Hacker News Reader

Comment by AWildDHHAppears | Hacker News Reader

Another question is why does "society" honor and accept Obesity as a lifestyle choice, when its openly critical of tobacco addicts and heroin addicts? What's the difference?

View on HN

It's widely seen as less of a simple choice to become obese, as it is to take up smoking for one thing. Presumably if you met someone who'd been regularly given cigarettes since they were toddlers, you would have a certain degree of sympathy for their issues as adults. There is also the simple fact that abstinence from tobacco is simple, and easy, and it works for everyone who doesn't choose to smoke. Most people don't attempt to have a "moderate" intake of smoking after all.

Meanwhile food is a bit harder to manage if you have a problem with it, don't you think? So, for people talking about a "lifestyle" ignore the crazy people. For people talking about realistic challenges beyond "suck it up fatty", you might want to pay attention.

Finally, "honor"? I don't think you have widespread discriminatory hiring practices against the "honored".

It doesn't, but at least in the US it might seem so because society makes it as hard as possible to get hooked on heroin and tobacco (prohibition, restriction & taxes) and easy as possible to get off of it (rehabilitation programs), whereas the ingredients that cause obesity (e.g. corn) are actively subsidized by the government and promoted by a large portion of the medical establishment. I'd bet that if the US government were actively subsidizing tobacco and opium farmers and processors, addiction to those drugs would be seen much more as a lifestyle choice.

>whereas the ingredients that cause obesity (e.g. corn)

Pardon my ignorance, but isn't corn just a vegetable? Are we talking about the same corn (sweetcorn) or something else?

My intuition tells me that such a vegetable can't be "bad" for you, though that's probably because I eat it as part of my "vegetable" section of my diet.

Is this vegetable really in the same ranks as cane sugar, salt, sweeteners etc.?

The US uses lots of HFCS - high fructose corn syrup. Partly this is because government subsidies make it a very cheap ingredient. Some people think HFCS is particularly bad, worse than other sugars.

Unprocessed corn isn't exactly bad for you--yes, it is a cereal and thus has large quantities of carbohydrates, but it has plenty of fat, proteins and fiber as well. It's when the corn gets processed, and the fat, proteins, and fiber get removed that it starts being unhealthy. In the end it's the American preference for sweet, bland foods that causes most of these problems.

I don't think the US weight loss market would be so large if society honored and accepted obesity ($64 billion in 2014 was one number I saw). There's certainly people who push for acceptance, but I've never gotten the feeling that it's the overwhelming sentiment.

It doesn't, but a vocal community are pushing this idea.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com