An Internet hub for moderates, centrists, and independents, with domestic and international news, analysis, original reporting, and popular features from the left, center, and right

Jelly Donuts and Junk Food: Uncle Sam, Save Us!

In light of all the heated discussion about health care reform, this Houston Chronicle article seems pretty timely:

Obesity is causing “death and illness on a massive scale,” according to a new study by University of Virgina and Urban Institute researchers. And it is all but impossible to treat.

“Unless there is some vast improvement in the efficiency of the health care system — and I mean vast — we’re going to be spending a lot more just because a lot more people will have diabetes” and other obesity related diseases.

Prevention is the only cure.

If prevention is the only cure, then it really doesn’t matter how efficient the health care system becomes, does it? Preventing obesity, however, is quite the sticky wicket. I mean… just how would a government go about that?

Junk food taxes are part of a growing consensus among public health experts to adapt the successful fight against tobacco to the more complex obesity epidemic.

So… everybody’s getting fat because they eat too much junk food? Have these experts not eaten out at a real restaurant in the last decade? I dunno about you (or them), but being served enough food to feed a small African nation seems a bit over the top to me.

Or maybe it’s just all that ethnic food?

Texas Sen. Leticia Van de Putte of San Antonio said education programs that have tried to teach kids about eating nutritious foods have “backfired” because they made the food their families cooked for them seem bad.

“We love Mexican food in this state,” Van de Putte said, adding that there are ways to prepare it to be healthier.

That’s funny, actually. They’ve been eating Mexican food in Mexico for… like… ever – but they’re facing a sudden, recent obesity crisis there as well. Did they suddenly change how they prepare it? Seems pretty unlikely.

Seriously. Aside from certain medical conditions, the cause of obesity isn’t particularly mysterious: Folks are eating way too much!

**gasp**

How can this be? Surely intelligent, self-respecting people aren’t doing this to themselves, are they?

Why no, they’re not. They’re innocents, caught in a nefarious plot to destroy the health of a nation.

“Every successful public health movement, whether it was sanitation or air pollution or drunk driving or tobacco, has shown that people can only be healthy if there are policies in place that support them in making healthy choices,” said Harold Goldstein, executive director of the California Center for Public Health Advocacy.

“We put fast food on every corner, we put junk food in schools, we got rid of PE, we put candy and soda at the checkout stand of every retail outlet you can think of,” he said. “The results are in. It worked.”

Indeed. I got my memo telling me I must eat junk food and candy bars a minimum number of times each week. Didn’t you?

Sigh…

Listen. I personally believe everyone’s well within their rights to consume 5000 calories of whatever they want every single day — even if they only burn off 1000. But we need to get a couple of things cleared up:

1. You have a choice about every single bite that goes into your mouth.

2. Obesity doesn’t simply appear overnight. It isn’t sneaky or sudden. As weight comes on, clothes get tighter. And tighter. That’s your body telling you to pay much closer attention to number one above. Listen to it!

Otherwise, we’re going to be having some very difficult conversations about this:

“Rising obesity rates are increasing health care expenditures per person in a way that is going to be very difficult to finance,” said Jay Bhattacharya, a doctor and health economist at Stanford University’s Center for Primary Care and Outcomes Research.

Because like the mortgage crisis, people who made less-risky choices are going to be pretty darned resentful at having to fund the problems resulting from those who didn’t.

  • tidbits
    Polimom - Just finishing up my cold breakfast pizza. Any typos can be attributed to sticky keys. We have a way to go on this issue. It is not just the advertisement and store placement running against real information. Grotesque gluttony, of the food variety, is actually glorified everywhere from college campuses, where lifelong lessons are "taught", to cable tv...ever watch "Man vs. Food" on the Travel Channel?

    You're right of course. You always are. But there's a massive education gap on this one.

    Must leave now. Gotta run to the store & get some chips & beer for my afternoon on the couch watching sports.
  • tidbits: "Gotta run to the store & get some chips & beer for my afternoon on the couch watching sports."

    That'll be me in about a month, when NFL season starts. And I'll be griping about it, too, when I'm out hiking and dragging my rear end up the mountain takes more effort than I really enjoy. LOL!

    So -- to the meat of your comment -- how do you suggest closing the "massive education gap"?

    Me, I'm okay with taxing the junk food (the proceeds of which could ideally go into a special fund to help offset the rising health care costs of dealing with gluttony). I also think allowing food stamps to be used at places like farmer's markets has possibilities (but this idea was evidently shot down in the texas legislature). And it seems pretty darned dumb to be serving junk food in public schools. I mean, talk about funding your own future disaster....!

    But beyond some of these ideas? Dunno...
  • tidbits
    Polimom - First, on the football scene, "Go Badgers". Yeah, I know, that's not NFL.

    On to the education gap & other tasty issues. I would begin by acknowledging some advances. Fast food chains are now offering nutrition information about their food, though many make it as difficult to find/read as they can get away with. Movies like "Super-Size Me" have helped, and some schools have taken high sugar soft drinks and treats out of their vending machines and have changed cafeteria meals. So, all is not lost. And, whatever happened to the good old days when the drinking age was 18 and I could get a beer at the Student Union?

    I am not a fan of using taxes as a means of social engieering, but that's an entirely different diatribe. I don't mind taxes as a revenue source, mind you, just object to using the tax code to modify behavior. Those who can afford it continue to smoke their cigars, drive their gas guzzlers, create carbon footprints without thought for the cost or consequences, etc. "Sin" taxes tend to unfairly impact the poorest and least able to afford them. Is that a socialist thought or a rejection of neo-progressivism?

    Excuse me while I microwave some Mac&Cheese from this box and think about this further. Ah, but there's part of the problem. Fast food drive thrus and processed food are...what's the word I'm looking for...EASY. And, easy sells; easy trumps good; easy is the mantra of twenty first century TCNS American family life. Could we impose a 24 hour waiting period before you could pick up your drive-thru order or collect your processed food from the store? Talk about Whole Foods being girlcotted.

    Barring that, education really is the best weapon, with a punch (sugarless of course). A "radical" tactic organization modelled on PETA, MADD, ASPCA, would be helpful, including a national "shock and awe" campaign. Beyond that...really radical...double the health insurance deductibles for diseases related to unhealthy eating.

    Let's see: promote the cost savings of preparing healthy food...people like to save money more than they like to pay sin taxes...or organize well publicized boycotts and girlcotts of prepared food companies that fail to offer healthy alternatives...exposing the sin is a wonderful deterrent...organize letter writing campaigns to advertisers who promote shows, events like hot dog eating contests or "Man vs. Food". In other words, use the usual, and unusual, guerilla tactics to get the issue on the front burner (so to speak).

    Good luck & please stop by for some nachos if you're in the naighborhood.

    z of c
  • GeorgeSorwell
    Did they really get rid of PE in Texas?
  • tidbits
    Comment Voluntarily Removed.
  • margaretwilde
    It's not the amount of food or number of calories or grams of fat that are the trouble. It's the amount of salt/sodium. That's why dieting and calorie-counting don't work.

    Reducing sodium intake rapidly reduces excess weight because it reduces the fluid retention which is the cause of excess weight. - Only people who are sensitive to salt become overweight.

    Lose weight by eating less salt! - Go on! - Try it! - You will feel so much better!
  • Silhouette
    Here's how you define junk food for purposes of taxation for the health-fund pool: Junk food is almost devoid of nutrition. You set a high minimum of required nutritional value and a low maximum for sugar, salt and fat content. If the product doesn't meet the minimums or exceeds the maximum, respectively, it gets taxed for the pool along with tobacco and alcohol.

    You can still continue to consume those products as you wish. And the more they are consumed, the more money will go into the pool to offset the medical costs you are virtually guaranteed to cost society. It could be the "you play, you pay" system of indulgence. The neat part of this is that it makes logical sense and solves the problems all at once. You'll still have a right to kill yourself slowly as you wish, only that right won't infringe on the general population when you become a burden. And with chirrosis, heart disease and cancer they usually kill pretty quickly once you become aware they are at a critical level in your body so you won't be a burden for long.

    There, there's your capitalistic-freedom solution without anybody being your Big Brother of socialism.
  • StockBoySF
    More gym memberships! :)

    Actually I don't think processed foods are good for us. It's one thing to have beans (and whatever else) in a tortilla made from ingredients grown locally. It's another thing to have beans (and whatever else) in a tortilla from prepackaged foods filled with lots of other stuff.

    I guess those preservatives added to food just help preserve the food in your body longer. :)
  • dstt9901
    There are a lot of good points here. However, there are some overlying problems: the idea of taxing things like sugar ultimately go against system already set up by the government. While the current proposal it to tax sugar, the government will reward the production of products such as high fructose corn syrup in the form of subsidies. We cannot have a system that will reward at one end, yet punish the other end. I'm not a fan of killing farm subsidies, but it may be better to reward the productions of a wider array of crops as to promote better health in the end products available to us. If people are worried about the ease of food, I'm sure market forces will figure out a suitable way to sell broccoli in such a way that they have been corn and soy developed products.

    And it's going to have to be a force such as the government to tackle this issue. Businesses will not change so long as people buy this crap (fast and processed foods), and people on their own are just not equating the detriment to their bodies as that big of a problem for their concern. For example, just the idea that a 50 year old person could develop diabetes with no family history should make said person seriously what they are doing with their life; yet, my 400 pound mother-in-law still eats in the same horrendous fashion she has for most her life. And, institutions seem to reenforce the fact that obesity is okay (i.e. heredity). Such excuses shouldn't tell a person that it's okay to be the giant size they are, but that their diet is incompatible. Neither business or individuals do this, so another force needs to.
  • Father_Time
    Words of wisdom from a Hooray Harry.

    National Healthcare is the only answer.
  • tidbits
    Sil - I understand your point. But, we can't tax everything we disagree with. Taxing people into subserviant obedience is no better than the Soma of "Brave New World". Private solutions work too. Love ya, but the tax-all-politically-incorrect-activities model doesn't work for me.

    Give up the tax-then-die model & get radical. Remember, sin taxes disproportionately hurt the poor. Serious social activism attacks the problem at an educational level.
  • tidbits
    F.T. - God bless you for your devotion to national health care & health care reform. But, to ignore the problem of obesity and say let national health take care of the aftermath puts us on the road to national bankruptcy. One of the keys to effectvie national health care is a committment to prevention, not high end treament of those who won't pay attention to their own lives.

    Really like the forthrightness of your comments...even when I disagree.
  • tidbits
    Dstt - Sorry to hear about your mother in law's short life expectancy. You are dead-on right about taxing one end and rewarding the other vis-a-vis farm subsidies. Disagree (respectfully) that re-education needs to be entirely a government issue.

    Don't worry about "people not equating the detriment to their bodies". Hit them where they live...the real radicalism. Tobacco - people don't respond to you'll die of lung cancer in 30 years...they respond to: your breath stinks & nobody wants to date you. And, it doesn't require government to get the message out. Government follows, it doesn't lead. Don't believe me? Ask MADD.

    So, with bad diets. Focus on: it makes you fat & ugly...Americans care more about their appearance than they do about health consequences 30 years down the road. Do guerilla PR...not because its fun, but because it works. Government will follow.

    z of c
  • Dr J
    That eating a lot makes you fat was never exactly a secret. Education seems good mostly for teaching people to blame someone else for how much they eat. God bless you, Michael Moore.
  • dstt9901
    I agree that a grassroots PR campaign will ultimately be the way that anything worth while has to start. Though, telling people that eating pure crap will make them fat & ugly is currently the way society works now. Unfortunately, people do not respond to this message by changing their diets in a beneficial manner, they respond by adopting a more dangerous habit: overeat, or become anorexic/bullemic. There are organizations trying to promote better food habits and production, though these are associated more with left wingers, and not with more mainstream society. Hopefully this will change down the road.

    Most importantly, you are right that government follows. So does the people. It takes small groups of few to make change, for better or worse.
  • Father_Time
    tidbits--

    Sorry no. The road to bankruptcy has already arrived. It's caused by massive over charging by the medical industry. Cost is the problem not fat people. Capitalist medicine cannot work because it is based on supply and demand. Supply will always be in greater and greater demand with more and more people. There is no competition, no incentive to reduce cost. Only a National Healthcare system with strict government control will serve the American people. What we have now is just a rip off. And lets not have God blessing me. I'm not sure your God is my God.
  • CStanley
    So, with bad diets. Focus on: it makes you fat & ugly...Americans care more about their appearance than they do about health consequences 30 years down the road.

    An excellent example of this is Dr. Andre Agatston and the South Beach Diet. He's a serious cardiologist who focuses on prevention and has pioneered some work on cardiac imaging (calcium scoring, which is far better at measuring real risk of heart attack than any of the methods used by traditional cardiologists.)He created what is now known as the South Beach Diet as a means of improving his patients' cardiovascular health. When a lot of his patients started losing weight, and their friends were asking how they had done it, he realized that more people were motivated by the vanity aspect than the health one- and he figured he might as well promote it on that basis too since it works as a powerful motivator.
  • tidbits -- I agree totally with this: "[smokers] respond to: your breath stinks & nobody wants to date you"

    We have, however, been running a somewhat schizophrenic campaign regarding weight. On the one hand, we don't want to over-focus on it, because then (some) people swing too far the other direction into anorexia (or bulemia). And we've heard and read a lot about how heavy people are discriminated against, subtly, in society and the economy. On the other hand, everyone's wringing their hands about the growing obesity problem.

    There's been a not-so-subtle PC movement toward normalizing heaviness. The whole, "You're okay if you're overweight; love your body; love yourself as you are" campaign has had great effect in this arena.
  • tidbits
    Yes, it is a complex problem. Several people have mentioned dietary over-compensation (compulsion) like anoexia, and I agree. Polimom makes an excellent point about the PC campaign to make obesity an acceptable social condition. There really is a fine line between encouraging healthy lifestyles and avoiding weight based discrimination. Feeling good about being over weight seems to me not to be the answer.

    FT - My use of the phrase "God bless you" was meant as a simple courtesy, not as a religious statement. If I offended you, please accept my apology. I will remember in the future not to make such references when responding to your comments.

    CS - Thanks for the real life example of using "attractiveness" as a marketing tool to achieve a greater benefit.
  • roro80
    Wow...there's an incredible amount of fat hating going on here on this thread. Quite frankly, I don't think that casting being fat as a moral failure has actually worked all that well. Equating fat with ugly, fat with smelly, fat with unloveable, fat with undisciplined, fat with lazy -- c'mon folks, it's not only really disgusting as a tactic, but it's just not working. This is already the way the system is set up. If shaming fat people into being not fat were going to work, we'd be the most in-shape nation on the planet. Instead, the more and more that we've focused on how gross fat people are, the more we see thin=loveable and thin=healthy and thin=desireable above all else, the more our national obesity problem has grown, along with eating disorders and poor nutrition decisions.

    I don't really know what the answer is here (probably education and doing away with farm subsidies and getting good grocery stores into low-income neighborhoods all are good steps), but blaming the fatty-fat-fats for our national health care crisis is not only falling flat in effectivity, but it's also a really *sshole way to look at things.
  • LionAslan
    fat time: your widdo sensitive self when someone says God bless. You dont have to act like your usual jacka-- self about it. You seem to think snippiness is cool. It's not. It's lame as hell, esp in a male.
  • CStanley
    roro- I guess I'm not reading this thread the same way because I didn't catch any hating. Fact is that obesity is a major health problem. I don't hate anyone who's overweight (certainly haven't hated myself when I've put on a few extra pounds) but I don't see the point of ignoring the effects of lifestyle habits on healthcare costs.

    And as far as shaming- I guess it was initially brought up in a negative manner a bit like that, and PM explained some of the reasons that that's not a good approach. But there's also the positive framing of the issue by helping people make choices that lead to health and attractiveness- and I don't think it's really disputable that the latter tends to be a stronger motivator.
  • roro80
    Seeing this: "Something like 'Eating this will make you fat and ugly' and 'This product is only purchased by really stupid people' " pretty clearly states that fat=ugly and fat=stupid. That's some pretty good fat hating going on, and was pretty well agreed with by at least you, CStanley. Polimom suggests that it's wrong to tell a fat person that it's ok to be fat. If we can't say it's ok, that implies that it's not ok to be fat. While tidbits acknowledges that "There really is a fine line between encouraging healthy lifestyles and avoiding weight based discrimination", he clearly understands that there IS weight-based discrimination, and seems to want to perpetuate it.

    And I just want to repeat again: there are no fat people who don't understand that being thin is considered attractive in our culture. If you think that, you must also think that fat people are braindead (of course we already know tidbits thinks that only "stupid" people are fat). There is a legitimate concern that there are a huge number of people who are not educated on what a good diet is, and there are also a lot of people who do not have the access or means for a good diet, but let's not equate the sort of education etc needed to change these problems with some idea that all the thin people need to make sure that the fat people understand that they're ugly. Thin people have been *extremely* clear on this point, and somehow that hasn't caused all the big fatties to run out and lose weight.
  • roro, I understand what you're saying. But I cannot help thinking you're avoiding the elephant in the room: the enormous health costs that result from obesity.

    In the current health care debate (which is actually why I thought this was worth talking about in the first place), we're talking about making sure health care is available to all -- a goal worth striving for. Directly related to that... subsidizing premiums for people who cannot afford them is a logical outcome of reform. Of course, such subsidies will come in the form of taxes. Public money.

    When you combine that with projections of up obesity rates of 40% (in TX by 2040), this is a very real social issue coming down the pipe.

    Down the line (not very far), when nearly 1/2 the population is radically affecting health care costs that are rippling through the system, the conversation is likely to be far less civil. Don't you think talking about it in realistic terms right now has the potential to be more productive?
  • roro80
    "Don't you think talking about it in realistic terms right now has the potential to be more productive?"

    Yes, Polimom, I do think talking about it in realistic terms does have the potential to be productive. I don't think that it is realistic to think that shaming fat people is going to help, as that is what we are already doing, every day, as a culture. And it most certainly has not helped. If we look at obesity trends and compare them to trends in the diet market, and to trends in the population seeing being fat as a *moral* failure, and to trends of severely underweight women appearing as ideal in popular culture, we do NOT see that these things cause the obesity rate to go down. In fact, we see exactly the opposite. I'm not at all denying the issues you bring up -- I understand very well that obesity rates are going up, that obesity often causes health problems, and that those health problems cost a lot of money. I am saying that refusing to be "civil" about the conversation is causing the problem to be worse, not better.

    Saying to a smoker that their breath stinks and they won't be able to find a date doesn't make them want to quit smoking, it makes them think you are a jerk. And they're right. In the same way, cow calling (the fat version of cat calling) does not make a fat person go out and lose weight, it just clues them into the fact that there are jerks out there.

    Look, I'm not averse to having a conversation about how to bring down obesity rates, but I am very much offended at seeing fat people scapegoated for America's health care crisis, and I am also quite ashamed that these memes about fat people being stupid and lazy and ugly get passed off as "realistic" or constructive conversation, when they are neither.
  • roro -- I guess I'm seeing the general message going out about weight differently than you are. As the parent of a teenager, I've been pretty sensitive to this message... which has been overwhelmingly "it's okay if you're overweight".

    No. It's not ok. But how to fight back against that without sounding like a jerk? Education isn't gonna do it. And eating well is *not* more expensive than buying junk food. Processed / junk food is, however, MUCH much easier to deal with at mealtime (as was noted downthread). I really think that's more key than anything else, actually.
  • tidbits
    Roro - Well, I am not accustomed to being called names..."fat hating", or being accused of thinking "only stupid people are fat" or that I want to perpetuate discrimination. To be clear, I don't "hate" anybody. That I am not as politically correct as some would have me be...Guilty. Please respond to ideas...or the inartful way in which they are expressed if you must, but kindly do not assume what is in my soul.

    To the issue. Obesity is a serious health problem. I have attendedd too many funerals of overweight friends to believe otherwise and worked in an advisory capacity in one of the first weight based discrimination lawsuits in the country...the subject of late night talk show humor. Btw, it was dismissed because obesity is not a "protected class".

    What I tried to suggest, through perhaps inarful humor, was a guerilla PR campaign to grab people's attention as opposed to politely telling folks they might get diabetes someday or die of an early heart attack someday. The subtle, politically correct, nudging IMHO doesn't have the desired effect. So, I suggest we push the envelope...not in a discriminatory manner, but in an in-your-face, PETA like approach, to get the issue out front.

    To those who were offended by my choice of language, my apologies.
  • roro80
    Polimom -- I guess I'm thinking more about coming at this from the teenager's point of view, not the person trying to get the teenager to not be fat. I'm a good many years out of teenager-dom, but I was a meticulous diary-keeper at the time, so I remember very well what if felt like to be a teenager. I obviously don't know your kids, nor you, but I would definitely consider carefully what effects your statement that "it's not ok to be fat" might have on your kids, and the fact that it might be exactly the opposite of what you want.

    Just to give you a bit of my background: I'm the daughter of 2 extremely attractive, ridiculously in-shape parents, who were just about perfect parents in every way, but were not afraid to tell me exactly what I should and shouldn't eat, and that exercise was an important part of every day. Statements like "honey, how do feel about starting a sit-up program together? We *both* could use it" were in easy supply. The result? Teenage eating disorder, and a body complex that it took years and much therapy to overcome. Yay fun! In my early twenties I was finally able to confront my parents, and tell them that they were under no circumstances allowed to comment on my weight or my body -- even if I had lost weight and was looking great. It just hurt too much to have their approval and disapproval hinge on something like body size. After some crying and "you don't appreciate anything I do for you!", they agreed not to make any comments on my weight, and my relationship with them improved immediately. Incidently, so did my ability to lead a healthy lifestyle at a healthy weight. When your weight is not a condition of others' love for you (whether this is real or perceived), when weight is something you can separate from your inherent goodness, when weight and food are not moral decisions, it's a lot easier to be rational about keeping at a healthy weight.
  • roro80
    "do not assume what is in my soul"

    Oh for goodness' sake, tidbits, you said many "inartful" things, things that were quite offensive, with a pretty dang clear message, and I called you out on it. A lot of people say rude things without malintent, but those things can still hurt. I don't purport to know what's in your soul, but when you say what you said, it's hard to come to any other conclusion that you think ridicule is an acceptable way to get people to be thin. What that says about your soul is anybody's guess.

    "That I am not as politically correct as some would have me be...Guilty."

    I'm very tired of hearing people say say "Oh I'm just not PC" after saying something offensive. It's very reminiscent of "I'm not a racist, it's just that [insert racist comment]", only the "PC" term can be used for anything offensive or discriminatory.

    "a guerilla PR campaign"

    I've tried to explain through many comments that shaming fat people is something that is done all the time, by so very many aspects of our culture, and it doesn't work. In fact, it is counterproductive if what you're going for is a drop in obesity. It does, however, do an excellent job of making thin people feel superior and special. This is what makes me dubious of your request to "Please respond to ideas" -- I did. It's a bad idea.

    "PETA like approach,"

    Ah, PETA is a great example of highly offensive advertising that does darn near nothing to affect the causes they purport to be working for. They always get the press with their constant use of naked women though, don't they?

    Also, I don't believe I called you any names. I was offended by the fat hating memes you trotted out, and said so.
  • roro -- I'm sorry you had difficult teenage years. They are hard enough already for hyper-self-conscious young girls without external scrutiny. However, I'm surprised that because I've said I'm sensitive to the messaging because I'm parenting a teen, you have somehow construed that I'm trying to deal with weight issues here. I'm not.

    "Paying attention" to the messaging means I'm a parent who's focused on the world she's interacting with (as much as I can be). It means I'm listening, mostly, to her and her friends, as well as the marketing and public service messaging. It also means I'm fighting back nearly non-stop (feels like!) against daily runs to Sonic or MickieD's, or regular Dunkin' Donut breakfasts. They're totally surrounded by lures to put garbage into their systems -- and to be honest, I think I'd be failing in my duty as a parent if I weren't trying to off-set all that.
  • CStanley
    roro- your personal history certainly helps put into perspective your reaction to the language used in the thread, and I apologize if my comment seemed approving of the 'fat= ugly' messaging. I wasn't really agreeing with the way that was phrased, or with a negative PR campaign at all.. I just launched off of the general idea that people's behavior does seem to be more motivated on appearance than on long term health concerns. Of course I think that kind of messaging can be overdone, and can be harmful if it's negative instead of positive or harmful if it's positive but focused on an impossible to obtain image of perfection. I think the messaging has to be moderate and balanced, just like diet and exercise should be.

    And honestly, my concern is that if we can't talk about the problem of obesity and address it in public discourse, that a move toward a public health system will end up having the govt take the problem on- and I think that although people certainly can be insensitive, bureaucrats who have to worry about the bottom line will be even less concerned with hurting people's feelings.
  • roro80
    Hi Polimom --
    I want to make it clear that I'm not saying that I thought you were berating your teen because he or she is overweight, and I apologize if that's the way my comment came off. I did misunderstand what messaging you were talking about, and I want you to know that I'm definitely not saying that filtering and talking with your kids about things like food commercials is anything but a great idea. It most certainly is important! What I'm saying is that conflating eating well and getting excercise with the message that "it's not ok to be fat" can be very harmful.

    When it comes down to it, most teenagers will have unexpected weight gain at times, and will be very upset at the way their bodies are changing. In fact, while I appreciate your comment about my teenage years, I literally do not know one single woman in my age group who did not have similar issues -- often manifested differently, but none the less it came down to the very act of eating having some sort of moral quality to it. "I was good today" or "I was bad today" based on every food experience. What I'd like to see is this idea of moral failing or success tied to food to go away. Making good choices as to what we put into our bodies has to come from a different place -- it makes us feel better, it makes our daily lives better by giving us energy instead of weighing us down, etc. I think that tying good health decisions to health instead of weight can go a long way to solving the problem without giving any implicit or explicit fat shaming messages, which are harmful to both fat people and to thin people.

    Hi CStanley -- I appreciate what you said, and I want to make it clear that I do understand your concerns, and I'm concerned about the same things. The problem I have with the way this thread was going is exactly what you said: "people's behavior does seem to be more motivated on appearance than on long term health concerns". I find this to be one of the roots of the problem to begin with. We put far too much emphasis on appearance in our culture, and as I've said (too many now) times on this thread, this is not only not helping to cure the obesity problem, it's almost certainly having the opposite effect. I know that it's easier to just to, as tidbits suggests, do a big fat-shaming guerilla campaign maligning fat people, than it is to try and change the narrative away from the ever-present skinny=healthy meme that is so prevalent (and not particularly accurate either) and that tries to justify unattainable beauty standards with science.
blog comments powered by Disqus
© 2005-2009 The Moderate Voice | Site design by Elegant Themes | Site customization, hosting, and security by Enxit Group, LLC