NYT Article: What Really Makes Us Fat

[SkiRockies]

Ran across this opinion piece in the New York Times, What Really Makes Us Fat:
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/01/op...0fat&st=Search

It is a real travesty that the government and heart association prescribe a weight loss and health program consisting of a high-carb, low-fat diet and cardio exercise that doesn’t work. Essentially setting up an entire nation for failure; contributing to the massive obesity problem in this country. A prime example of why I am opposed to government involvement in healthcare.

It is heart-wrenching to see disciplined people struggle to lose weight and fail achieve real health on this kind of plan. When in reality the opposite works: high-protein, high-fat, low-carb diet with heavy weightlifting achieves the fastest and most sustainable weight loss and health results.

Thankful for Rip and the people on this site who are dedicated to reeducating the masses.

[Ezpeasy]

I'm wondering when the shift will be from focusing on macro to micro (aka quality of food). Anyway, I just make it a point to try avoid any food/ingredient that's subsidized by the government.

Government involvement in anything distorts the markets involved (food, health, pharma, education, etc)

[matclone]

You guys might make some sense if you weren't blinded by your stupid anti-government ideology. Maybe we should look to Taco Bell instead, for nutritional advice, since, as much as I can tell, they have far greater access to the public ear.

[Ezpeasy]

Please enlighten me as to how I'm blinded by stupid anti-government ideology, thank you.

[matclone]

1. Thinking all the answers to nutrition have been resolved;
2. Talking about the government as a monolithic entity;
3. Thinking "the government" is all wrong--and out to do you and me wrong, e.g., ("[The gov't is] essentially setting up the entire nation for failure");
4. Thinking the "the government" is out to promote obesity ("contributing to the massive obesity program in this country");
5. Your use of a non-sequitur (it does not follow): "a prime example of why I'm opposed to government involvement in healthcare".
6. Generally, your single-minded point of view--which is characteristic of all ideologues and fundamentalists.

It's a sign of maturity to acknowledge there may be different, yet legitimate, views on any given matter.

[ecj]

I'm wondering when the shift will be from focusing on macro to micro (aka quality of food). Anyway, I just make it a point to try avoid any food/ingredient that's subsidized by the government.

Government involvement in anything distorts the markets involved (food, health, pharma, education, etc)

I love the idea that "the government" is responsible for screwing up food in America because they subsidized...something. I'm assuming you're referring to corn production?

Who do you think lobbied for those subsidies, guys? Hint: it was not "the government".

[Ezpeasy]

1. Thinking all the answers to nutrition have been resolved;
2. Talking about the government as a monolithic entity;
3. Thinking "the government" is all wrong--and out to do you and me wrong, e.g., ("[The gov't is] essentially setting up the entire nation for failure");
4. Thinking the "the government" is out to promote obesity ("contributing to the massive obesity program in this country");
5. Your use of a non-sequitur (it does not follow): "a prime example of why I'm opposed to government involvement in healthcare".
6. Generally, your single-minded point of view--which is characteristic of all ideologues and fundamentalists.

It's a sign of maturity to acknowledge there may be different, yet legitimate, views on any given matter.

Wow you gleaned quite a bit from what I actually did write. Good job.

[Ezpeasy]

I love the idea that "the government" is responsible for screwing up food in America because they subsidized...something. I'm assuming you're referring to corn production?

Who do you think lobbied for those subsidies, guys? Hint: it was not "the government".

There's a lot of factors that occurred to bring us where we, as a nation, are today. However, simply (!) put, government subsidy in various sectors, whether it be in housing (here I specifically mean the whole mortgage backed securities issue), banking, crops (corn soy wheat), education, etc, artificially affect the markets of those subsidies.

I agree/understand subsidies are lobbied for by the industries themselves, which brings about another issue that industry/business does not have to have the consumer's best interest at heart to succeed.

[JMB1911]

Ran across this opinion piece in the New York Times, What Really Makes Us Fat:
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/01/op...0fat&st=Search

It is a real travesty that the government and heart association prescribe a weight loss and health program consisting of a high-carb, low-fat diet and cardio exercise that doesn’t work. Essentially setting up an entire nation for failure; contributing to the massive obesity problem in this country. A prime example of why I am opposed to government involvement in healthcare.

It is heart-wrenching to see disciplined people struggle to lose weight and fail achieve real health on this kind of plan. When in reality the opposite works: high-protein, high-fat, low-carb diet with heavy weightlifting achieves the fastest and most sustainable weight loss and health results.

Thankful for Rip and the people on this site who are dedicated to reeducating the masses.

I agree 100% good post. High carbs, low fat, etc is killing this country..and of course I don't trust the gov