Food nannies claim ‘obesogenic environments’ are more important than genetics, exercise; ‘Prospect of self control fairly grim in these environments’

The food nannies do not intend to let the food industry get away with saying that child weight problems are due to lack of exercise.

Read more at Salon.

6 thoughts on “Food nannies claim ‘obesogenic environments’ are more important than genetics, exercise; ‘Prospect of self control fairly grim in these environments’”

  1. “What we’ve seen for so many years is research looking at physical activity as the preventative or the curative solution for childhood obesity, but the data on physical activity as a means to set children’s weight is abysmal,” he says. “What this study confirmed is that screen time increases obesity consequent to calorie intake, not to a lack of physical activity. That’s a crucial message that people don’t understand—obesity is not a disease of inactivity.”
    I think we should not just cast aside good research. The guy has a point. Food is far more accessible than the “good old days.” You had to secretly raid the pantry/larder store at home and hope not to be caught. People(including children) ate only at set meal times. Now people eat all day. And, by the way, on the question of being fat because of your “genes”. Check out the guys building the Empire State Building. See any guys with fat genes? Or WW1 soldiers who were fat? I know what Air-force food was like – even for pilots.

  2. “Obesogenic environemnt” is an interesting term. Sooo — making things available that people want and need is now “obesogenic”. How evil of corporations and a free market to provide people with the choices they want at low cost.
    Coach, I grew up about when you did and I mostly have high blood pressure readings when I hear what the nannies want to do next. It’s transient, though.

  3. FTA: “… the ubiquity of fast food, changes in technology, fewer home-cooked meals, more food advertising, an explosion of low-cost processed foods and increasing sugary drink serving sizes (pdf) as well as easy access to unhealthy snacks in vending machines, at sports games and in nearly every setting children inhabit.” So, the nannies plan to require or otherwise institute a “responsible” village to replace dysfunctional families under the guise of fighting obesity? They are approaching a plan for society that is centered around the lowest common denominator, exaggerates the problem and denies the important factors of genetics and personal and parental responsibility on the problem and eliminates not just freedom but choice. As long as it’s all about the social engineers, they will always be creating problems that fit their solutions that create more problems for them to justify themselves. An ugly dysfunctional loop based on uncommon solutions to common human behaviors. They themselves contribute to the dehumanization that causes (not correlates with) problems centered around human beings abusing their various appetites.

    I grew up in those 40 to 50 years ago days they say were “pre-epidemic.” Odd isn’t it, that the whole idea up to now has been to feed and grow the kids – lots of homemade jams, jellies, applesauce, cakes, pies and candies and lots of meat, potatoes, corn, salt and dairy – and now they’re saying those were the good old days? Ate a boatload of snacks and drank barrels of Pepsi and sweet tea after that. But I was skinny through my 50s, just overweight now, and have yet to have a high blood pressure reading.

  4. As always with liberals its alwsys someone elses fault not the fault of the lard ass or the lard asses parents.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.