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.

What new or revised public policy/law would make it easier for people to maintain a healthy weight?

1568101119

Replies

  • aokoye
    aokoye Posts: 3,495 Member
    lemurcat2 wrote: »
    lemurcat2 wrote: »
    ceiswyn wrote: »
    The more the USA government has gotten involved on telling people how the eat the fatter people have become it seems to me.

    ...other way around...

    People do not follow government guidelines very well but the for profit manufacturing side will even when guidelines are medically unproven.

    The guidelines are basically eat more veg and fruit and switch from white to whole grains and consume added sugar and added fat in limited amounts.

    The for-profit side puts out stuff that's popular. Tons of paleo and keto things these days and things marketed as "no sugar!", not any more nutritious in many cases than the old "low fat!" snacks (which no one legitimately thought were health food when they were cookies and such).
    People eat what is in front of them just like I did as a child eating from the garden and pasture field.

    Hmm. What's "in front of me" is what I choose to cook or otherwise to put in front of me.
    There were no leftovers to have to put away after most meals.

    We had leftovers eating mostly whole foods when I was a kid. I intentionally create meals where there will be leftovers now, as they are helpful for bringing lunch.
    We know today obesity is more a factor of what kind of calories we feed the body than how many calories we eat because the total calorie count has on average stayed the same.

    No, we do not know this. The credible studies demonstrate that calories have increased a lot (including from fat!). There are NO credible studies that show that calories don't dictate weight loss, maintenance, or gain. All studies controlled for calories demonstrate that calories ARE the factor.

    What you choose to eat, in a non controlled environment, probably determines how likely you are to overeat. If someone ate like the guidelines, they'd (on average) be less likely to overeat than if they ate some other ways that are common in the US currently. Indeed, you have frequently explained how you used to eat, and it was nothing like the guidelines.
    I still eat 2000-3000 calories daily staying away from processed foods containing added sugars and or any form of any grains.

    You have frequently mentioned eating processed foods, not that there's anything wrong with that.

    You don't track your calories, do you?

    Many men eat 2000-3000 cal a day and maintain, as I believe you have said you are doing.
    I just got back from the huge annual insurance claims event PLRB and did not gain or loss a pound of weight unlike when eating my old WOE (Way of Eating) that I left Oct 2014 at the age of 63. In the past I always gained more than just water weight.

    Rather obviously your current dietary restrictions -- which I agree seem to work for you -- made a lot of the foods you typically would have eaten off-limits. The same is true if one is doing W30 or 100% plant-based or logging and decides not to make an exception for the special event. None of that goes to the worth of the guidelines being discussed or to the effect of calories.

    While cause and effects can be hard to define at least we can agree that since the event of government eating guidelines in the USA have been established that obesity, diabetes, cancer, etc have become worse.

    No, we cannot.

    Ok scratch the cancer then we can all agree there are higher rates of obesity and diabetes then 50 years ago in the USA.

    Correlation does not imply causation.
  • Mouse_Potato
    Mouse_Potato Posts: 1,513 Member
    Theoldguy1 wrote: »
    hlr1987 wrote: »
    UK based and relevant to me would be elimination of multi-portion snacks, and a complete revision of the working hours of the week for fewer hours . So much of the year is spent going to work in the dark, coming home in the dark so to be able to fit exercise in (naturally active time, not "going to the gym" exercise) you have to either have an active job or use your lunch time. Plenty of people work longer hours than I do, but I find 7.5hours stuck at a desk really frustrating.

    Just curious do you expect less pay for less work? If that's the case, at least in the US you can get part time work.

    I would happily take a 20% pay cut for a 32 hour work week. Unfortunately, not all positions are available part-time.
  • johnslater461
    johnslater461 Posts: 449 Member
    These conditions have also worsened since the Kennedy assassination, the moon landing, Watergate, and the death of Gene Roddenberry...

    So clearly the dietary guidelines caused all those things too.
  • GaleHawkins
    GaleHawkins Posts: 8,159 Member
    aokoye wrote: »
    lemurcat2 wrote: »
    lemurcat2 wrote: »
    ceiswyn wrote: »
    The more the USA government has gotten involved on telling people how the eat the fatter people have become it seems to me.

    ...other way around...

    People do not follow government guidelines very well but the for profit manufacturing side will even when guidelines are medically unproven.

    The guidelines are basically eat more veg and fruit and switch from white to whole grains and consume added sugar and added fat in limited amounts.

    The for-profit side puts out stuff that's popular. Tons of paleo and keto things these days and things marketed as "no sugar!", not any more nutritious in many cases than the old "low fat!" snacks (which no one legitimately thought were health food when they were cookies and such).
    People eat what is in front of them just like I did as a child eating from the garden and pasture field.

    Hmm. What's "in front of me" is what I choose to cook or otherwise to put in front of me.
    There were no leftovers to have to put away after most meals.

    We had leftovers eating mostly whole foods when I was a kid. I intentionally create meals where there will be leftovers now, as they are helpful for bringing lunch.
    We know today obesity is more a factor of what kind of calories we feed the body than how many calories we eat because the total calorie count has on average stayed the same.

    No, we do not know this. The credible studies demonstrate that calories have increased a lot (including from fat!). There are NO credible studies that show that calories don't dictate weight loss, maintenance, or gain. All studies controlled for calories demonstrate that calories ARE the factor.

    What you choose to eat, in a non controlled environment, probably determines how likely you are to overeat. If someone ate like the guidelines, they'd (on average) be less likely to overeat than if they ate some other ways that are common in the US currently. Indeed, you have frequently explained how you used to eat, and it was nothing like the guidelines.
    I still eat 2000-3000 calories daily staying away from processed foods containing added sugars and or any form of any grains.

    You have frequently mentioned eating processed foods, not that there's anything wrong with that.

    You don't track your calories, do you?

    Many men eat 2000-3000 cal a day and maintain, as I believe you have said you are doing.
    I just got back from the huge annual insurance claims event PLRB and did not gain or loss a pound of weight unlike when eating my old WOE (Way of Eating) that I left Oct 2014 at the age of 63. In the past I always gained more than just water weight.

    Rather obviously your current dietary restrictions -- which I agree seem to work for you -- made a lot of the foods you typically would have eaten off-limits. The same is true if one is doing W30 or 100% plant-based or logging and decides not to make an exception for the special event. None of that goes to the worth of the guidelines being discussed or to the effect of calories.

    While cause and effects can be hard to define at least we can agree that since the event of government eating guidelines in the USA have been established that obesity, diabetes, cancer, etc have become worse.

    No, we cannot.

    Ok scratch the cancer then we can all agree there are higher rates of obesity and diabetes then 50 years ago in the USA.

    Correlation does not imply causation.

    It never has and never will just like with Round-Up. It takes provable science to prove causation. Emotions and science are not the same thing.
  • Lenpayasa
    Lenpayasa Posts: 69 Member
    I just imagined an actual sugar pill, like a pill made of compressed refined sugar and someone saying "I've got to take my medicine" Off-topic, sorry.
  • corrarjo
    corrarjo Posts: 1,157 Member
    If you want the government to show you how to eat, how about bringing Home Economics back to public school.
  • Lenpayasa
    Lenpayasa Posts: 69 Member
    corrarjo wrote: »
    If you want the government to show you how to eat, how about bringing Home Economics back to public school.

    I loved middle school Home Ec! The memories and practical knowledge. Field trip to the grocery store, learned to wash dishes properly to save water and make breadsticks from scratch. Yeah, now days kids aren't allowed to use knives.
  • ceiswyn
    ceiswyn Posts: 2,256 Member
    TheRoadDog wrote: »
    While I agree that people are not eating healthy and weight is an issue now, more than ever before, I don't want the Government telling me what I can and cannot eat.

    Has anyone suggested that it should?

    I’m OK with governments offering advice, though.
  • bobshuckleberry
    bobshuckleberry Posts: 281 Member
    I think we have enough laws for the most part. As far as policy goes, I'd like to see communities develop infrastructure that promotes a healthy lifestyle. I live in a small rural community in Texas. The county road systems are wonderful for cycling and we have limited traffic - that's the good part. The flip side is our towns and cities are designed for cars - not people. I deal with loose (biting) dogs all the time because city ordinances aren't enforced. City streets have a lot of junk near the curb. We don't have bike lanes. You get the idea. Many folks just won't take a walk or ride their bike because they don't feel safe. We also need kinder neighborhoods where children (actually their parents) feel it's safe to be outside and play or ride a bike.

    Edit: I know all of this is expensive. But what's the cost of obesity to our communities and our countries?

    Our area is very rural also. The roads are not conducive to riding, walking or running. However we have a system of trails where railroads are not being used any longer. The paths are already there, so it did not cost the local government as much to utilize them. They are well used and appreciated.
  • lemurcat2
    lemurcat2 Posts: 7,885 Member
    ceiswyn wrote: »
    TheRoadDog wrote: »
    While I agree that people are not eating healthy and weight is an issue now, more than ever before, I don't want the Government telling me what I can and cannot eat.

    Has anyone suggested that it should?

    I’m OK with governments offering advice, though.

    The food industry recommend the eating guidelines.and the USA federal government put them in place officially.

    And do they require you to follow them? Of course not, nor should they, nor has anyone suggested otherwise.
  • lynn_glenmont
    lynn_glenmont Posts: 10,097 Member
    Lenpayasa wrote: »
    corrarjo wrote: »
    If you want the government to show you how to eat, how about bringing Home Economics back to public school.

    I loved middle school Home Ec! The memories and practical knowledge. Field trip to the grocery store, learned to wash dishes properly to save water and make breadsticks from scratch. Yeah, now days kids aren't allowed to use knives.

    I enjoyed middle school (well, "junior high" in my day and place) home ec for a while, but the memories were pretty much spoiled when the bullies decided to remove the needles from the sewing machine and run around stabbing people with them, and the teacher did zilch about it.

    So maybe not letting them have knives these days isn't such a bad thing.
  • h7463
    h7463 Posts: 626 Member
    Lenpayasa wrote: »
    corrarjo wrote: »
    If you want the government to show you how to eat, how about bringing Home Economics back to public school.

    I loved middle school Home Ec! The memories and practical knowledge. Field trip to the grocery store, learned to wash dishes properly to save water and make breadsticks from scratch. Yeah, now days kids aren't allowed to use knives.

    I enjoyed middle school (well, "junior high" in my day and place) home ec for a while, but the memories were pretty much spoiled when the bullies decided to remove the needles from the sewing machine and run around stabbing people with them, and the teacher did zilch about it.

    So maybe not letting them have knives these days isn't such a bad thing.

    I remember the times when students got a good spanking for that kind of behaviour. And then a second one as soon as they got off the school bus, because the bad deed had already been reported to the parents. I wonder how we all survived as kids... But I guess, we learned a lesson..
This discussion has been closed.