Have you seen FED UP - the documentary?

daydreams_of_pretty

I think the problem with educating "Society" about health issues is illustrated here on MFP forums every day! Someone asks if anyone knows a good cleanse because they want to lose 20 lbs fast. And they get lots of responses explaining BMR and healthy weight loss rates and meal suggestions. And then one person replies with a suggestion that they probably have a metabolic condition and should stop eating carbs and that is the post they decide to thank and announce they will be trying.

People are lazy. The info is out there if they really want it. I personally know plenty of people who ask me how I stay "so slim" and when I tell them about this place, they glaze over and wander away. They would rather complain that it is too difficult and too expensive to eat healthy so they can feel better about the choices they make. They spend hours watching TV and playing video games, but are too busy to cook whole foods or educate themselves.

I know that probably sounds really cynical, but this my personal experience. I wish everyone was as committed to learning as those of us here are, but "ignorance is bliss" is a cliché for a reason. I wish I knew what the answer was, but I don't. I just try to be a good resource for the people around me and maybe some day it will spread???

I don't think that we need to tell people how to live. It's about opening up a greater discussion and attempting to provide better nutritional education. The forums here are great. If someone decides to go ahead with a cleanse even though they've been provided information about why it's not a great idea, then that's their business.

We don't all have to give up the same foods, eat the same diet, do the same exercise, etc. It's not about convincing people that there is a specific way to eat and live (because there isn't). It's about offering people different viewpoints that can help them understand that what is not working for them is not the only way. For that, we need more discussion/education.

SanteMulberry

Between 1820 and 1930, US sugar consumption increased 10-fold. 10 fold! During that time, life expectancy at birth nearly doubled, from around 35 to over 60.

Sugar FTW!

And I suppose modern sanitation, and the availability of adequate amounts of food, accounts for no part of that? Or modern medicine? I realize that you are (hopefully) joking but even as a joke, it is a bit lame.

daydreams_of_pretty

As I have stated earlier in this thread, some people lack the intelligence and critical thinking skills necessary to question what they are told by someone whom they perceive to be an authority or expert. It might also shock you to learn that some people are bad at math and many people read at a sixth grade reading level.

These individuals still deserve the opportunity to live a long and healthy life, and as a society we should create an environment where they are exposed to a discussion that counters the misleading messages being purported by the food industry.

Do yourself a huge favor, before you think you understand someone and their needs maybe ask how they make a veggie omelet if they do not have a heat source(stove) to make it. A poor person has more immediate needs then their nutrition in the day in and day out.

This is a random addition to the discussion.

To be clear, I don't think that everyone should or needs to eat veggie omelets to be healthy. I'm also not saying that we should teach people to eat them or how to make them.

It's also not about poor people or rich people. The fact that a person has a low income does not mean that he/she has poor critical thinking skills. There are many reasons that someone could have a low income. At the same time, higher income individuals are not necessarily more intelligent.

daydreams_of_pretty

Between 1820 and 1930, US sugar consumption increased 10-fold. 10 fold! During that time, life expectancy at birth nearly doubled, from around 35 to over 60.

Sugar FTW!

And I suppose modern sanitation, and the availability of adequate amounts of food, accounts for no part of that? Or modern medicine? I realize that you are (hopefully) joking but even as a joke, it is a bit lame.

I feel like we all needed the joke. :drinker:

MyChocolateDiet

I don't watch any food related television anymore. I achieved Nirvana this way.

kimny72

I think the problem with educating "Society" about health issues is illustrated here on MFP forums every day! Someone asks if anyone knows a good cleanse because they want to lose 20 lbs fast. And they get lots of responses explaining BMR and healthy weight loss rates and meal suggestions. And then one person replies with a suggestion that they probably have a metabolic condition and should stop eating carbs and that is the post they decide to thank and announce they will be trying.

People are lazy. The info is out there if they really want it. I personally know plenty of people who ask me how I stay "so slim" and when I tell them about this place, they glaze over and wander away. They would rather complain that it is too difficult and too expensive to eat healthy so they can feel better about the choices they make. They spend hours watching TV and playing video games, but are too busy to cook whole foods or educate themselves.

I know that probably sounds really cynical, but this my personal experience. I wish everyone was as committed to learning as those of us here are, but "ignorance is bliss" is a cliché for a reason. I wish I knew what the answer was, but I don't. I just try to be a good resource for the people around me and maybe some day it will spread???

I don't think that we need to tell people how to live. It's about opening up a greater discussion and attempting to provide better nutritional education. The forums here are great. If someone decides to go ahead with a cleanse even though they've been provided information about why it's not a great idea, then that's their business.

We don't all have to give up the same foods, eat the same diet, do the same exercise, etc. It's not about convincing people that there is a specific way to eat and live (because there isn't). It's about offering people different viewpoints that can help them understand that what is not working for them is not the only way. For that, we need more discussion/education.

ITA with pretty much everything you just said. I just think the discussion is already out there and most people choose to ignore it. Maybe we need more GIFs!!!

SanteMulberry

This is exactly what I'm getting at. I personally think it would be best if we could just outright stop the inaccurate messages being presented by food/diet industry people who are trying to hype and sell a product using misleading statements. However, doing so would be incredibly difficult. If people know all of the facts and still choose to purchase the product, then that's on them. Education, or at least more public discussion, could help people make more informed decisions.

Factually inaccurate ads are already illegal.

So let's focus specifically on what you are bothered about here. As I see it, it's products that are (according to you--I'm not sure how we could objectively define this given the disagreements about nutrition) unhealthy are able to promote themselves using terms that some consumers (often poorly-informed ones) understand to mean more healthy. You are particularly bothered, it seems, by the "reduced fat" or "low fat" labels. I would add as equally stupid (although they don't really bother me) labels like "gluten free" or "extra protein" as--like the "no fat" labels you used to see on dried pasta, these are often on products that don't have gluten anyway or "extra" still means very little. Also, again, some group of badly informed consumers probably do think that gluten free or low fat is always "healthier," and that's not true (unless one is celiac, of course).

But others might have legitimate reason to care about this information, so for example I don't care if yogurt is promoted as no fat. It, factually, is no fat in those cases, and while I think full fat yogurt is healthy too, 0% is not worse for everyone and some might do better saving calories in that way. So similarly, while most "diet" products don't appeal to me, if someone wants to save some calories by subbing a low fat for high calorie dressing or the like, go for it. Now obviously check the calories, but I don't know one person in the US who doesn't understand that calorie information is on packaged food, and anyone who claims otherwise is almost certainly lying and just didn't want to know. (Or so unbelievably stupid that nutrition is really the least of their problems.)

As for names like "Lean Pocket"---that is simply a statement about the comparison with Hot Pockets, not a factual claim and if it does have less (or little) fat (I don't know, I don't eat that stuff and never have), it's true. It doesn't trump common sense, especially in a population as used to marketing as ours should be by now. Certainly I think most people are reasonably cynical about it.

I'd have more issue with stuff like "heart healthy grains" which appears to be doctor certified, but even that is based on facts of a kind, and shows the difficulty of trying to have the gov't decide what's healthy and not given the arguments (plus, probably lots of the anti sugar folks like that just fine, as well as many of the muckraking documentarians). And that's even apart from the whole argument about personal responsibility and the proper role of the government.

It is inaccurate for a company to portray their product as being the answer to someone's obesity problem when it isn't.

I don't think they do this. I don't think anyone with common sense could think that a Lean Pocket is especially healthy except perhaps in comparison with a Hot Pocket. You seem to think they do this because of the name?

Just because you don't think that people believe this doesn't mean it isn't happening. I'm actually a bit confused as to how you don't know anyone who chooses "leaner" options because they think they're healthier. It like the thing with the fake butters that are full of trans fats. People were told that butter was bad and that they should switch to margarine. Even now that trans fats are constantly under attack, we still have people who think that the margarine is virtuous compared to the butter.

I really don't see why you don't think that we should educate people regarding nutrition. I'm not saying that you can't eat as many lean pockets as your heart desires. I'm not saying that Nabisco can't advertise Oreos. I'm saying that there is a pervasive message in our society that making the choice to eat the lighter option is the solution to obesity, and it's incorrect. That message is put out there by the people who make those lighter options so that people who don't want to eat the regular version will still make a purchase.

A great example is low fat yogurt. The commercial portrays to the consumer that choosing that yogurt over a cookie will lead to weight loss. It won't unless you control other factors. That's the point. That's where education comes in.

There's actually about 8 teaspoons of sugar in a serving-sized container of the cheaper brands of "0-fat" yogurt. That would actually be a lot more sugar than the typical serving of cookies (4 teaspoons)--and in the cookie at least, there is the fat and potentially nuts to slow down the transmission of the sugars into the bloodstream. Some kind of nice low-sugar, nutty cookies and a glass of milk would actually be a much better snack than "0-fat" yogurt.

JamieZ0503

I really want to see this. I love nutrition documentaries!

SanteMulberry

I think the problem with educating "Society" about health issues is illustrated here on MFP forums every day! Someone asks if anyone knows a good cleanse because they want to lose 20 lbs fast. And they get lots of responses explaining BMR and healthy weight loss rates and meal suggestions. And then one person replies with a suggestion that they probably have a metabolic condition and should stop eating carbs and that is the post they decide to thank and announce they will be trying.

People are lazy. The info is out there if they really want it. I personally know plenty of people who ask me how I stay "so slim" and when I tell them about this place, they glaze over and wander away. They would rather complain that it is too difficult and too expensive to eat healthy so they can feel better about the choices they make. They spend hours watching TV and playing video games, but are too busy to cook whole foods or educate themselves.

I know that probably sounds really cynical, but this my personal experience. I wish everyone was as committed to learning as those of us here are, but "ignorance is bliss" is a cliché for a reason. I wish I knew what the answer was, but I don't. I just try to be a good resource for the people around me and maybe some day it will spread???

I don't think that we need to tell people how to live. It's about opening up a greater discussion and attempting to provide better nutritional education. The forums here are great. If someone decides to go ahead with a cleanse even though they've been provided information about why it's not a great idea, then that's their business.

We don't all have to give up the same foods, eat the same diet, do the same exercise, etc. It's not about convincing people that there is a specific way to eat and live (because there isn't). It's about offering people different viewpoints that can help them understand that what is not working for them is not the only way. For that, we need more discussion/education.

ITA with pretty much everything you just said. I just think the discussion is already out there and most people choose to ignore it. Maybe we need more GIFs!!!

Nah--the moderators recently shut down a thread because people were throwing a lot of GIFs on an OP.

daydreams_of_pretty

I think the problem with educating "Society" about health issues is illustrated here on MFP forums every day! Someone asks if anyone knows a good cleanse because they want to lose 20 lbs fast. And they get lots of responses explaining BMR and healthy weight loss rates and meal suggestions. And then one person replies with a suggestion that they probably have a metabolic condition and should stop eating carbs and that is the post they decide to thank and announce they will be trying.

People are lazy. The info is out there if they really want it. I personally know plenty of people who ask me how I stay "so slim" and when I tell them about this place, they glaze over and wander away. They would rather complain that it is too difficult and too expensive to eat healthy so they can feel better about the choices they make. They spend hours watching TV and playing video games, but are too busy to cook whole foods or educate themselves.

I know that probably sounds really cynical, but this my personal experience. I wish everyone was as committed to learning as those of us here are, but "ignorance is bliss" is a cliché for a reason. I wish I knew what the answer was, but I don't. I just try to be a good resource for the people around me and maybe some day it will spread???

I don't think that we need to tell people how to live. It's about opening up a greater discussion and attempting to provide better nutritional education. The forums here are great. If someone decides to go ahead with a cleanse even though they've been provided information about why it's not a great idea, then that's their business.

We don't all have to give up the same foods, eat the same diet, do the same exercise, etc. It's not about convincing people that there is a specific way to eat and live (because there isn't). It's about offering people different viewpoints that can help them understand that what is not working for them is not the only way. For that, we need more discussion/education.

ITA with pretty much everything you just said. I just think the discussion is already out there and most people choose to ignore it. Maybe we need more GIFs!!!

Cat GFIs? We could do a whole series where we help a really fat cat eat a more balanced diet.

ChefSteveUrso

It's not true. Actual sugar production is down from 20 years ago. You can do your own research by looking at the BLS and other government sites. This is nothing but a sensationalist piece with an agenda. It is a advertisement, actually.

Sugar production is down because corn is subsidized by the US gov. High fructose corn syrup is cheaper because of subsidies and has dominated the market. Consumption of dietary sugar in all forms has doubled in recent years.

Hornsby

(I also agree with you- how someone doesn't know someone who wouldn't grab a lean pocket vs a hot pocket thinking it was healthier- seriously- I know tons of people like that- its baffling)

Too bad no one claimed this. I said that I didn't know anyone who would think that a Lean Pocket was, objectively, health food, or if you prefer akin to fish and vegetables, not that I didn't know anyone who might think it was more healthy than a Hot Pocket. In fact, I specifically said that in the post that Danielle was replying to.

(This seems silly to me.)

It is silly that people think this way, but they still do it. Some people genuinely think that these are health foods, partially because they are offered as the alternative to an "unhealthy" food.

I seriously don't care if everyone decides to just eat lean pockets all of the time. I don't care if every commercial has a dancing lean pocket with happy people catching them in their mouths. I simply have a problem with the fact that we do have a pervasive message in our society that switching regular foods for diet foods is the cure-all of obesity, and that if you fail it's your fault. This message serves the food companies because it maximizes profits, but it hurts us as individuals.

I know you all have beaten it to death, but I don't feel like that is a message at all. I'm not sure I know anyone who thinks that either. Ignorance isn't a free pass. If one can't take the 15 minutes to figure how much they should be eating, why is it the food manufacturers fault?

I don't think that food manufacturers should be expected to do anything other than market their product. Sure, it would be great if they would stop paying for misleading ads/studies/government regulations/etc, but I'm not even going that far. What I am saying is that we should discuss/educate.

I think that all of you are projecting other arguments onto me because all of the people who want to burn the sugar industry to the ground left the thread.

BTW, the reason the lean pocket thing keeps coming up is because it is a direct reference to this particular documentary. There is a woman who tries to help her son lose weight. She switches out his hot pockets for lean pockets and seriously thinks that it's the "healthy" alternative.

Also, wouldn't it be great if the discussion we're having right now were happening on a larger stage where more people could be exposed to it and participate? That's what I'm saying.

Okay...so I agree with you...lol. There was a lot to follow in this thread and maybe I misinterpreted the points you were getting at.

But in reality, switching the son out to lean pockets will help him lose weight if all things remain the same. They are less calories after all.

That's what the lean pockets want you to think. She did this with all of his food, and the boy actually gained weight. He needs a tool like MFP to help him track his intake and activity. Unfortunately, his mom thought that what she was doing was the right thing. Without someone educating her or at least exposing her to other opinions on the subject, she and her son will continue to make these types of misguided choices. It's sad.

So overconsuming products the mom thought were "healthier" caused the boy to gain weight. In an instance where a person is just trying to lose weight, calories would be the determining factor on whether it is "more healthy" than the Hot Pocket. The Lean Pockets are less calories, therefore, they are healthier for someone trying to lose weight (especially since most of the macros are pretty close other than fat).

Confuzzled4ever

i'm surprised people still don't know this.

daydreams_of_pretty

(I also agree with you- how someone doesn't know someone who wouldn't grab a lean pocket vs a hot pocket thinking it was healthier- seriously- I know tons of people like that- its baffling)

Too bad no one claimed this. I said that I didn't know anyone who would think that a Lean Pocket was, objectively, health food, or if you prefer akin to fish and vegetables, not that I didn't know anyone who might think it was more healthy than a Hot Pocket. In fact, I specifically said that in the post that Danielle was replying to.

(This seems silly to me.)

It is silly that people think this way, but they still do it. Some people genuinely think that these are health foods, partially because they are offered as the alternative to an "unhealthy" food.

I seriously don't care if everyone decides to just eat lean pockets all of the time. I don't care if every commercial has a dancing lean pocket with happy people catching them in their mouths. I simply have a problem with the fact that we do have a pervasive message in our society that switching regular foods for diet foods is the cure-all of obesity, and that if you fail it's your fault. This message serves the food companies because it maximizes profits, but it hurts us as individuals.

I know you all have beaten it to death, but I don't feel like that is a message at all. I'm not sure I know anyone who thinks that either. Ignorance isn't a free pass. If one can't take the 15 minutes to figure how much they should be eating, why is it the food manufacturers fault?

I don't think that food manufacturers should be expected to do anything other than market their product. Sure, it would be great if they would stop paying for misleading ads/studies/government regulations/etc, but I'm not even going that far. What I am saying is that we should discuss/educate.

I think that all of you are projecting other arguments onto me because all of the people who want to burn the sugar industry to the ground left the thread.

BTW, the reason the lean pocket thing keeps coming up is because it is a direct reference to this particular documentary. There is a woman who tries to help her son lose weight. She switches out his hot pockets for lean pockets and seriously thinks that it's the "healthy" alternative.

Also, wouldn't it be great if the discussion we're having right now were happening on a larger stage where more people could be exposed to it and participate? That's what I'm saying.

Okay...so I agree with you...lol. There was a lot to follow in this thread and maybe I misinterpreted the points you were getting at.

But in reality, switching the son out to lean pockets will help him lose weight if all things remain the same. They are less calories after all.

That's what the lean pockets want you to think. She did this with all of his food, and the boy actually gained weight. He needs a tool like MFP to help him track his intake and activity. Unfortunately, his mom thought that what she was doing was the right thing. Without someone educating her or at least exposing her to other opinions on the subject, she and her son will continue to make these types of misguided choices. It's sad.

So overconsuming products the mom thought were "healthier" caused the boy to gain weight. In an instance where a person is just trying to lose weight, calories would be the determining factor on whether it is "more healthy" than the Hot Pocket. The Lean Pockets are less calories, therefore, they are healthier for someone trying to lose weight (especially since most of the macros are pretty close other than fat).

That appears to be what happened. It's easy to fall into the trap of thinking that it's okay to overeat something that is "healthier" than what you were previously eating. You could also just gain weight because you're still eating over maintenance. I mean, if the boy were eating 1000 calories over maintenance and switching to the leaner options brought him down to 300 calorie over maintenance, he'd still gain weight.

*Edited to fix mistake.

lemurcat12

With regard to the Yoplait ad, I was using that as an example of how a food company portrays to the public that their food is "healthy" and will help you lose weight if you switch to it. It portrays to the viewer that simply choosing this product over another product will result in weight loss.

Depending on the trade off, it might. Just like eating one cookie instead of 10 or eating cookies once a week instead of twice a day might. I don't see how this is an example of a false ad. It's puffery.

Anyone who claims they think they can lose weight just by adding Yoplait to a terrible diet that contains many more calories than they need is (a) lying, or (b) willfully choosing to fool themselves.

Either way, there's nothing I can do about it but say what I think is true, which I do already.

To suggest this is the fault of anyone but the individual involved is wrong, IMO. At least when I was gaining weight I didn't try to blame others. I knew it was because I was too inactive and eating too much.

lemurcat12

BTW, the reason the lean pocket thing keeps coming up is because it is a direct reference to this particular documentary. There is a woman who tries to help her son lose weight. She switches out his hot pockets for lean pockets and seriously thinks that it's the "healthy" alternative.

Yes, I understand that. Lots of non-credible things are shown in documentaries.

How do we get this bigger stage? I don't think spreading fear-mongering in pseudo documentaries is the answer.

Nor do I think there's a shortage of sources of nutritional information, some good, lots crap. If anything, the reason people have trouble sorting through it all has far less to do with commercials and more to do with the promotion of all kinds of ridiculous diets and claims about food. I bet more people think they should lose weight from cleanses or juice fasts or cutting out "gluten" or sugar (whether or not they actually know what gluten is) than think they will by eating Lean Pockets or Yoplait or Special K. I mean the Special K thing was kind of a joke when I was a kid. It's success is that many people possibly class Special K as closer to All-Bran than Frosted Flakes. Eh.

JustFindingMe

This idea that we are all so educated, intelligent and able to make good decisions on our food is just not realistic.

So basically you're saying that the population is too stupid to do their own research and draw their own conclusions and that we need other people (such as this documentary) to tell us what to think and what decisions to make.

No thank you. I'll do my own research and make my own decisions.

I agree, well said

daydreams_of_pretty

With regard to the Yoplait ad, I was using that as an example of how a food company portrays to the public that their food is "healthy" and will help you lose weight if you switch to it. It portrays to the viewer that simply choosing this product over another product will result in weight loss.

Depending on the trade off, it might. Just like eating one cookie instead of 10 or eating cookies once a week instead of twice a day might. I don't see how this is an example of a false ad. It's puffery.

Anyone who claims they think they can lose weight just by adding Yoplait to a terrible diet that contains many more calories than they need is (a) lying, or (b) willfully choosing to fool themselves.

Either way, there's nothing I can do about it but say what I think is true, which I do already.

To suggest this is the fault of anyone but the individual involved is wrong, IMO. At least when I was gaining weight I didn't try to blame others. I knew it was because I was too inactive and eating too much.

You just don't understand what I'm saying.

Yes, sometimes a person can create a calorie deficit by switching out a high calorie dessert for a yogurt. However, it's the deficit that creates the weight loss, not the yogurt.

We both agree that the ad is puffery. That's Yoplait's goal because they want to sell more yogurts. It also adds to the misconception that just changing all of your foods to the lighter versions is going to help you lose weight.

It can be the fault of the individual and there can still be other factors at play. If someone chooses to overeat, yes that's their fault. I never said that it was. The problem - for me - occurs when someone decides to do something about it and receives the wrong information from an entity that has an interest in misguiding the individual, in this case the food industry.

Here is a breakdown of my argument:

1. Food companies want to make a profit. This is what is supposed to be happening because that's how capitalism works.

2. People like the food and eat too much of it.

3. Some people become overweight and obese.

4. Some of the overweight and obese people decide that they want to lose weight.

5. Food companies, fearing loss of profits, create alternative foods that are lighter, leaner, lower fat, etc. The food companies portray these foods as the answer to weight loss because it allows them to continue to make sales. (Capitalism - not arguing against this, though I think it's the wrong thing to do.)

6. Some overweight and obese people believe the messages that they receive from the food company and switch their foods.

7. These people are largely unsuccessful because they aren't tracking. They become discouraged because they are "doing everything right." Society tells them that it's their fault and to take personal responsibility. That person believes that they did.

This is where we land. It's not that we should take responsibility for these people or take their food away. It's about creating a public discussion and encouraging nutritional education.

People should be free to eat whatever they want. People can lie to themselves if it makes them feel better. That's not the point. It's about putting alternative messages out into the community so that people have a greater likelihood of having a better understanding about how to take charge of their health.

Also, I also don't blame others for my weight gain, and none of what I've said applies to me.

_Terrapin_

As I have stated earlier in this thread, some people lack the intelligence and critical thinking skills necessary to question what they are told by someone whom they perceive to be an authority or expert. It might also shock you to learn that some people are bad at math and many people read at a sixth grade reading level.

These individuals still deserve the opportunity to live a long and healthy life, and as a society we should create an environment where they are exposed to a discussion that counters the misleading messages being purported by the food industry.

Do yourself a huge favor, before you think you understand someone and their needs maybe ask how they make a veggie omelet if they do not have a heat source(stove) to make it. A poor person has more immediate needs then their nutrition in the day in and day out.

This is a random addition to the discussion.

To be clear, I don't think that everyone should or needs to eat veggie omelets to be healthy. I'm also not saying that we should teach people to eat them or how to make them.

It's also not about poor people or rich people. The fact that a person has a low income does not mean that he/she has poor critical thinking skills. There are many reasons that someone could have a low income. At the same time, higher income individuals are not necessarily more intelligent.

Phew...for a second I thought you wanted to make a point, but it seems you want to make several. Best of luck.

lemurcat12

You just don't understand what I'm saying.

Quite possible.

Yes, sometimes a person can create a calorie deficit by switching out a high calorie dessert for a yogurt. However, it's the deficit that creates the weight loss, not the yogurt.

I thought that's what my "side" of the conversation was saying. Of course I agree with this. I don't see food companies as the main opponents to this message (they are happy to sell low calorie products to be used by people seeking to create deficits, as well as high calorie products for those who don't care). It's the anti sugar, anti grains, anti "junk food", anti "processed foods", etc. people who claim that the deficit isn't the issue. They are the current heirs of the anti fat people of the '70s and '80s who this woman in the documentary may still be influenced by. Being anti sugar is no different than being anti butter back in the day. (I do get that you are not anti sugar, but you seem to be arguing for the documentary, which is why I'm confused here.)

We both agree that the ad is puffery. That's Yoplait's goal because they want to sell more yogurts. It also adds to the misconception that just changing all of your foods to the lighter versions is going to help you lose weight.

Okay, but I really don't think that's primarily a message from the food companies. It's popular because people don't want to eat less and don't want to give up the products they enjoy. So they try to sub lower cal versions of those products, just like they wanted to keep eating cookies so ate Snackwells. (I am not saying you can't lose weight and eat cookies. Of course you can.)

It can be the fault of the individual and there can still be other factors at play. If someone chooses to overeat, yes that's their fault. I never said that it was. The problem - for me - occurs when someone decides to do something about it and receives the wrong information from an entity that has an interest in misguiding the individual, in this case the food industry.

I just think you are overstating the role of the food industry in the messages people get and understating personal responsibility and the messages from lots of other places (including medical authorities who continue to say to eat less fat, the diet industry, etc.).

Here is a breakdown of my argument:

1. Food companies want to make a profit. This is what is supposed to be happening because that's how capitalism works.

Okay. But this doesn't mean that they are really the primary source of the messages about diet. They just use those messages to their own end. That's my point.

2. People like the food and eat too much of it.

We agree. That's why you don't need some "addiction" theory to explain people gaining weight.

3. Some people become overweight and obese.

4. Some of the overweight and obese people decide that they want to lose weight.

5. Food companies, fearing loss of profits, create alternative foods that are lighter, leaner, lower fat, etc. The food companies portray these foods as the answer to weight loss because it allows them to continue to make sales. (Capitalism - not arguing against this, though I think it's the wrong thing to do.)

Sure, although I don't see why it's the wrong thing to do. Under this logic Fage 0% (my current favorite yogurt) would be bad, bad, very bad, because some dumb person might think it magically causes weight loss. Yet I admit that one reason I eat 0% on many occasions is, gasp, fewer calories and macros that better fit my needs. While I could, yes, eat chicken instead for the protein and eat less Fage full fat, why on earth is it bad for me to choose a lower calorie product if I like it? Why is the company bad for meeting the demand for that product?

6. Some overweight and obese people believe the messages that they receive from the food company and switch their foods.

Again, I think you are overstating the extent that the message is from the companies vs. numerous other sources, as set forth above.

BUT, more importantly, what difference does it make why the people get these ideas? IMO, it's wishful thinking, but what really matters is that it would be better if they understood how weight loss works, we agree on that.

Having seen lots of discussions of these topics on MFP, however, I think the person is going to continue believing what he or she wants to believe in more cases than not. And for those open to learning, the correct information is already available.

7. These people are largely unsuccessful because they aren't tracking. They become discouraged because they are "doing everything right." Society tells them that it's their fault and to take personal responsibility. That person believes that they did.

I love tracking and think it's a great (and extremely available) tool, but I think you are overly optimistic about how much it would help most people who don't already gravitate to it. It's actually possibly easier for the person who doesn't like the idea to lose by just focusing on serving sizes and food choice. But sure, evangelize for tracking. I'll back you up and say I find it really enjoyable and helpful.

But I still don't think that someone who lives off Lean Pockets in unlimited quantities can really, in good faith, think she is "doing everything right." Having been fat and all, I think most fat people know deep down why they gained weight and aren't losing. Being fat doesn't make you dumb.

This is where we land. It's not that we should take responsibility for these people or take their food away. It's about creating a public discussion and encouraging nutritional education.

So have a discussion. Who is stopping you? I just think the discussion must include criticizing bad ideas, and the current "sugar=heroin" nonsense is one of those bad ideas.