you're eating more than you're burning you'll lose. Doesn't matter if you get the deficit via diet, exercise, or a combination. At least as far as weight loss. Physical fitness is definitely important for health.8 -
TyTravis007 wrote: »estherdragonbat wrote: »Sugar and carbs don't make you fat either. Eating in a calorie surplus does. It doesn't matter whether it's donuts, pasta, sweet potatoes, or skinless boneless chicken that puts you over. And, since I doubt anyone here is on a true mono-diet, it's almost definitely a combination. There is no food or macro that makes you fat.
Per livestrong: “If sugar calories are not used as energy shortly after they are consumed, however, they are converted into stored body fat by a process known as lipogenesis. One form of sugar in particular, fructose, may be more dangerous and likely to be stored as body fat than other types of sugar, such as sucrose, or table sugar.”
A factor I believe we aren’t considering is physical activity. Often times I see people become obese because they consume a lot of food (whether it be fats, carbs, protein, etc) and do nothing to work it off.
Livestrong as a source, Wow just wow. Might wanna do some actual research into denovolipogenesis. Hint: it isn't carbs and sugar that get stored................it is fat.6 -
russelljam08 wrote: »
Livestrong as a source, Wow just wow. Might wanna do some actual research into denovolipogenesis. Hint: it isn't carbs and sugar that get stored................it is fat.
I again invite you to contribute by linking us to your own research! Livestrong is certainly not a strong source but the article itself makes a great point. I’ll be sure to include some additional studies when I get the chance8 -
TyTravis007 wrote: »russelljam08 wrote: »
Livestrong as a source, Wow just wow. Might wanna do some actual research into denovolipogenesis. Hint: it isn't carbs and sugar that get stored................it is fat.
I again invite you to contribute by linking us to your own research! Livestrong is certainly not a strong source but the article itself makes a great point. I’ll be sure to include some additional studies when I get the chance
Not only is livestrong not a strong source - they fairly consistently get things outright wrong.
In this case, they're calling the pathway for carbs to get stored the wrong term. It's not "lipogenesis" - it's "de novo lipogenesis." Seems like a minor nit to pick, yet it shows that they don't really know what they're talking about. DNL is a fairly costly process and occurs quite rarely.
Additionally, I've caught them a few times citing studies in their articles while making ridiculous claims. As it turned out, those studies showed exactly the opposite of what livestrong was claiming.
Conclusion: ignore everything you read on livestrong. Better yet - just avoid it altogether.
5 -
TyTravis007 wrote: »There is certainly a grey area in this debate - whether or not diet education is a factor. For example, it is being discovered that fat does not make you fat- it is in fact sugar and carbohydrates that do. Yet for a long time the food industry has convinced us that fat is the number one enemy. More than 70% of my macros has been fat for over three years. My LDL Cholesterol level is normal and I’m now 5’9 150lbs and 8% fat. If the American guidelines were so great, why are 1/3 of us obese? The problem in some cases is not metabolics or life choices, it’s the beurcracy of the food industry influencing the population on what to eat that gives them profit in exchange for their health...
Stop with the keto propaganda already.
Number one, sugars are carbohydrates, so there's no "and" in that sentence. Number two, carbohydrates don't make you fat - a caloric surplus (eating more than you expend) makes you fat, regardless of the macro composition of your diet. Are you saying there are no fat keto dieters? Because if so, I'll point you to one of your "keto illuminati", Jimmy Moore:
Firstly, livestrong has as much derp as Dr. Oz, Fung or dietdoctor.TyTravis007 wrote: »Per livestrong: “If sugar calories are not used as energy shortly after they are consumed, however, they are converted into stored body fat by a process known as lipogenesis. One form of sugar in particular, fructose, may be more dangerous and likely to be stored as body fat than other types of sugar, such as sucrose, or table sugar.”..
Secondly, de novo lipogenesis only occurs when you have massively overfed on carbohydrates over an extended period and have gone beyond topping off all glycogen stores in your body (https://bodyrecomposition.com/fat-loss/how-we-get-fat.html/). Anybody who says it happens quickly after eating carbs and not burning them off has zero knowledge of physiology - or has an agenda to push.
Thirdly, there is zero net storage of fat while in a caloric deficit, regardless of the macro composition of your diet. That's what "energy deficit" means.
Keto is not magic.9 -
TyTravis007 wrote: »When it comes down to obesity, I belive there are two pathways of blame: the person or his/her metabolic system. Here’s my logic:
Some obese people have no control over their weight due to some metabolic issue despite making every attempt in resolving it. Mind you, in good cases people with for example half or no thyroid have found a way to keep their weight under control - diet and excercise. Regardless of that, there are still those who are simply stuck with what they have.
In that path, it isn’t their fault.
Some obese people have no metabolic issue, or a metabolic issue that doesn’t contribute to weight gain. They become obese because they eat too much and are sedentary - they eat because it gives them that addicting dopamine rush. It pleases them, so they eat more and more and, in consequense, become obese. This is despite seeing the physical change in their bodies, which makes it safe to say that it is in a way their fault for being the way they are. They chose their pleasure to be food, while those with serious metabolic issues have no choice.
There is certainly a grey area in this debate - whether or not diet education is a factor. For example, it is being discovered that fat does not make you fat- it is in fact sugar and carbohydrates that do. Yet for a long time the food industry has convinced us that fat is the number one enemy. More than 70% of my macros has been fat for over three years. My LDL Cholesterol level is normal and I’m now 5’9 150lbs and 8% fat. If the American guidelines were so great, why are 1/3 of us obese? The problem in some cases is not metabolics or life choices, it’s the beurcracy of the food industry influencing the population on what to eat that gives them profit in exchange for their health.https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=9rWjb7t8cfo
Well...if you want to ever do something about it you'd better hope it's your fault.
Metabolic issues are exceedingly rare. Even in extreme circumstances the impact to BMR/REE is ~5% from clinical observation. That's 80 kcals/day out of a 1600 kcal/day budget.
Your weight is an output of your behavior.4 -
You're not responsible for anything. The government will take care of you. Lawyers will help you claim irresponsibility for anything that you might have been responsible for. Rest assured.8
-
SweatLikeDog wrote: »You're not responsible for anything. The government will take care of you. Lawyers will help you claim irresponsibility for anything that you might have been responsible for. Rest assured.
You forgot the winky emoji. Let me help you 7 -
My opinion is a little bit different. I don't believe we're responsible for being obese, but I do believe we're responsible for letting it happen. I don't blame myself for getting fat, many factors contributed to that, but I take full responsibility (not blame) for not doing something about it. Almost every factor can be countered with the right strategy, and almost anyone with a sound mind, knowledge, and willingness to control weight can control weight.
I guess I have a foot in each camp because I recognize that we're wired to overeat (some more than others), but I don't believe we're powerless to do something about it.5 -
.... Pain clinics sprang up, some regs were relaxed. Now we have an opioid crisis. Unrelated?...
Pain clinics are not the problem, and neither is the existence of opioids. The problem is abuse by people who use the drugs, then abuse them, then look for ways to feed their habits. It's the bad choices of the abusers that have caused the epidemic, not the existence of pain clinics.
Pain clinics use a variety of techniques to help people manage chronic pain: biofeedback, cognitive behavioral therapy, hypnotherapy, massage, meditation. They're not pill pushing stations and it does a disservice to those who work at pain clinics to blame them for the situation society finds itself in.
100% agree.1 -
The article is right and wrong. We are responsible for our weight and what we eat. However, many corporations put sugar into everything they make, even if they claim its sugar free because it’s addicting. They aren’t always required to tell you that by the FDA, either. They even do it to oils like Olive oil. Most of the time, olive oil isn’t the only ingredient in ‘olive oil’ but it won’t tell you what else is in there, either. So it’s hard for a lot of people to figure out what they can and cannot eat when corporations are not honest about what’s really in the food.
But we all know that baked chicken breast with herb vegetables is better than a cheeseburger and large fry at McDonald’s, so at the end of the day, we are responsible for doing our research and controlling what we put in our bodies. Corporations just make it harder but they haven’t made it impossible.21 -
richardgavel wrote: »http://www.cnn.com/2017/12/27/opinions/life-expectancy-corporations-opinion-sachs/index.html
Just read this article on CNN and it really infuriated me. I think the line that was the toughest to stomach was "While the obesity and opioid epidemics are sometimes written off as "bad life choices," these epidemics are largely the handiworks of an irresponsible corporate sector." More and more, we're being told that we're not responsible for our own actions, that our lives, our own destinies, are the result of the actions of others and not ourselves. You're overweight? Blame the soda/fast food vendors? Trump won the election? Blame Russia.
</rant>
So there's a large correlation, which cannot be ignored.
Corporations do lobby the crap out of congress, to the point that Pizza sauce is an acceptable serving of vegetables. Coca-Cola can change from Corn Syrup to "real sugar" and call itself Healthy. Eggs, Bacon and Butter are heart healthy.
You get the gist.
We're here daily and we're paying attention and even we get stuck on some weird habits.
Imagine the mother of 3, walking down the isle, looking at stamp of the American Heart Association on a pot of Reduced Fat Margarine.
The internet is a mess. You google "healthy weight loss meals" and you get everything from Dukan, to paleo to keto, to raw frugivorous veganism. Everyone is trying to sell you a fix.
"The easy way".
Now... To my point, I believe that there must be a change in the way things are run.
Lobbying must be forbidden, Citizen's United must erased from our history and the government should go back to taking care of the people's best interest.
Food needs to be properly labelled.
Nutrition needs to be brought back to schools. School meals cannot be Pizza and Soda any longer.
Subsidies need to be taken away from cattle feeding grain and put into vegetable production.
Investments need to shift from filling up people to nourishing people.
And that includes, personal responsibility.
By now, everyone knows that fast food, sodas, sugary drinks, sugary cereals, cookies etc are bad for you. If you still eat and drink them, it's your fault.
12 -
allie_oopsiesTK wrote: »The article is right and wrong. We are responsible for our weight and what we eat. However, many corporations put sugar into everything they make, even if they claim its sugar free because it’s addicting. They aren’t always required to tell you that by the FDA, either. They even do it to oils like Olive oil. Most of the time, olive oil isn’t the only ingredient in ‘olive oil’ but it won’t tell you what else is in there, either. So it’s hard for a lot of people to figure out what they can and cannot eat when corporations are not honest about what’s really in the food.
But we all know that baked chicken breast with herb vegetables is better than a cheeseburger and large fry at McDonald’s, so at the end of the day, we are responsible for doing our research and controlling what we put in our bodies. Corporations just make it harder but they haven’t made it impossible.
What specific foods have been found to have added sugar that isn't on the ingredients list?10 -
janejellyroll wrote: »allie_oopsiesTK wrote: »The article is right and wrong. We are responsible for our weight and what we eat. However, many corporations put sugar into everything they make, even if they claim its sugar free because it’s addicting. They aren’t always required to tell you that by the FDA, either. They even do it to oils like Olive oil. Most of the time, olive oil isn’t the only ingredient in ‘olive oil’ but it won’t tell you what else is in there, either. So it’s hard for a lot of people to figure out what they can and cannot eat when corporations are not honest about what’s really in the food.
But we all know that baked chicken breast with herb vegetables is better than a cheeseburger and large fry at McDonald’s, so at the end of the day, we are responsible for doing our research and controlling what we put in our bodies. Corporations just make it harder but they haven’t made it impossible.
What specific foods have been found to have added sugar that isn't on the ingredients list?
Good luck getting an answer. I just love when people make these wild claims with absolutely no evidence to back it up. It's good to know that food manufacturers are sneaking sugar into my olive oil so I can quit adding it myself.12 -
janejellyroll wrote: »allie_oopsiesTK wrote: »The article is right and wrong. We are responsible for our weight and what we eat. However, many corporations put sugar into everything they make, even if they claim its sugar free because it’s addicting. They aren’t always required to tell you that by the FDA, either. They even do it to oils like Olive oil. Most of the time, olive oil isn’t the only ingredient in ‘olive oil’ but it won’t tell you what else is in there, either. So it’s hard for a lot of people to figure out what they can and cannot eat when corporations are not honest about what’s really in the food.
But we all know that baked chicken breast with herb vegetables is better than a cheeseburger and large fry at McDonald’s, so at the end of the day, we are responsible for doing our research and controlling what we put in our bodies. Corporations just make it harder but they haven’t made it impossible.
What specific foods have been found to have added sugar that isn't on the ingredients list?
I've heard it about skim milk more than once here, with the "proof" being that a cup of skim milk has more sugar grams than a cup of whole milk.
Clearly, there's been a giant plot by evil food corporations to make us all bad at applied math, and they've co-opted cows as nefarious allies.
(eye roll)
What I love are the articles about "hidden sugars in your food" that consist of a list of things that - duh - list sugar on the ingredients label. (Case in point: https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/04/11/hidden-sugar-in-food-_n_7020234.html). Evidently the evil food corporations are plotting to make us bad at reading, too. 9 -
russelljam08 wrote: »So you're a competition level male physique competitor? and you chose that as your profile pic. Amazing. Oh and all the healthiest, leanest, and longest living populations are high carb low fat traditional cultures. No cultures are keto, not even the eskimos.
What someone has for their profile pic is their own business. Not ALL of the healthiest populations fit your description. France has low heart disease and diabetes rates, and ranks 19th in the world for longevity but they eat very fatty, decadant foods. Disclaimer, I am not keto but just pointing out that it isn't as black and white as high carb low fat.5 -
I could (with extreme hubris) sum up the Alcoholics Anonymous message as 1) Addiction is an illness and not your fault, and 2) you have full responsibility for your recovery activities. It is paradoxical, and it works.
Recognizing that sugar hype and potentially plastics that affect metabolism and fat storage contribute to obesity simply means you can stop thinking of yourself as bad and lazy and shameful. Beating myself up doesn't help me stay on track; guilt and shame are more likely to derail me. Knowing these outside influences helps me recognize the subtle manipulations in the ads, and I've stopped keeping my refrigerated water in plastic.
It's kind of like walking against the wind. Knowing there's a wind means I push on without wondering why it's so much work.12 -
NorthCascades wrote: »Why does it matter who other people blame for their troubles? People who are ready to take responsibility will.
Because when people blame others, they usually want others to pay. I really don't want to pay for the bad choices of others. Just as I don't expect others to pay for my bad choices.
Sadly, there are many who make their living by getting others to pick up the tab.
4 -
I agree with this as an explanation of the mechanism of addiction - but humans can also think rationally about their choices - it's bad choices that got the addict to a bad place in his/her life, and it's replacing them with good choices that will get him/her to get help and break the bonds of addiction. My abuse of alcohol was my own choice, as was my choice not to seek help until my life was falling apart. Ditto with my being overweight for years without doing anything about it.
I did snip a bit out, as it's not salient to what I'm answering, but wanted to fully disclose.
I agree ADULTS can think rationally. However, there is the issue of kids and the ability to think.
I have no problem with an adult recreationally using weed, as long as they don't drive, or whatever while under the influence.
I have a bigger problem with youth use of drugs, because the brain isn't done developing until about 25 years of age. Not to mention, the ability to critically reason is a developed skill and I don't expect the typical 14 year old to have it.
So rather than worry about corporations, worry about parenting. I think many of the addiction patterns are set when people are young. Some parents are good, some are bad. Some people are better at critical reasoning in middle school than others. Some 25 year old still haven't figured it out.
I'm pretty much a free market libertarian, personally conservative, but feel no need to impose my view of the greater good on others. However, I do think some parents are doing their children a disservice by not teaching them to be more judicious in the choices they make.
Shielding young people from the consequences of their choices when they are younger breeds people who take no responsibility for their choices in adulthood. Same for giving children too much freedom when they are not yet prepared to understand the consequences of their choices.
I had to give that choice to my 20 year old daughter. As long as she was smoking pot, I wasn't going to give her a car, pay for college, etc. She had to make a choice. It's not that I'm against smoking pot. However, she wasn't at a place in her life where she would face or maybe even see the potential consequences of her choices. If she was 25+ and established in her career and her brain fully developed, knock yourself out. If you are driving a car with my name on the title and insurance policy, you will be clean and sober.
So she decided to move out, buy a car and fund her own life.
Maybe I'm wrong. But she is learning a great deal, and probably has a lot less time to smoke weed as it's more expensive to live away from home and pay for college than it was to live at home and have me pay her tuition.
8 -
janejellyroll wrote: »allie_oopsiesTK wrote: »The article is right and wrong. We are responsible for our weight and what we eat. However, many corporations put sugar into everything they make, even if they claim its sugar free because it’s addicting. They aren’t always required to tell you that by the FDA, either. They even do it to oils like Olive oil. Most of the time, olive oil isn’t the only ingredient in ‘olive oil’ but it won’t tell you what else is in there, either. So it’s hard for a lot of people to figure out what they can and cannot eat when corporations are not honest about what’s really in the food.
But we all know that baked chicken breast with herb vegetables is better than a cheeseburger and large fry at McDonald’s, so at the end of the day, we are responsible for doing our research and controlling what we put in our bodies. Corporations just make it harder but they haven’t made it impossible.
What specific foods have been found to have added sugar that isn't on the ingredients list?
Good luck getting an answer. I just love when people make these wild claims with absolutely no evidence to back it up. It's good to know that food manufacturers are sneaking sugar into my olive oil so I can quit adding it myself.
So the real problem here is misunderstanding.
"Journalists" don't understand simple math, which makes their reporting a mix bag of crap with incorrect information.
Take milk for example:
Typical composition of Whole, unpasteurized milk is:
Water 87.3%
Milk Fats 3.9%
Non-fat Solids (Protein, Milk Sugar, Immune Factors, etc.) 8.8%
Now. If they were to remove the fat and replace the content with water, you would simple have watered down milk. (Which fat-free milk already tastes like)
Instead, most commercial grade cheeses use that fat and some casein for cheeses, cream cheese, butter etc.
Since the Non-fat Solids are the parts that don't evaporate and sugar is the only part that doesn't degrade with heat, cooling and it is also the only non- perishable, it is perfectly natural that the process of removing the fat would increase the sugar content in fat free milk.
Now, this is where we get to the gray area.
The industry did not say that Fat-free milk was not fattening or even healthier for that matter.
They imply that via industry funded research and they let the morons in the media, especially now in the "new media", make incorrect assumptions about the products.
The main problem is that we don't have real life education.
We're taught how to add and subtract, but not how to think freely and apply those small bits into our daily lives.
Most people never think to connect these simple dots.
1
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions