Weight Loss Secrets Revealed

|

From Tennessee, a revolutionary plan to fight obesity.

Advertisement

NEXT: Opportunity Costs

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Hmmm…

    Eat less.

    Move more.

    Revolutionary, indeed. Next, they’ll be telling us that lots of saturated fat is bad for us. Yes, yes, let’s fork over half a million taxpayer bucks to fund such things as free pedometers for poor folks, and, um, regional “directors” who will manage the effort to inform people about this revolutionary new idea!

    WHAT THA FUCK? Why do we need half-million-dollar grants to inform the people of some common-sense shit that any 5-year old should know?

  2. Long before the concepts of calories and energy were really understood…

    Long before people had ways to measure the energy burned during physical activity…

    Long before Dr. Atkins roamed the earth…

    Back in ancient times when the main nutritional worry was TOO LITTLE food…

    Back when 99% of the population was illiterate…

    Everybody somehow knew that those who eat more and work less get fat!

  3. And back then fat people were idolized.

  4. NEWS FLASH:

    Sex can lead to children, film at 11.

  5. What about funding large scary men with whips who will encourage all these Tennessee fatties to move their lardbutts NOW!

    One stationed in each mall should do the trick.

  6. Mr. Jacob Sullum,

    Damnit man! You made me register to WaPo for this?

    There ought to be a law against what you did!

  7. A couple of months ago, I wrote an article for my paper that covered the other side of the low carb diet debate. I interviewed a couple of dieticians from the local hospital who pointed out that the Atkins’ diet had the potential to cause health problems and that the only real way to lose weight and keep it off was to eat less and exercise.

    The reaction I received was akin to going into a Southern Baptist prayer meeting and declaring that there is no God. The day after the article was published, I received several e-mails from angry Atkins diet disciples berating my article’s “bias” because I didn’t cite all the “studies? proving low carb diets were healthy and I had only relied on “status-quo” nutritionists who had a vested interest in attacking the late, great Dr. Atkins. (My editor agreed the article didn’t need “balance” since the pro-Atkins side was already well spoken for elsewhere.) When I asked them which studies, they pointed me to… you guessed it… http://www.atkins.com.

    As if the late, great, Dr. Atkins didn’t have a “vested interest.”

  8. When you go on a diet, you feel like hell. You also have low energy and your work suffers. On the plus side, you may look better and live longer. This is a classic tradeoff. I’m waiting for the anti-fat person who acknowledges there’re two sides to this issue. Next, we need to consider who is the person who decides that tradeoff. If it’s not #1, you have a major problem.

    You have to wonder, it this thing takes off and you have a large number of people in a very bad mood, wouldn’t that give rise to some secondary problems — like increased crime?

    “Socially speaking,” a person who eats normally, without trying to diet, will have more energy for work, so he’ll presumably generate more income on the average, resulting in more “contributions” to Social Security, income taxes, etc. Moreover, we’re told, he’ll die earlier. It seems this would generate a net plus for Social Security. The guy feels better, so he’s more likely to get along with people — less crime and social friction. So, there seems to be no “social” objection to being overweight.

  9. Don,

    Exercising makes you feel better, and have more energy.

    Or so I’ve been told. I think there’s an article in that magazine, but it’s way over there, and – you know what? Up yours, jerk!

    ‘-)

  10. Oh, God, my EYE!

  11. Don,
    I agree that there is no “social” objection to being overweight. That is a personal choice.

    My problem is that people on food stamps and EBT are allowed to use the subsidy on food that makes them fatter and then run up huge Medicaid charges. As an advocate of personal choice and personal responsibility, I respect the right of a self-supporting person to be overweight. If, however, you are on the dole, I really don’t think that you should be able to eat ribs, pizza and fried chicken every day. Those cards that poor people get should only work for nutritional fare.

    Trust me, as a resident of TN, I can assure you that this thing will not take off. No recommendations from some regional consultant are going to persuade the masses to walk a mile a day.
    Unless there was free BBQ at the end of the mile.

  12. Obviously, we need to have a Federal Initiative to turn excess agricultural products into synthetic rubber to make All-American cross-training shoes. Of course, the factory will have to be in West Virginia.

    Kevin

  13. Exercising makes my knees hurt. If I could only get the proper pain medication, I’d be able to exercise more.

  14. But eating ribs and fried chicken are good for the economy. If these fat people start exercising, the only thing they’ll be spending their money on will be athletic shoes which are all made in China, ballooning the trade deficit. American farmers will suffer and we’ll be subject to further agricultural subsidies.

    Instead of going to the doctor for weight problems, they’ll be going to the doctor for athletic injuries; Medicaid spending won’t change a bit.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.