> we should try to fix the societal problems generating the poor outcome
What would this look like policywise?
What would this look like policywise?
One policy choice (amongst many required) could be to stop subsidizing the inputs to junk food.
Another policy I've heard talked about by Joel Salatin is that a lot of low processed foods are getting crushed by regulation because the cost/barriers are very high and demand scale/volume. For example poultry processing is only feasible on a massive scale because of regulation policies like (paraphrased) "there must be a dedicated washroom onsite for the inspector to use". That makes no sense if you only process 10000 birds a year (something like $100k of gross market value).
I really could go on.
At the local level, it is up to you. In my city of Pittsburgh, we are removing parking and expanding transit access and bike lane coverage. But there is still a lot to be done, so I am advocating for change by participating in groups and contacting my city councilman.
I know many would prefer bike lanes, but bicycle infrastructure isn't always safer for cyclists. Often city planners have no concept of what actually goes on, so even when token lines are painted on the street - it does nothing to increase cycling.
It may be best to put aside the issues of investment and which top-down solution is the best. There may be a time and place for that, but in the near term individuals with an interest can develop their skills incrementally.
Disclaimer: I am a self admitted cycling extremist
Most people do not care what form of transportation they take. They do not identify as cyclists, drivers, or anything else. Transportation is an inconvenience in their lives as they travel from A to B. They will do whatever is cheap, fast, and convenient.
Cities need to be built to a human scale and not a car scale. Cities should be designed so that riding a comfortable, durable, upright bicycle is a fast and convenient option for people. That means bicycle paths that are physically separated from other forms of traffic. It means constructing different kinds of buildings and businesses so that bicycle routes are short and convenient.
Most people are never going to risk their lives to ride bicycles on roads where cars, driven by people on their phone, are travelling at speeds exceeding 30 mph. They won't ride their bicycles for an hour over the vast distances that are convenient for cars to travel in a few minutes. And they won't take their bicycle to a big box store with car-parks larger than the store so that they can clumsily chain their bicycle to a street light pole.
If you want normal people to ride bicycles as transportation, you need extensive bicycle infrastructure.
>Most people are never going to risk their lives to ride bicycles on roads where cars, driven by people on their phone, are travelling at speeds exceeding 30 mph
From my admittedly biased or perhaps experienced perspective it really isn't as dangerous as people imagine.
What is clear to me is that no matter what happens, there will always be a contingent of individuals who will never ride a bicycle. Whether that is because of imagined safety reasons or because of infrastructure fantasies, I can't say. I can say with certainty that if you eliminated both of these objections, another excuse would be raised. That's fine. People should choose the lifestyle that suits them and brings them happiness.
Pick a "first world" country with much better BMI. Copy all of their regulations surrounding food and agriculture.
What about rolled oats or steel cut oats? They're clearly "processed", oats don't look like that when they come off the plant.
Potato chips + fries are just cut potatoes dropping into a vat of oil. Oil itself isn't very much processed either. But we all know that potato chips / fries are unhealthy and shouldn't be eaten all the time.
Cheese or butter require incredible amounts of processing to get done. But when properly portioned, they are part of a healthy diet (more so than potato chips anyway).
--------
Is honey any healthier than sugar? Is juice healthier than soda? From an obesity perspective, not really. You really want to be cutting back on these empty calories. (Sure, juice is __slightly__ better than soda cause juice has vitamins in it. But... its actually not that good for you)
Because "unhealthy" is a better starting point than the arbitrary metric "processed".
-------
You're going to do more for your health by cutting back on your rice portions, rather than worrying about what is or isn't processed. (And rice is barely "processed" at all... but its incredibly calorie dense with high glycemic index).
Switching out bread portions (since bread is highly processed) for rice portions won't do you jack diddly squat. Both are high calorie / high glycemic index foods.
And yet Asia has basically no obesity problem. We clearly need better nutrition science.
Citation: I'm Asian-American. Also, Filipino. We're not obese, but erm... Americans might be healthier, no joke. The amount of lechon we consume (incredibly fatty pig) + other fatty foods is a big problem to heart health, despite the fact that it doesn't cause obesity.
Oh, and Filipinos generally eat fresh foods. Fresh fish, fresh pork, fresh chicken. Relatively low processed foods (our Halo-Halo is similar to your "ice cream", except Halo-Halo is just milk poured over shaved ice + fruits + ube mixed in. "Low processing", but we all know its a desert and unhealthy).
That's the thing. Being Filipino gives me more insight into this "processed food" craze going on. Halo-halo has almost no processing involved and is made out of fresh ingredients. That doesn't make Halo-halo any healthier.
> And yet Asia has basically no obesity problem. We clearly need better nutrition science.
We all know beer and soda is bad for us, and yet we drink it all the time as a society. I'm not sure what nutrition science is beneficial when so many people choose to ignore it.
Cut back on high calorie foods. Watch your portion sizes. Count calories. Eat more fibrous meals to fill up your stomach ("tricking" your brain into thinking you're more full). Avoid non-fibrous foods (such as soda) because they miss out on the stomach/brain psychology.
---------
Its hard in America because of stupid little things. Plates are bigger in America, so when you're in America you trick yourself into putting more food into your plates.
Plates are literally smaller in the Philippines. So you end up eating less. Stupid cultural differences like that make a big difference.
Because American culture subtly forces you to overeat (bigger plates, bigger glasses, bigger drinks), you need to explicitly count calories. That's just the facts, if you aren't counting calories in America, you're going to overeat.
NYC's obesity rate is half of the nation's; we could still do better, but it's a starting point.
This is a function of density. We walk more. Look at the boroughs that drive and they're closer to the national average.
Replicating this in e.g. San Francisco would require overcoming the anti-development NIMBYs. That's a hard problem.