Jophiel wrote:
Is this going to turn into another thread where we debate the value of a 60lb sack of lentils?
Of course it is!
IDrownFish of the Seven Seas wrote:
The money issue certainly is valid. In the US, "healthy" food is usually more expensive than, say, a McDouble.
That's not remotely true though. It's why Tucker is being a jerk the way he's making his point, but he's not wholly wrong. There is an issue with fast food being used as a substitute for home cooked meals by poor people, but that's less an issue of money versus time (insert "lazy poor folks" argument if you feel the need I suppose). It's much more expensive to buy food at a fast food restaurant (any restaurant) than to prepare it at home. So while I wouldn't necessarily make a "poor people are fat" argument out of this, I would point to it as a monumental waste of our food assistance dollars.
Having said that, the valid point with regard to obesity issues is about processed food versus fresh. While the cost comparison between buying rice, beans, flour, fresh (or even frozen, but not-processed) proteins, sauce makings, seasonings, etc versus microwave dinners and other pre-packaged stuff is pretty similar, the health differential between them is vast. It still comes down to time as the primary question with regard to healthy food. A $.99 microwave dinner is much less expensive than a combo from McDonalds, but it's arguably even worse for your health. It's the salts and preservatives and other chemicals (and the food dregs used to make those things) that makes them so unhealthy. But it's much much easier to just pop that dinner in said microwave than to actually prepare and cook a meal from scratch (or nearly scratch) ingredients.
And let's face it, until you get pretty good at cooking (and seasoning), those pre-packaged foods are actually going to taste better than what you'd make yourself (all that salt and bad fats also tend to taste good). So it's not shocking that so many people will gravitate towards them. Honestly though, I think the issue is more complex than just how much things cost relatively speaking. We tend to focus a lot on the dollars and forget that there are other factors involved. I do happen to think that simply tossing dollars at the problem is the wrong solution, but that's maybe a discussion for another day (or thread).
Jophiel wrote:
Poverty or laziness or whatever causes aside, the point remains that there is a number of people carrying the "I'm perfect the way I am!" banner. Or, more hostilely, the whole "At least I'm a REAL woman with curves and not some Barbie doll wannabe" schtick.
Yeah. I agree with this. I think you're right about how we tend to look at the edges of the issue, and not at the middle. I also think that we tend to have a "perfect unreasonable figure or bust" mentality, and that this actually hurts a lot of people (both men and women). I've known a few people who were in good health and shape for most of their lives, but at some point began gaining a bit of weight. They knew it, didn't like it, but couldn't spend the effort to maintain the "perfect shape" that all those diet and exercise programs sport. So they gave up and just accepted being overweight. And of course, once that sort of mindset is accepted, the weight gain just increases. What could have been a reasonably achievable goal (just not be obese) becomes impossible because they don't feel that's acceptable (largely fed by unrealistic images all around us).
Top that off with the bit you were talking about, and it's just easier to accept being fat. I agree that this is a bit counter productive. But on the flip side, it is somewhat hard to tell someone right to their face "Hey. You're really overweight and you should exercise and maybe not eat those chocolate candies all day long". Odds are this will result in them not wanting you to bother them about their weight, and not them doing anything about it. But the alternative is just watching their health deteriorate. Not sure there's a right approach to this.