New at Reason

January 11, 2007

Can anything save mankind from the scrumptiousness epidemic? Greg Beato investigates.

Comments

|1.11.07 @ 7:33AM|#

organic apples grow on trees?

|1.11.07 @ 8:17AM|#

Food ration cards! Introduce food ration cards at once!

Max 1500 kcal per head daily, and you have to WALK at least three miles every day to the next Federal Food Control Office to get your card rubberstamped (after waiting in line a few hours). That's the deal, folks -- nobody will be fat any longer after a few months on my mandatory diet. Offenders who eat more then 1500 kcal will be detained at Nutrition Education Centers. FASTEN MACHT FREI!

|1.11.07 @ 8:55AM|#

Although it's politically incorrect to say so, there is surely a strong correlation between obesity and low intelligence. The health problems associated with obesity are nature's way of culling the species. Let nature take its course.

Amy Alkon|1.11.07 @ 9:33AM|#

This is a rare weak piece in Reason. I'm against bans, of course, but there's something to the point that lowfat/high sugar foods make people fat. Lowfat/no-fat food doesn't fill you up, and does give you an insulin rush, making you hellishly hungry about 20 minutes later. If people ate moderate portions of fatty food, they'd be "full," and for a long period of time. There's a terrific book on this, by neurophysiologist Will Clower, called "The Fat Fallacy." Gary Taubes, who wrote "What If It's All Been A Big Fat Lie" (about the Atkins diet) for the NY Times, will be coming out with another (not soon enough) -- data-based, like Clower's. You want to be thin? Eat half a croissant in the morning, and move a little -- and more than your finger over the remote.

VM|1.11.07 @ 9:33AM|#

Jeez! That meant it would have sucked to have been Sidney Greenstreet... :)

Inverse relationship between education level and BMI and all that

Longer abstract of above

(I love JSTOR)
Refining the Assocation between Education and Health: The Effects of Quantity, Credential,and Selectivity
Catherine E. Ross; John Mirowsky
Demography, Vol. 36, No. 4. (Nov., 1999), pp. 445-460.

Looked at the association between education (years, credential, selectivity) and mechanisms of health. They found:

Years of formal education had a positive association with health. Credential had no net association. Selectivity was also positive.

*****
There seems to be a body of work that looked in directions Edward notes above. There is also some work on obesity and wages (they looked, of course, for a negative association after adjusting for race, gender, and ethnicity. That's by Cawley (2004).

thank you JSTOR!

|1.11.07 @ 11:37AM|#

One of the dumber articles Reason has printed in a while. The logic seems to be "hey, not everybody is fat and it's possible to buy healthful foods, so there's no problem".

Terms like "scrumptiousness epidemic" illustrate pretty well why libertarians are not taken seriously. You can't solve a problem by making fun of the people who point it out.

|1.11.07 @ 12:17PM|#

buck-

The point of the piece wasn't that there isn't a problem with obesity. But rather that so-called Big Food isn't creating a problem in as much as they are filling a demand. Why shouldn't we be making fun of the Big Food tinfoil hats? The blame clearly lies with the consumer, and to say otherwise deserves ridicule. Physicians regularly counsel weight loss (and smoking cessation). Do you see libertarians poking fun at them? Of course not.


As to why libertarians aren't taken seriously (not that you care as much as you're trolling with the dig); well, there are lots of reason, and you may be right about this one. Why would the undisciplined morbidly obese listen to the folks telling them to take some responsibility for their actions when they have the cheerleading crowd consoling them; it's not your fault, it's Big Food, you're the victim.

|1.11.07 @ 12:20PM|#

Buck

The point of the piece is that the problem is more imaginary than real. Making fun of people who dream up fake problems is fair. In any case, leaving such decisions about what to eat to individual choice is consistent with the libertarian position on personal freedom.

|1.11.07 @ 12:24PM|#

Piggywiggle makes a celaer case than I did. Obesity is a real problem; too much choice isn't.

|1.11.07 @ 12:25PM|#

a clearer case

|1.11.07 @ 2:20PM|#

The point of the piece wasn't that there isn't a problem with obesity. But rather that so-called Big Food isn't creating a problem in as much as they are filling a demand. Why shouldn't we be making fun of the Big Food tinfoil hats? The blame clearly lies with the consumer, and to say otherwise deserves ridicule.

To some extent it's true that Big Food only gives people what they want, but it's probably also true that people tend to want the things that are made attractive to them. Otherwise, why are billions spent on marketing and advertising?

Why would the undisciplined morbidly obese listen to the folks telling them to take some responsibility for their actions when they have the cheerleading crowd consoling them; it's not your fault, it's Big Food, you're the victim.

It seems to me that you could just as easily ask why the fast-food industry doesn't have to take some responbility for their actions as well? They're the ones profiting at the expense of the rest of society who is made less healthy by their products.

|1.11.07 @ 3:54PM|#

"Otherwise, why are billions spent on marketing and advertising?"

Because just about everyone can make a cookie. But I want you to buy my cookie.

"They're the ones profiting at the expense of the rest of society who is made less healthy by their products."

It's not society, it's fatty who's hurting. I benefit from the transaction with the cookie company because they make cookies for less than I can or otherwise sell a modicum of convenience with the product. They benefit from the transaction because I'm better at my job than they are, that is, I get paid more to do science than I would to make cookies. It's the old story of competitive advantage.

Now the fat guy. He likes cookies more than he likes his health. I think we can both agree he is a dumb-ass. But it's his life. Let him be.

|1.11.07 @ 6:39PM|#

Dr. Lustig could very well have been making these comments about alcohol, which is unambiguously addictive. I buy a lot of booze and so have had occasion to see liquor store employees turn away drunks. Can you imagine some fat lady being turned away from a McDonald's counter; "sorry lady, but haven't you had enough?" She lurks outside, waiting for the trim young kid she sent inside to buy her double QP w/cheese and super sized shake. Skid row fataholic.

That just brought to mind the scene in half-baked with Bob Saget. Get back to me when folks start sicking dick for cheese burgers.