I totally agree that healthy food options are more expensive, but I don't think they're that hard to find, or unfeasible. I mean, I'm pretty fucking poor and I can manage to shop at those places, pay off student loans, and still have some disposable income left over. People saying it's too expensive are just throwing out another bullshit excuse 90% of the time. Also, health food stores have tons of variety. I don't think it's reasonable to say farmer's markets are the only escape. It's true that the government isn't helping, but I would put more blame on the people. If they want to eat healthy, they'll eat healthy. Besides, there's a difference too between eating super healthy and not being a gargantuan fat ass. The average person could easily eat at those restaurants you listed 3x a week, fast food a couple times, snack occasionally on candy and still not be fat if they exercised a few times a week. My biggest problem with the food situation right now is what is being served in schools. I didn't go to middle school/high school in the states, but I remember thinking what the fuck when I came back for college and walked into the dorm cafeteria. It was like walking into a McDonald's. If America wants the weight problem to change they should at least offer healthy meals in schools.
You want to eat healthy and cheap? Stay the fuck out of Whole Foods. Their mark-up is asinine. You're also ensuring they can continue to develop these godawful post-modern grocery stores and pass their overhead onto your bill. I have zero idea how middle/lower class folks afford to shop there. In fact, stay out of grocery chains for the same reason unless a sale is going on. There are mom and pop stores still around. Simple buildings, simple shacks, not a ton of employees or ridiculous expenses. Farmer's markets, delis, butchers, vegetable stands, all these places that still sell (for the most part) local produce. At the very least their meat isn't from the psychopaths at the factory farms. Your local or state farms' products are still of dubious provenance sometimes. But the meat is nowhere near as fatty, tough, or generally ill looking; or maltreated. It is also ridiculously cheaper. Not to mention a real variety in the cuts. For instance: chain store sells bell peppers at $2.79 a pound, A POUND. The small grocer stand with their products right from the farmer sell it at 79 cents a pound. Ground sirloin was $4.99 a pound in the store. The grocer $2.99. The only thing Whole Foods gives you is a guarantee the meat hasn't been fucked with. But I don't know anyone that can buy ground beef at $5 a pound.
I graduated in 1995. My high school had a fucking Pizza Hut outlet in it in my grade 13 year. The greasiest food there is (but goddamn it if it doesn't taste good sometimes). Nowadays, the vending machines in them dispense water and ginger-ale only. No soda/pop or gatorade-type shit allowed in the schools PERIOD. Sure it sounds like they're trampelling on rights a little bit, but sometimes that shit just plain works. I always blame parents when it comes to unhealthy children. Schools should at least be blamed less than parents. My daughter only drinks milk or water, and honestly that's ALL she wants. She doesn't like soda or orange juice (which are usually loaded with sugar) the couple times she was offered it. Little kids drink poisonous venom like Mountain Dew because their parents allow it and that's wrong. However, it's another thing that society can't stop.
Speaking of school lunches, they are becoming a big deal in Kansas and I would like to hear some well informed opinions on the topic. I'm sorry if this was covered somewhere else in this thread or it is derailing, but I would genuinely appreciate some discussion above and beyond what is said in my teacher's lounge (a level of discourse that makes you want to climb the nearest grain elevator and jump off...that's not a paleo reference; that's a "rural Kansas is flat and those are the only tall buildings" reference, but I digress.) Horrible parody video that everyone in my town thinks is going to make it onto Good Morning America. Spoiler High school lunches can only be between 800-850 calories. The logic being that if you multiply 800 x 3 (breakfust, lunch, dinner) you have consumed a reasonable 2,400 calories in a day. In my school the students have the option of purchasing a second lunch, however they must do so at full price. That makes it tough for kids who receive free or reduced lunches. Good or bad policy? I have to say that it has been fairly ineffective so far. As shown in that video, the kids just go augment their lunch with junk food. Of course the money used for that comes directly from the parents. "You're hungry Timmy? Here is $5 to spend in the vending machine after lunch." And I hear that the kids still throw away a large portion of the food. As one mother was complaining to me, "Well, Jacob won't eat that because he doesn't like it. He doesn't like fruits or vegetables." I don't think that kid is an anomaly. This does hurt kids in poverty whose main meal has now been cut, and it hurts the athletes who need more calories, but it's a step in the right direction as far as the average student goes, in my opinion.
Seriously? Buttermilk is milk that has been inoculated with a bacteria that give it a characteristic sour taste. Further, I'd like you to explain to me what process has gone on which causes milk to be fat free. People seem to use the word "processed" as a synonym for "means by which radioactive cyanide has been added to food in order to make it tastier". By chopping carrots, you have processed them. By adding ingredients together in a bowl, you have processed them. By putting anything in a hot frying pan, you have processed it. By boiling eggs, you are dipping them in a vat of dihydrogen monoxide, which is known to be lethal to humans at low concentrations.
Compared to the barrage of junk food advertising they're exposed to for the (on average) 4.5 hours/day they're watching television, that's like whispering at a rock concert.
My daughter was just talking about these changes the other day. She said they used to offer as an option Uncrustables but now they are deemed unhealthy and the school makes their own sandwiches (she doesn't eat pbj) and apparently the kids say the jelly is disgusting. But what I thought was the funniest comment is that she said that the slushies they offer count as a fruit serving. Slushies!
Wow, a very outspoken vegan doctor is saying we shouldn't eat a lot of meat. Stop the presses. Edit: Rebuttal to that retarded Harvard study referenced in the article. Second rebuttal.
To be fair to me all you did was post the article, you didn't give any context to what you wanted us to pull from it or discuss, and he did go pretty hard on lower carbohydrate dieters and red meat.
I don't see how he's being defensive about his personal nutrition. I read the article and facepalmed the whole time because it was so grossly inaccurate, and I'm (as previously discussed) pretty poorly paleo. The idea of tellin people to eat a lot of grains and soy is preposterous, in my experience and based on what I've learned.
This article pretty much exactly illustrates why I hate diet advice. "My way is right, any other way is wrong and if you don't follow my way you're going to get fat+cancer+heart disease+diabetes." It also outlines the fundamental problem with the way our society approaches health (and a lot of other things): That there exists some fundamental truth that is universal to everyone. The idea that there's "one true way" stems from intellectual laziness because people don't want to put in actual effort to make themselves healthy; they want some magic formula that they know will work so they don't have to think about what they're doing. Whether the "one true way" is a supplement, exercize, diet, or whatever, until we as a society take responsibility for our own health by paying attention to how each of our own bodies reacts to diet/exercise/supplements/medication and going from there I fear we're never going to solve the problem.
Eh, mixed feelings on this. I ran cross-country in high school about 10 miles a day, so I might have needed more food. The vast majority of kids though, basketball and football players included, might not need that much -- unless they were really trying to put on weight. Basically I can see an exception for athletes, but for everyone else, eating 3000 calories a day will make you rotund in no time. I'm currently 186 lbs, active, and eat about 400-500 calories a day for lunch. 850 seems more than enough. Certainly not 'starving' like in the video. The kids in the video just want to be able to eat pizza and ice cream and chicken wings and everything they want. Should they have the choice to destroy themselves with government-funded food? That's another debate. But is 850 calories for lunch "starvation levels" --- no it's perfectly fine and healthy. Anyway, like others have mentioned, the problem in this country is mostly diet. Exercise can only do so much for you, although it's good to do for other health reasons. I think the main reason is that no one 'has time' or energy to cook these days. They want pre-made shit, even at the grocery store --- premade soups, premade potato salad --- etc etc. That or they go to 'healthy" fast food places like Panera Bread or whatever the hell.
Also realize that the nutritional needs of a teen are different than an adult. Where a normal sedentary adult might need 1800 a day to maintain, a sedentary teen might need 2000-2300. Then, add in sports, learning in class, constantly moving from class to class while carrying books...it adds up. For a high endurance sport like CC I could easily see a male teen needing 2600-3000 calories. 850 would only be a problem if the kids were skipping breakfast and eating a piss poor dinner as well. 850 works if all other things are up to par.