Have you seen FED UP - the documentary?

1679111219

Replies

  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    And for those that are talking about "parental responsibility" and don't have kids, STFU. :)

    No

    Sorry but having kids doesn't make you a special snowflake and automatically immune to criticism

    Honestly the fact that you would even pull that card is kinda pathetic.

    It's pathetic when someone who has NO IDEA on the difficulties of raising a child in this world, blames everything on only one factor - parents and not the environmental impact of the world around. Kids spend 8 hours a day in a school with public education (provided by government), eat in school cafeterias, see billboard after billboard in transport or in stores... but of course, it's absolutely 100% parental responsibility for the impact and education that these children receive -- especially about food.

    And that's the cop out parents have used to get out of everything.

    Sorry don't care about your sob story. Oh and If you read up I said PERSONAL AND PARENTAL responsibility.

    Also I even said that it's not really the parents fault a lot of the time. Sometimes it is though.

    And no you can't monitor everything. But you can't expect to control everything. I never made any assumptions like that. You have just decided to attack me because I mentioned that parental responsibility is a problem in many cases .. and it is.

    You are just appealing to parenthood to get out of the fact that your argument on sugar stinks and it's not worth wasting any more time on you.

    I didn't give you a sob story and you went from saying "The obvious culprit. And the one we want to ignore because we know it is the source.

    Personal and Parental responsibility. " to "sometimes" and "You can't monitor....control everything". I see my point sank in.

    When you are trying to shuffle your 4 year old through the grocery store and they are wailing for some junk they see at the counter that you have no intention of feeding them but it's there, it will even more.

    I take responsibility for my kids. If you don't then you are the problem. My 4 year old does pretty well in grocery stores. She knows what she's allowed, which does include sweets, and funny enough her pediatrician is absolutely amazed at how fit (strong) both our daughters are. It's you, not the industry and sugar. Take responsibility.

    Wait until your kids are teenagers and those perfect parent/ perfect child living in a bubble ideals roll away. Great parents can still end of with kids who make bad choices -- why? because they have other sources of influence their whole lives. You may set a good foundation but they will eventually make friends, have boyfriends/girlfriends, read books...

    That's what failures say about everything. It's not my fault. I can't control. Of course you don't have 100% control, but the absolute most important influence on any child is his/her parents, and if you're already making excuses with a 4 year old, all I can say is best of luck.

    Not an excuse but I can say that my 4 year old is not a robot isolated in a bubble, with a personality that only I can control. A child's will is not simply built by parent.

    No it's not. They're intelligent and I treat mine as future adults who can take responsibility for their actions, and learn about nutrition, athletics, and excel academically all at the same time. Set expectations high and encourage. It works. Or make excuses and blame the world around you for your children's problems.

    Of course, encouragement is amazing and can really help a child grow and do well. The reality is though, great children and great parents will still have to face failures, mistakes, wrong decision making. Ideally, our children would be perfect and have a perfect environment. Poor people would easily climb social ladders through achievement on their own merits, hard workers would make the most money, the nicest would have the best relationships... etc.

    Yea, it's all futile, life is unfair, give up now . . .

    Of course life has challenges, so it's better to teach your child how to face and overcome them successfully. Believe it or not life skills can be taught, but you have to do more than throw your hands in the air and complain.

    Yes, I agree that you give every effort for your child to survive and thrive. Doesn't mean I give up on things like criticizing the food industry for the impact they have on us, our food choices, our health. My family is ultra important and that's why social justice and accountability to those that have an impact on our health environment means that much more.

    So now, is your fault or the industry's that your child can't behave in a grocery aisle? I just want to be clear here.

    If my child wasn't surrounded by candy, she wouldn't want it. It's quite well known that grocery items are strategically placed to incite desire. Have you been to a grocery counter that didn't have a pack of gum at arms reach? Do you think they see more or less gum sales from people because they are easy to pick up while you are waiting in line? Do I think that the average person waiting for gum spends time reading the ingredients, analyzing it's negative/positive health benefits or do the marketing people know that we are impulse buyers and our kids will want the candy?

    And there it is. The bubble of irresponsible parenting

    Now, now, it's also proven fact that supermarkets make people buy Star Magazine. And TV Guide. Hmm, more evidence that they caused obesity.

    However, all this was true even before obesity was common--much as one could go to McD and could buy soda back when I was a kid, and yet there were almost no overweight kids--but why bother with reality when there's blame to cast!
  • usmcmp
    usmcmp Posts: 21,219 Member
    Wonderfullyma,I am not going to try quoting again after I mucked up my last attempt - but calling some food "food like products" is really not helping your credibility here.

    Sure, some food is more nutritious than other food (also depending which nutrients you want at the time) but there is no such thing as "food like products" - that is just silly zealots talk.

    Out of curiosity, does USA or other countries have confectionary free aisles? They do here, not by govt regulation,but in response to parent group's requests. Usually only one or two per supermarket but at least gives parent the option to use that aisle if they are having problems with tantrums, or anyone having problems with their own temptations.

    Just a question to the thread,anyone can answer please.

    There is no regulation for that, but I do know that some in my area don't have candy (usually one is next to magazines and our express lanes rarely do). Not by request, just by they way they are set up.

  • What do you expect? You just told me to "woman up" and judged me because I most certainly must not say "no" so that's why my child desires candy at the counter because you've got a child that doesn't? You just implied my parenting style is "yes" to whatever she desires and that created that behavior. That's not how this household runs and I'm appalled that another parent assumes that.

    Yes I did say that. Because obviously you would rather blame stores and their strategically placed candy for your child's outbursts than to teach them some self control. Now unless your kid has some sensory processing disorder, kids at the ages of 3 or 4 can reason that they don't always get candy and to not have fits about it. But then I am starting to think my child really is a special snowflake.

    Again, the stores wouldn't put the stuff there if they didn't know 100% that incites desire. You can say your child is wonderfully controlled but we know that they sell billions of dollars of candy and spend millions on advertising, consumer research, product placement, commercials etc because it impacts our behavior as consumers.

    Because they know people do not exercise self-control. If people would learn and use that value, than it wouldn't matter where stores placed their candy. Exercise self control and it wouldn't matter where they placed it or what kind of commercials they show. Exercise moderation and then it wouldn't matter how often it's consumed, because it would all be a part of a well balanced diet.

    Yes, exactly, because they know the notion of self-control when it comes to addictive substances is a farce. When you treat a heroin addict, you advise them to change their friends, the places they will get triggers -- basically their environment, because it is so overwhelmingly a predictor to their behaviour. It's not simply "self-control", it's more than that.. and the industry is playing us with addictive sugar, lack or misinformation and control of our environment. And a well-balanced diet should not include junk, exercise or not. That's like saying, a little poison is acceptable... NO, get that crap away from me!
  • ThePhoenixIsRising
    ThePhoenixIsRising Posts: 781 Member
    Wonderfullyma,I am not going to try quoting again after I mucked up my last attempt - but calling some food "food like products" is really not helping your credibility here.

    Sure, some food is more nutritious than other food (also depending which nutrients you want at the time) but there is no such thing as "food like products" - that is just silly zealots talk.

    Out of curiosity, does USA or other countries have confectionary free aisles? They do here, not by govt regulation,but in response to parent group's requests. Usually only one or two per supermarket but at least gives parent the option to use that aisle if they are having problems with tantrums, or anyone having problems with their own temptations.

    Just a question to the thread,anyone can answer please.
    In most supermarkets there are these check out isles.
  • nicailyzee
    nicailyzee Posts: 183 Member
    Thanks will add to list of must see documentaries! WOW this thread Wow!
  • Wonderfullyma,I am not going to try quoting again after I mucked up my last attempt - but calling some food "food like products" is really not helping your credibility here.

    Sure, some food is more nutritious than other food (also depending which nutrients you want at the time) but there is no such thing as "food like products" - that is just silly zealots talk.

    Out of curiosity, does USA or other countries have confectionary free aisles? They do here, not by govt regulation,but in response to parent group's requests. Usually only one or two per supermarket but at least gives parent the option to use that aisle if they are having problems with tantrums, or anyone having problems with their own temptations.

    Just a question to the thread,anyone can answer please.

    A food like product is manufactured food... if you are eating chemicals, preservatives disguised to look like a nutritious food, it's not food, it's a product. Apple is a food, artificial apple flavoring is not. Never seen a candy-free aisle in Canada or the states.
  • ThePhoenixIsRising
    ThePhoenixIsRising Posts: 781 Member

    What do you expect? You just told me to "woman up" and judged me because I most certainly must not say "no" so that's why my child desires candy at the counter because you've got a child that doesn't? You just implied my parenting style is "yes" to whatever she desires and that created that behavior. That's not how this household runs and I'm appalled that another parent assumes that.

    Yes I did say that. Because obviously you would rather blame stores and their strategically placed candy for your child's outbursts than to teach them some self control. Now unless your kid has some sensory processing disorder, kids at the ages of 3 or 4 can reason that they don't always get candy and to not have fits about it. But then I am starting to think my child really is a special snowflake.

    Again, the stores wouldn't put the stuff there if they didn't know 100% that incites desire. You can say your child is wonderfully controlled but we know that they sell billions of dollars of candy and spend millions on advertising, consumer research, product placement, commercials etc because it impacts our behavior as consumers.

    Because they know people do not exercise self-control. If people would learn and use that value, than it wouldn't matter where stores placed their candy. Exercise self control and it wouldn't matter where they placed it or what kind of commercials they show. Exercise moderation and then it wouldn't matter how often it's consumed, because it would all be a part of a well balanced diet.

    Yes, exactly, because they know the notion of self-control when it comes to addictive substances is a farce. When you treat a heroin addict, you advise them to change their friends, the places they will get triggers -- basically their environment, because it is so overwhelmingly a predictor to their behaviour. It's not simply "self-control", it's more than that.. and the industry is playing us with addictive sugar, lack or misinformation and control of our environment. And a well-balanced diet should not include junk, exercise or not. That's like saying, a little poison is acceptable... NO, get that crap away from me!
    So should this expand to all types of food issues people have? My brother is allergic to peanut butter, should we ban it from store shelves?
  • And for those that are talking about "parental responsibility" and don't have kids, STFU. :)

    No

    Sorry but having kids doesn't make you a special snowflake and automatically immune to criticism

    Honestly the fact that you would even pull that card is kinda pathetic.

    It's pathetic when someone who has NO IDEA on the difficulties of raising a child in this world, blames everything on only one factor - parents and not the environmental impact of the world around. Kids spend 8 hours a day in a school with public education (provided by government), eat in school cafeterias, see billboard after billboard in transport or in stores... but of course, it's absolutely 100% parental responsibility for the impact and education that these children receive -- especially about food.

    And that's the cop out parents have used to get out of everything.

    Sorry don't care about your sob story. Oh and If you read up I said PERSONAL AND PARENTAL responsibility.

    Also I even said that it's not really the parents fault a lot of the time. Sometimes it is though.

    And no you can't monitor everything. But you can't expect to control everything. I never made any assumptions like that. You have just decided to attack me because I mentioned that parental responsibility is a problem in many cases .. and it is.

    You are just appealing to parenthood to get out of the fact that your argument on sugar stinks and it's not worth wasting any more time on you.

    I didn't give you a sob story and you went from saying "The obvious culprit. And the one we want to ignore because we know it is the source.

    Personal and Parental responsibility. " to "sometimes" and "You can't monitor....control everything". I see my point sank in.

    When you are trying to shuffle your 4 year old through the grocery store and they are wailing for some junk they see at the counter that you have no intention of feeding them but it's there, it will even more.

    I take responsibility for my kids. If you don't then you are the problem. My 4 year old does pretty well in grocery stores. She knows what she's allowed, which does include sweets, and funny enough her pediatrician is absolutely amazed at how fit (strong) both our daughters are. It's you, not the industry and sugar. Take responsibility.

    Wait until your kids are teenagers and those perfect parent/ perfect child living in a bubble ideals roll away. Great parents can still end of with kids who make bad choices -- why? because they have other sources of influence their whole lives. You may set a good foundation but they will eventually make friends, have boyfriends/girlfriends, read books...

    That's what failures say about everything. It's not my fault. I can't control. Of course you don't have 100% control, but the absolute most important influence on any child is his/her parents, and if you're already making excuses with a 4 year old, all I can say is best of luck.

    Not an excuse but I can say that my 4 year old is not a robot isolated in a bubble, with a personality that only I can control. A child's will is not simply built by parent.

    No it's not. They're intelligent and I treat mine as future adults who can take responsibility for their actions, and learn about nutrition, athletics, and excel academically all at the same time. Set expectations high and encourage. It works. Or make excuses and blame the world around you for your children's problems.

    Of course, encouragement is amazing and can really help a child grow and do well. The reality is though, great children and great parents will still have to face failures, mistakes, wrong decision making. Ideally, our children would be perfect and have a perfect environment. Poor people would easily climb social ladders through achievement on their own merits, hard workers would make the most money, the nicest would have the best relationships... etc.

    Yea, it's all futile, life is unfair, give up now . . .

    Of course life has challenges, so it's better to teach your child how to face and overcome them successfully. Believe it or not life skills can be taught, but you have to do more than throw your hands in the air and complain.

    Yes, I agree that you give every effort for your child to survive and thrive. Doesn't mean I give up on things like criticizing the food industry for the impact they have on us, our food choices, our health. My family is ultra important and that's why social justice and accountability to those that have an impact on our health environment means that much more.

    So now, is your fault or the industry's that your child can't behave in a grocery aisle? I just want to be clear here.

    If my child wasn't surrounded by candy, she wouldn't want it. It's quite well known that grocery items are strategically placed to incite desire. Have you been to a grocery counter that didn't have a pack of gum at arms reach? Do you think they see more or less gum sales from people because they are easy to pick up while you are waiting in line? Do I think that the average person waiting for gum spends time reading the ingredients, analyzing it's negative/positive health benefits or do the marketing people know that we are impulse buyers and our kids will want the candy?

    And there it is. The bubble of irresponsible parenting

    Now, now, it's also proven fact that supermarkets make people buy Star Magazine. And TV Guide. Hmm, more evidence that they caused obesity.

    However, all this was true even before obesity was common--much as one could go to McD and could buy soda back when I was a kid, and yet there were almost no overweight kids--but why bother with reality when there's blame to cast!

    Ok smartypants, what has caused the increase in obesity rates then? Offer a reason so we can take your interjection seriously.
  • Since I seem to be participating in this conversation largely, I must bid you adieu... would love to chat more but need to drive the car pool in the morning. If I can find time, I'll return but this lady does have a life off screen.

    At the very least, if this conversation peaks your interest, watch the documentary link I posted too...http://www.cbc.ca/fifth/episodes/2013-2014/the-secrets-of-sugar

    Michael Pollan also writes some great books about food politics.

    Phinney, an amazing scientist/ researcher talks here about nutritional ketosis, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GkQYZ6FbsmI

    Enjoy!
  • ThePhoenixIsRising
    ThePhoenixIsRising Posts: 781 Member
    And for those that are talking about "parental responsibility" and don't have kids, STFU. :)

    No

    Sorry but having kids doesn't make you a special snowflake and automatically immune to criticism

    Honestly the fact that you would even pull that card is kinda pathetic.

    It's pathetic when someone who has NO IDEA on the difficulties of raising a child in this world, blames everything on only one factor - parents and not the environmental impact of the world around. Kids spend 8 hours a day in a school with public education (provided by government), eat in school cafeterias, see billboard after billboard in transport or in stores... but of course, it's absolutely 100% parental responsibility for the impact and education that these children receive -- especially about food.

    And that's the cop out parents have used to get out of everything.

    Sorry don't care about your sob story. Oh and If you read up I said PERSONAL AND PARENTAL responsibility.

    Also I even said that it's not really the parents fault a lot of the time. Sometimes it is though.

    And no you can't monitor everything. But you can't expect to control everything. I never made any assumptions like that. You have just decided to attack me because I mentioned that parental responsibility is a problem in many cases .. and it is.

    You are just appealing to parenthood to get out of the fact that your argument on sugar stinks and it's not worth wasting any more time on you.

    I didn't give you a sob story and you went from saying "The obvious culprit. And the one we want to ignore because we know it is the source.

    Personal and Parental responsibility. " to "sometimes" and "You can't monitor....control everything". I see my point sank in.

    When you are trying to shuffle your 4 year old through the grocery store and they are wailing for some junk they see at the counter that you have no intention of feeding them but it's there, it will even more.

    I take responsibility for my kids. If you don't then you are the problem. My 4 year old does pretty well in grocery stores. She knows what she's allowed, which does include sweets, and funny enough her pediatrician is absolutely amazed at how fit (strong) both our daughters are. It's you, not the industry and sugar. Take responsibility.

    Wait until your kids are teenagers and those perfect parent/ perfect child living in a bubble ideals roll away. Great parents can still end of with kids who make bad choices -- why? because they have other sources of influence their whole lives. You may set a good foundation but they will eventually make friends, have boyfriends/girlfriends, read books...

    That's what failures say about everything. It's not my fault. I can't control. Of course you don't have 100% control, but the absolute most important influence on any child is his/her parents, and if you're already making excuses with a 4 year old, all I can say is best of luck.

    Not an excuse but I can say that my 4 year old is not a robot isolated in a bubble, with a personality that only I can control. A child's will is not simply built by parent.

    No it's not. They're intelligent and I treat mine as future adults who can take responsibility for their actions, and learn about nutrition, athletics, and excel academically all at the same time. Set expectations high and encourage. It works. Or make excuses and blame the world around you for your children's problems.

    Of course, encouragement is amazing and can really help a child grow and do well. The reality is though, great children and great parents will still have to face failures, mistakes, wrong decision making. Ideally, our children would be perfect and have a perfect environment. Poor people would easily climb social ladders through achievement on their own merits, hard workers would make the most money, the nicest would have the best relationships... etc.

    Yea, it's all futile, life is unfair, give up now . . .

    Of course life has challenges, so it's better to teach your child how to face and overcome them successfully. Believe it or not life skills can be taught, but you have to do more than throw your hands in the air and complain.

    Yes, I agree that you give every effort for your child to survive and thrive. Doesn't mean I give up on things like criticizing the food industry for the impact they have on us, our food choices, our health. My family is ultra important and that's why social justice and accountability to those that have an impact on our health environment means that much more.

    So now, is your fault or the industry's that your child can't behave in a grocery aisle? I just want to be clear here.

    If my child wasn't surrounded by candy, she wouldn't want it. It's quite well known that grocery items are strategically placed to incite desire. Have you been to a grocery counter that didn't have a pack of gum at arms reach? Do you think they see more or less gum sales from people because they are easy to pick up while you are waiting in line? Do I think that the average person waiting for gum spends time reading the ingredients, analyzing it's negative/positive health benefits or do the marketing people know that we are impulse buyers and our kids will want the candy?

    And there it is. The bubble of irresponsible parenting

    Now, now, it's also proven fact that supermarkets make people buy Star Magazine. And TV Guide. Hmm, more evidence that they caused obesity.

    However, all this was true even before obesity was common--much as one could go to McD and could buy soda back when I was a kid, and yet there were almost no overweight kids--but why bother with reality when there's blame to cast!

    Ok smartypants, what has caused the increase in obesity rates then? Offer a reason so we can take your interjection seriously.
    I'm gonna speculate and say it has more to do with the a lack of personal responsibility that is becoming so common today.
  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    Wonderfullyma,I am not going to try quoting again after I mucked up my last attempt - but calling some food "food like products" is really not helping your credibility here.

    Sure, some food is more nutritious than other food (also depending which nutrients you want at the time) but there is no such thing as "food like products" - that is just silly zealots talk.

    Out of curiosity, does USA or other countries have confectionary free aisles? They do here, not by govt regulation,but in response to parent group's requests. Usually only one or two per supermarket but at least gives parent the option to use that aisle if they are having problems with tantrums, or anyone having problems with their own temptations.

    Just a question to the thread,anyone can answer please.

    Our self serve aisles are like that, and of course there are a range of groceries with different aisle set ups.

    But I've not heard of any for parents or a demand for it.
  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    And for those that are talking about "parental responsibility" and don't have kids, STFU. :)

    No

    Sorry but having kids doesn't make you a special snowflake and automatically immune to criticism

    Honestly the fact that you would even pull that card is kinda pathetic.

    It's pathetic when someone who has NO IDEA on the difficulties of raising a child in this world, blames everything on only one factor - parents and not the environmental impact of the world around. Kids spend 8 hours a day in a school with public education (provided by government), eat in school cafeterias, see billboard after billboard in transport or in stores... but of course, it's absolutely 100% parental responsibility for the impact and education that these children receive -- especially about food.

    And that's the cop out parents have used to get out of everything.

    Sorry don't care about your sob story. Oh and If you read up I said PERSONAL AND PARENTAL responsibility.

    Also I even said that it's not really the parents fault a lot of the time. Sometimes it is though.

    And no you can't monitor everything. But you can't expect to control everything. I never made any assumptions like that. You have just decided to attack me because I mentioned that parental responsibility is a problem in many cases .. and it is.

    You are just appealing to parenthood to get out of the fact that your argument on sugar stinks and it's not worth wasting any more time on you.

    I didn't give you a sob story and you went from saying "The obvious culprit. And the one we want to ignore because we know it is the source.

    Personal and Parental responsibility. " to "sometimes" and "You can't monitor....control everything". I see my point sank in.

    When you are trying to shuffle your 4 year old through the grocery store and they are wailing for some junk they see at the counter that you have no intention of feeding them but it's there, it will even more.

    I take responsibility for my kids. If you don't then you are the problem. My 4 year old does pretty well in grocery stores. She knows what she's allowed, which does include sweets, and funny enough her pediatrician is absolutely amazed at how fit (strong) both our daughters are. It's you, not the industry and sugar. Take responsibility.

    Wait until your kids are teenagers and those perfect parent/ perfect child living in a bubble ideals roll away. Great parents can still end of with kids who make bad choices -- why? because they have other sources of influence their whole lives. You may set a good foundation but they will eventually make friends, have boyfriends/girlfriends, read books...

    That's what failures say about everything. It's not my fault. I can't control. Of course you don't have 100% control, but the absolute most important influence on any child is his/her parents, and if you're already making excuses with a 4 year old, all I can say is best of luck.

    Not an excuse but I can say that my 4 year old is not a robot isolated in a bubble, with a personality that only I can control. A child's will is not simply built by parent.

    No it's not. They're intelligent and I treat mine as future adults who can take responsibility for their actions, and learn about nutrition, athletics, and excel academically all at the same time. Set expectations high and encourage. It works. Or make excuses and blame the world around you for your children's problems.

    Of course, encouragement is amazing and can really help a child grow and do well. The reality is though, great children and great parents will still have to face failures, mistakes, wrong decision making. Ideally, our children would be perfect and have a perfect environment. Poor people would easily climb social ladders through achievement on their own merits, hard workers would make the most money, the nicest would have the best relationships... etc.

    Yea, it's all futile, life is unfair, give up now . . .

    Of course life has challenges, so it's better to teach your child how to face and overcome them successfully. Believe it or not life skills can be taught, but you have to do more than throw your hands in the air and complain.

    Yes, I agree that you give every effort for your child to survive and thrive. Doesn't mean I give up on things like criticizing the food industry for the impact they have on us, our food choices, our health. My family is ultra important and that's why social justice and accountability to those that have an impact on our health environment means that much more.

    So now, is your fault or the industry's that your child can't behave in a grocery aisle? I just want to be clear here.

    If my child wasn't surrounded by candy, she wouldn't want it. It's quite well known that grocery items are strategically placed to incite desire. Have you been to a grocery counter that didn't have a pack of gum at arms reach? Do you think they see more or less gum sales from people because they are easy to pick up while you are waiting in line? Do I think that the average person waiting for gum spends time reading the ingredients, analyzing it's negative/positive health benefits or do the marketing people know that we are impulse buyers and our kids will want the candy?

    And there it is. The bubble of irresponsible parenting

    Now, now, it's also proven fact that supermarkets make people buy Star Magazine. And TV Guide. Hmm, more evidence that they caused obesity.

    However, all this was true even before obesity was common--much as one could go to McD and could buy soda back when I was a kid, and yet there were almost no overweight kids--but why bother with reality when there's blame to cast!

    Ok smartypants, what has caused the increase in obesity rates then? Offer a reason so we can take your interjection seriously.
    I'm gonna speculate and say it has more to do with the a lack of personal responsibility that is becoming so common today.

    I agree with this. Also inactivity, and a breakdown in cultural norms surrounding food. People have this idea of the SAD that is completely unlike what I thought of as the standard American diet when I was a kid, based on how we ate. Meat, potatoes, and a vegetable (usually canned or overcooked, granted), home cooked and eaten with the family together at the table. I went through a phase where I thought it was terribly unsophisticated and laughed at how unhealthy--my family would have been weirded out by meatless meals, although we did have lots of fish, for example. We also didn't have pasta, only spaghetti and occasional lasagna, of a sort, and I don't think I tried most ethnic foods til college. But in retrospect how I ate then isn't so different from how I eat now (but with fresh veggies, cooked well), and I was given an intuitive understanding of balanced, nutritious food that many younger people seem to have grown up without. We were not given fast food other than a rare treat, not because it was unavailable, but because that wasn't a proper way to eat. Candy was also rare, as was soda (though we called it pop). It's this sense of boundaries, that you can't have whatever you want when you want it that has, sadly, changed.

    Jeez, when did I get so old?
  • ninerbuff
    ninerbuff Posts: 48,908 Member
    Its not realistic. Sugar is added to everything to make it taste better, so that you will buy it. Why to they do all the taste tests? For example, do you expect you french fries to be coated in sugar? ..probably not...but if you buy them from McDonalds or the store..they are. It make them brown up and look better. I don't know about you , but if I was making fries at home I wouldn't be coating them in sugar first. So how is the consumer supposed to know other than to avoid all processed foods?
    Please stop. I've heard this claim made before but have seen no evidence to support it. If you have no actual empirical evidence, then you're just saying based on what you've heard.

    A.C.E. Certified Personal/Group FitnessTrainer
    IDEA Fitness member
    Kickboxing Certified Instructor
    Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
  • twinkle150
    twinkle150 Posts: 133 Member
    As to the sugar, it baffles me to how otherwise intelligent people are taken aback when that prepared boxed meal that tastes slightly better than cardboard isn't exactly healthy whole food.

    whenever someone in my office makes one of those lean cuisine-type meals, the whole building smells of MSG. it's got to be the only thing making them edible.

    i know they're low in calories and convenient, but i'd much rather make my own chicken and turkey lettuce wraps. they fill me up a lot better than one of those things do.

    I used to eat them back in my "low-fat" days. They were repulsive but that was when the medical establishment was preaching low-fat. I got fatter. Since I cut out added sugar and most of the "healthy whole grain" I was eating, I have lost what you see on my ticker--more or less effortlessly AND I have more energy now than I had 20 years ago. Sugar is making us fat and sick--and it is addictive (that's why they put it in everything). The food manufacturers know that adding sugar will make a product more appealing and it is a cheap filler at the same time. In 1900, the average person ate about 5 pounds of sugar per year (it was fairly expensive in those days). Today, it is estimated that the average person eats 150 pounds per year (and much of it is "hidden" in processed food). Ironically, we eat slightly less fat than they did in 1900. But, we eat a LOT more carbohydrate and much of it is in the form of sugar. The rise of obesity and Type II diabetes perfectly tracks the post-WWII rise in sugar consumption.

    Exactly my point.. I only used Rotten Ronnies french fries as an example of the widespread use of sugar in our processed foods vs 100 years ago when it was a luxury. Why do you think it was such an outrage when Marie Antoinette said "let them eat cake" . The peasants couldn't afford the luxury of buying sugar to bake a cake
  • ninerbuff
    ninerbuff Posts: 48,908 Member
    For hundreds of years sugar was a luxury item...not a staple in the diet. Now the high sugar rates are being linked to a rise of diabetes and even Alzheimers.
    Diabetes isn't CAUSED by sugar if you didn't know. Diabetes is more genetic ALTHOUGH being overweight/obese directly affects risk of it. Even the ADA states that it's a link, but not the actual cause since increased weight can happen without consuming a lot of sugar.
    As for Alzeihemer's, there are SO MANY other things besides sugar that it's linked to.

    A.C.E. Certified Personal/Group FitnessTrainer
    IDEA Fitness member
    Kickboxing Certified Instructor
    Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

    I never said sugar CAUSES diabetes. Exactly what causes Diabetes is uncertain, although it's believed that genetic susceptibility and ENVIRONMENTAL factors play a role in the development. Diabetes is an inability to control you blood glucose levels... glucose = blood sugar... hmmmmm diets high in sugar? Hmmm
    So you're going back and saying sugar is the cause for diabetes? Hmmm.

    A.C.E. Certified Personal/Group FitnessTrainer
    IDEA Fitness member
    Kickboxing Certified Instructor
    Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
  • ninerbuff
    ninerbuff Posts: 48,908 Member
    Sugar is making us fat and sick--and it is addictive (that's why they put it in everything). The food manufacturers know that adding sugar will make a product more appealing and it is a cheap filler at the same time.
    It's not addictive. It's high palatable. There's a difference. And while highly palatable, people get fat from over consumption of calories and sick because they either are unhealthy, have a bad family health history or have low immunity.

    Everyone averts to just the overweight/obese suffering from eating sugar and blaming it as the cause. Here's a secret: Thin and lean people eat sugar too. They just don't over eat.

    A.C.E. Certified Personal/Group FitnessTrainer
    IDEA Fitness member
    Kickboxing Certified Instructor
    Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
  • ninerbuff
    ninerbuff Posts: 48,908 Member
    Ok smartypants, what has caused the increase in obesity rates then? Offer a reason so we can take your interjection seriously.
    This one is easy: people are eating calorie dense foods and not burning off the excess calories. I would add that people are so wound up with working long hours, long commutes, long study hours, that it's easier to get or fix a high calorie dense meal than prep one that's more nutritious and lower in calories. Oh and super huge portions too.

    A.C.E. Certified Personal/Group FitnessTrainer
    IDEA Fitness member
    Kickboxing Certified Instructor
    Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
  • snikkins
    snikkins Posts: 1,282 Member
    As to the sugar, it baffles me to how otherwise intelligent people are taken aback when that prepared boxed meal that tastes slightly better than cardboard isn't exactly healthy whole food.

    whenever someone in my office makes one of those lean cuisine-type meals, the whole building smells of MSG. it's got to be the only thing making them edible.

    i know they're low in calories and convenient, but i'd much rather make my own chicken and turkey lettuce wraps. they fill me up a lot better than one of those things do.

    I used to eat them back in my "low-fat" days. They were repulsive but that was when the medical establishment was preaching low-fat. I got fatter. Since I cut out added sugar and most of the "healthy whole grain" I was eating, I have lost what you see on my ticker--more or less effortlessly AND I have more energy now than I had 20 years ago. Sugar is making us fat and sick--and it is addictive (that's why they put it in everything). The food manufacturers know that adding sugar will make a product more appealing and it is a cheap filler at the same time. In 1900, the average person ate about 5 pounds of sugar per year (it was fairly expensive in those days). Today, it is estimated that the average person eats 150 pounds per year (and much of it is "hidden" in processed food). Ironically, we eat slightly less fat than they did in 1900. But, we eat a LOT more carbohydrate and much of it is in the form of sugar. The rise of obesity and Type II diabetes perfectly tracks the post-WWII rise in sugar consumption.

    Exactly my point.. I only used Rotten Ronnies french fries as an example of the widespread use of sugar in our processed foods vs 100 years ago when it was a luxury. Why do you think it was such an outrage when Marie Antoinette said "let them eat cake" . The peasants couldn't afford the luxury of buying sugar to bake a cake

    Firstly, apparently Marie Antoinette never actually said that. Secondly, had she actually said that, she would have been referring to brioche, which is apparently a cake made with flour, eggs, and butter, thus making the bread more expensive; brioche does also have sugar in it, but the sugar alone isn't what would have made the bread more expensive. Thirdly, thanks for bringing that up because I learned something today.

    In case anyone wants to read on this:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Let_them_eat_cake
    http://www.history.com/news/ask-history/did-marie-antoinette-really-say-let-them-eat-cake
  • twinkle150
    twinkle150 Posts: 133 Member
    Sugar is making us fat and sick--and it is addictive (that's why they put it in everything). The food manufacturers know that adding sugar will make a product more appealing and it is a cheap filler at the same time.
    It's not addictive. It's high palatable. There's a difference. And while highly palatable, people get fat from over consumption of calories and sick because they either are unhealthy, have a bad family health history or have low immunity.

    Everyone averts to just the overweight/obese suffering from eating sugar and blaming it as the cause. Here's a secret: Thin and lean people eat sugar too. They just don't over eat.

    A.C.E. Certified Personal/Group FitnessTrainer
    IDEA Fitness member
    Kickboxing Certified Instructor
    Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

    And where would you like your calories to come from given the choice? Processed food or whole foods given the same calorie intake? Which do you think is healthier or according to you it doesn't matter?
  • ninerbuff
    ninerbuff Posts: 48,908 Member
    Sugar is making us fat and sick--and it is addictive (that's why they put it in everything). The food manufacturers know that adding sugar will make a product more appealing and it is a cheap filler at the same time.
    It's not addictive. It's high palatable. There's a difference. And while highly palatable, people get fat from over consumption of calories and sick because they either are unhealthy, have a bad family health history or have low immunity.

    Everyone averts to just the overweight/obese suffering from eating sugar and blaming it as the cause. Here's a secret: Thin and lean people eat sugar too. They just don't over eat.

    A.C.E. Certified Personal/Group FitnessTrainer
    IDEA Fitness member
    Kickboxing Certified Instructor
    Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

    And where would you like your calories to come from given the choice? Processed food or whole foods given the same calorie intake? Which do you think is healthier or according to you it doesn't matter?
    If I've reached my macro/micros for the day and have room for ice cream calories, I'm gonna eat ice cream instead of a piece of fruit. Not that I don't enjoy fruit, but I enjoy ice cream more.:wink:
    At that point, neither is going to be "healthier" since I've already met macro/micro goals. It's just excess at that point and not going to enhance your health either way.

    A.C.E. Certified Personal/Group FitnessTrainer
    IDEA Fitness member
    Kickboxing Certified Instructor
    Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition