Smoking and Obesity

Both of these are seen as epidemics, and have come the the forefront recently, particularly with the focus on health care costs in the national discussion.

So we have:
smoking in a movie gets it an R rating
Anti-smoking ads everywhere, psa's
Smoking bans in public areas
ban on flavored cigarettes
high taxes on cigarettes
talk of a tax on fatty foods
ban on trans fats in restauraunts
ad campaigns about eating healthy
removing vending machines from schools
push for people to get out and exercise


So we have all these measures and the depiction of smoking and obesity as smoking and obesity as serious epidemics that need significant lifestyle and cultural changes to solve. What I want to know is: is this technologically shortsighted?

They come out with new drugs to help you quit smoking quite often. With the acceleration of the rate of invention, can we assume that within 10-15 years it will be easy to quit? People start smoking because they want to, why try and change that when you could allow them to quit when they want to?

Miracle fruit contains a chemical that binds to your tongue and makes bitter things taste sweet. Could we invent a chemical that binds to your tongue and makes healthy food taste as good as pizza?

Getting people to exercise wouldn't be as simple a drug, but could an improved energy drink give you a short boost and make you restless enough to want to go out and do something?

You know, this probably applies to global warming too. Do I need to bike to work if in 15 years they've invented solar panels that are efficient and can store the energy overnight?


People have an innate psychological bias to think of the body as a temple (which is why we disapprove of ritalin, tattoos, piercings, fat people, people with yellow teeth, etc), is that making them ignore the odds of a technological answer? There is certainly a moral flavor to the anti-smoking, healthy food, green living movements, and people don't think that well about moral issues.

Of course, I picked 10-15 years out of a hat. And you can say "until we invent those things...", but then you'd have to show that all the ad campaigns, restrictions, extra taxes, and time wouldn't be better spent on something else.

So will you set a topic for the debate/discussion :grin:? I read your OP a couple of times, yet I am not certain what you wish us to discuss. There are multiple interpretations of your post, or at least as far as I am thinking... What shall it be, Sasaki?

EDIT: nvm, a poll just appeared - when I first clicked the thread, there was no poll :inquisitive: - I suppose that is because you first have to post a thread and then add a poll.

Unfortunately, the meme appears to be winning. SFTS, take it away!

Why do you want pharmacutecial companies to enable you to like healthy food and help you give up smoking when we already have the capability to do all this allready its called the hard way and its better for you period

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gaelic cowboy

Why do you want pharmacutecial companies to enable you to like healthy food and help you give up smoking when we already have the capability to do all this allready its called the hard way and its better for you period

---

You ever take aspirin?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gaelic cowboy

Why do you want pharmacutecial companies to enable you to like healthy food and help you give up smoking when we already have the capability to do all this allready its called the hard way and its better for you period

---

What?

Pretty much everyone is aware of the dangers of smoking but most people are unaware of the dangers of being overweight. It's even treated as a touchy subject. If someone is overweight, it's considered impolite to "notice" that out loud while smokers will often be harassed with stories of how unhealthy it is.

There's really, really little knowledge about that. Most food products give information how much calories they contain but rarely will people know how much calories they need per day. It's even worse when it gets to specific types, like sugar, carbo-hydrates, proteins, calcium etc...

Like the awareness how bad smoking is for you was raised in the previous decades, we need to do the same thing for food now.

Also, emphasizing how important is to exercise and keep in shape is equally important. There should be much bigger government involvement in those areas, like building more courts and designating space for that purpose. That would serve double purpose, kids who keep in shape and/or take up some sport usually stay from drugs and bad company.

@Gelatinous Cube

You've been smoking for 3 years, you're still not feeling how bad it is. When you go over 10 you'll be singing a different tune...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ice

What?

---

This thread is all about how we should not try to implement laws and taxes on smoking fatty foods and instead accept its a choice.

The belief is then the "MARKET" will use its vast wealth and scientific to overcome the addictive natures of the ciggarettes and help us to enjoy bran instead of burgers.

Its cods wallop the simplest way to give up smoking is to stop smoking and the simplest way to get healthy is to stop eating too much junk food.

The idea we can develop both ways to give these things up is a perfect way to avoid your own need to shape up:yes:

The sad truth is that people don't want to take personal responsibility. Look at the diet industry - spend money to loose the weight that spending less on eating would cure... :wall:

In all countries especially fatties are a massive drain; in those with a free at use health service even more so. It is pragmatic to intervene, even though personally I agree with your ideals.

~:smoking:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rory_20_uk

The sad truth is that people don't want to take personal responsibility. Look at the diet industry - spend money to loose the weight that spending less on eating would cure... :wall:

---

Healthy food is much more expensive than fat food here, probably in the UK too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Proletariat

Healthy food is much more expensive than fat food here, probably in the UK too.

---

I believe he is talking about quantity.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Proletariat

Healthy food is much more expensive than fat food here, probably in the UK too.

---

Actually, making something yourself is far cheaper than take-away or microwavable dinners and far more healthy for you.

You can even get really meaty burgers, compared to the wafer cast-offs they serve you are Mc Donalds for the same/similar price at a massive difference in quality.

I challenge this belief.


Also, Psychonaut raises another point of people going out and having 4 different takeaways a day, common practise in the USA. Why do you need so much food? Unless you hardcore gym enthusiast, there is no need for you to get that much calories/etc.

http://shop.netgrocer.com/shop.aspx?...px&k=beef&ns=1

7 bucks for a pound of ground beef (you could get a cheaper brand for prolly 5 where I live). Then go buy one tomato, one lettuce head, one onion and whatever other topping you like on your burger. Unless your feeding more than two people, fast food is much, much cheaper than fixing the same meal at home.

No one in the history of this entire plant ever would or ever will pay MORE for a McDonald's quality burger than a home made one. It's popular because it is dirt cheap.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Proletariat

No one in the history of this entire plant ever would or ever will pay MORE for a McDonald's quality burger than a home made one. It's popular because it is dirt cheap.

---

No, you forgot the convenience factor. Fast food is popular because of its low prices, superb (in the customers' views) taste, and convenience. People do not have time to cook, cannot cook very well, and the opportunity cost of cooking a marginally less expensive burger is higher than that of a slightly more expensive, but unbeatably fast and effortless ordering of the junk food at the restaurants.

I would say that out of the three factors, cost is currently the least, at least for upper-lower class and lower-middle class. Now, if the cost were to rise, this would change, but now people buy fast food because it is fast and relatively delectable (at least compared to the other similarly-priced options - canned food, TV dinners/ready-to-eat meals, sandwiches/other improvised sustenance or amateur and shoddy home-cooking.

EDIT:
My family is blessed with a mother who has a degree in culinary arts (along with accounting degree) and my mother happens to be an avid cook. She cooks, often times, relatively sophisticated, very healthy dishes, and in general, she cooks nearly every day - all of quite high quality. My family has noticed that cooking, from the scratch as she does it, with fresh ingredients, is at least twice cheaper than eating the cheapest fast food from restaurants. We always buy plenty of fresh fruit and vegetables, yet our expenses on foodstuffs are negligible compared to our friends and acquaintances.

In general, this sort of practise is more or less uncommon in say, nations such as US, but in Eastern Europe this is the norm. Beskar is absolutely correct, although the sort of approach my family takes to food is largely unrealistic for a regular Western family, or at least in US and UK, as I know less about the situation of this matter in other Western Europeans states. For one, my mother is a home-maker, a housewife. She does not work any more. Secondly, her culinary skills are much more advanced than that of an average American, boasting aside. Thirdly, she enjoys this, and since she has time, thus her comparative advantage is high, but the opportunity cost is low, creating a near-perfect environment. If you do not enjoy cooking, or ahve no time for it, junk food may be less overall costly option for you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Proletariat

http://shop.netgrocer.com/shop.aspx?...px&k=beef&ns=1

7 bucks for a pound of ground beef (you could get a cheaper brand for prolly 5 where I live). Then go buy one tomato, one lettuce head, one onion and whatever other topping you like on your burger. Unless your feeding more than two people, fast food is much, much cheaper than fixing the same meal at home.

No one in the history of this entire plant ever would or ever will pay MORE for a McDonald's quality burger than a home made one. It's popular because it is dirt cheap.

---

Unless you put the entire onion, tomato and head of lettuce on your burger, those ingredients will actually last you over 5-6 burgers; so while they may all add up to around $10-15, you're getting about five good burgers out of it. The biggest expense will be burger meat. You can also cut out the extra ingredients to save money. That's also not generic beef, so of course it will be more expensive.

I would say, on average, I pay about $5-7 dollars on each individual meal I make; it's just a mixture of a chicken breast (or a thigh if I want to go REALLY cheap), half an onion (bough in bulk in the big bags,) a clove of garlic, half a can of diced tomatoes, one beer and a few spices (varies depending on the meal, but the cheapest is the Italian, because the herbs are optional and are added in very small amounts.) It takes a while to make, but it tastes great and is very healthy. Plus it's really easy to cook, so I can drink three or four beers while I'm waiting for it to finish. Now, if you compare that to four double cheeseburgers from McDonald's, yeah, it's more expensive, but taken on its own seven dollars a night maximum for a full dinner is a pretty damn good deal.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Proletariat

Healthy food is much more expensive than fat food here, probably in the UK too.

---

Depends what you want. There is plenty of food that is good for you and affordable:

Tinned fish: c, 50p a can
Spaghetti c. 40p a kilo
Potatoes / carrots etc are again cheap.

Sure, minced steak is expensive. So either a treat or don't get it. Chicken is cheaper.

Making single meals is expensive. Make a lot and save most of it; so buy in bulk which is cheaper too.

Lacks variety? Not exciting? Tough.

~:smoking:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rory_20_uk

~:smoking

---

Better correct that smiley, rory! Things are indeed going disagreeably if rory does not post his trademark smoking smiley on his posts. :laugh4::laugh4::2thumbsup:

You have yet to fail us - do not set a dangerous precedent. :beam:

:oops::embarassed:

~:smoking: :whip:

I actually eat only TV/frozen dinners, microwavable rice, and canned soup (unless someone makes something else for me, ie. fried chicken, potatoes with mushrooms, fried salmon). I'm not going to get fat off of this diet (a bag of rice has A LOT of sodium and up to a thousand calories, but frozen dinners and cans of soup average 250-400 calories), so I'll likely continue with it through college and into my adult life.

The only way this could possibly change is if scientists invented some sort of tasteless block of food-like material that is calorie and nutrient rich in the future.

A person's metabolism changes as they get older. Besides, eating so much salt will cause other illnesses.

A gram of salt in one meal isn't too bad. I'm not talking about cups of soy sauce or sunflower seeds here.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by A Very Super Market

A person's metabolism changes as they get older. Besides, eating so much salt will cause other illnesses.

---

Yeah, I was about to say that too. Very few men over 35 can keep their figure without controlling their eating habits. My father is one of those few exceptions. Tall, lanky, skinny and wiry he is, with his metabolism burning through anything. That does not, however, keep his arteries clean, and his blood pressure may spike at times. But most others, especially Americans, are quite susceptible to weight gain. Too many pot-bellies/beer-guts in this nation...

You don't get it. It isn't about how much over healthy levels you eat, it's how long over those levels you go. Granted, ripping your stomach open with salt would be pretty bad, but the risks of eating too much salt have already been well documented. Besides, all that stuff will give you some serious nutrient deficiencies. American way, I guess.

How much salt do people need every day, 3 grams? Come on now.

Nutrient deficiencies? Hell, at least 90% of the population is deficient in at least one nutrient. Where is the link to that study which found more than 3/4 of teenagers in the US don't eat enough vegetables?

Alright, that would explain America's poor state of health. Is there anything more you would like to say?

As if you're that much healthier.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Azathoth

The only way this could possibly change is if scientists invented some sort of tasteless block of food-like material that is calorie and nutrient rich in the future.

---

Maybe you should try tofu. :wink:

Quote:

---

I actually eat only TV/frozen dinners, microwavable rice, and canned soup (unless someone makes something else for me, ie. fried chicken, potatoes with mushrooms, fried salmon).

---

so you only eat processed food, unless someone cooks you unhealthy food:dizzy2:
I mean seriously, fried salmon??????
Why on earth would someone ruin a decent bit of fish?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tribesman

so you only eat processed food, unless someone cooks you unhealthy food:dizzy2:
I mean seriously, fried salmon??????
Why on earth would someone ruin a decent bit of fish?

---

Why on earth would anyone pass up the oppurtuinty to fry something?

https://i491.photobucket.com/albums/...sidonteven.jpg

Mmmm....

Meh, here in the Southern US battered and fried candy bars (Snickers, Milky Way, Twix) are quite common. While fried chicken with fried pickles with fried apple pie and fried ice cream for dessert, washed down with fried coke being a very much possible dish combination. In fact, fried apple pie and fried pickles are quite an old dish.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aemilius Paulus

Meh, here in the Southern US battered and fried candy bars (Snickers, Milky Way, Twix) are quite common. While fried chicken with fried pickles with fried apple pie and fried ice cream for dessert, washed down with fried coke being a very much possible dish combination. In fact, fried apple pie and fried pickles are quite an old dish.

---

https://img99.imageshack.us/img99/3471/droolbig.gif

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Strike For The South

https://img99.imageshack.us/img99/3471/droolbig.gif

---

I have to assume that is you being in the late state of food poisoning...

You know, that unhealthy bluish tinge of the skin, saliva bubbling from the mouth, eyes closing for the last time, a slow scream emanating from the larynx...

Quote:

---

Why on earth would anyone pass up the oppurtuinty to fry something?

---

That is a hard question.
I suppose there can be two possible answers
#1 they can cook
#2 they have taste
Don't get me wrong , there are time when frying is good , if for example I want a fried breakfast that normally involves 3 frying pans.
But for everyday food...no .....for good fish ...definately no...even for chicken ...hell no

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tribesman

That is a hard question.
I suppose there can be two possible answers
#1 they can cook
#2 they have taste

---

:laugh:

You sir have never had a chicken fried steak with Mashed potatoes <----(you know you want it) and country gravy.

Oh and fried okra to. MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM

Edit to his edit: I can live with that but you still need to try chicken fried steak. You will move here.

Quote:

---

You sir have never had a chicken fried steak

---

Sorry Strike , If I buy a piece of steak I don't expect it to have to be beaten to **** just to make it edible.
Plus of course I expect steak to be cooked without the unneccesary application of additonal fat.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tribesman

Sorry Strike , If I buy a piece of steak I don't expect it to have to be beaten to **** just to make it edible.
Plus of course I expect steak to be cooked without the unneccesary application of additonal fat.

---

You don't use good cuts of meat for it. You use the tough stuff (cube steak) ! Everytime I log on here I am reminded that our European friends don't have the luxury of American cusine and I'm not talking about crap fast food like Macdonalds. I mean honest to goodness food.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aemilius Paulus

I have to assume that is you being in the late state of food poisoning...

You know, that unhealthy bluish tinge of the skin, saliva bubbling from the mouth, eyes closing for the last time, a slow scream emanating from the larynx...

---

I was going to say he looks like he's having a stroke. He's clearly lost control of the left side of his face.

I'm gonna go out on a limb here, and say that I do enjoy Chicken fried steak, With biscuits and gravy. Man's food. And of course the only time I partake of it, is when one of my pals convinces me I have to go hunting, when it's well below freezing outside, and I have to climb up the face of a mountain in knee deep snow, before the sun breaks over the horizon.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aemilius Paulus

Meh, here in the Southern US battered and fried candy bars (Snickers, Milky Way, Twix) are quite common. While fried chicken with fried pickles with fried apple pie and fried ice cream for dessert, washed down with fried coke being a very much possible dish combination. In fact, fried apple pie and fried pickles are quite an old dish.

---

Taken from Scotland, I am guessing.

Quote:

---

Everytime I log on here I am reminded that our European friends don't have the luxury of American cusine

---

Fair play to Texas, there ain't many places where a peasant recipe using a poor quality cut of meat can be described as "luxury cuisine"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tribesman

Fair play to Texas, there ain't many places where a peasant recipe using a poor quality cut of meat can be described as "luxury cuisine"

---

This is true.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Strike For The South

You don't use good cuts of meat for it. You use the tough stuff (cube steak) ! Everytime I log on here I am reminded that our European friends don't have the luxury of American cusine and I'm not talking about crap fast food like Macdonalds. I mean honest to goodness food.

---

American "cuisine" is the second worst cuisine in the entire world. McDonalds isn't crap food. From something to be considered crap food, it's got to be food in the first place. Mcdonalds is garbage.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Beskar

Taken from Scotland, I am guessing.

---

Spot on, we are the heart attack capital of Europe for a reason. :beam:

Couple of points... fast food isn't particularly cheap, you could get good produce out of the local butcher for less in most cases. However, I think the main reason many people have a lot of fast food is simply because of the time issue. I know that in my case, I was getting KFC/McDonalds/local chippie at least every second night for long periods throughout the school year, due to the fact that both my parents would be working.

I'm also not sure that a bad diet = obesity. I was always skinny, although I had notoriously generally crappy health. I'm not the only person I've known like this either, in fact probably most people who ate a lot of junk food never really got obese. My brother got pretty fat though, so I'm not even sure how much genetics has got to do with it.

But can't a "skinny" person actually have a lot of internal fat around the organs?

And I remembered some more food that I used to eat - my grandma used to make me schniztel, chicken broth, fish, mashed potatoes, fried potatoes, and gretchki (I don't know what those are in English). I actually began eating TV dinners as a part of the gradual phasing out of my grandmother's cooking. They're very tasty though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Azathoth

But can't a "skinny" person actually have a lot of internal fat around the organs?

---

Yes, but unlikely. Far greater danger is to have one's arteries clogged, which is very, very much possible with a slim, yet unhealthy eater.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Azathoth

gretchki

---

Well, knowing your heritage, in Russia and Ukraine that would be buckwheat, which is simply cannot ever have enough of.

My principal issue with the whole "smoking/overeating" debate is: Don't start what you can't finish. It's a willpower issue. And I honestly don't see how technology is ever going to give anyone more willpower.

Regardless of how tasty texan 8000cal deep fried steak with cheese and snickers is, I'm not going to have one every day. And if you're idiot enough to do that, well, you're like that guy who was masturbating by the working chainsaw.

The emphasis shouldn't be on technology to solve people's problems, but on letting people know that they will really die in 10 years if they continue eating/smoking at the current rate. It's not that difficult to eat only when you're hungry, and start with a soup or a salad.

It also isn't so difficult to quit smoking. Considering most people do it just to do something with their hands. Are people really so uncomfortable around their hands?

Don't get me wrong, I think that if food has transfats, or asbestos, or enriched polonium, it should say so clearly on the label, but government imposing extra tax? Why is the government responsible for our own idiocy? Are we really capable of electing that government if we can't pick foods that are good for us?

I personally find it all a bit silly. Entire nations worried because their populations lack willpower. What do people expect? Not to lose weight themselves but get a politician to force someone to make them do it?

Really? Is that where we've gone?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SwordsMaster

It also isn't so difficult to quit smoking. Considering most people do it just to do something with their hands. Are people really so uncomfortable around their hands?

---

I would not rush to that conclusion unless I was a smoker myself... Regardless of the start, in the end, the result is uniform: nicotine addiction. That is the difficulty in quitting, as nicotine is a narcotic.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aemilius Paulus

I would not rush to that conclusion unless I was a smoker myself... Regardless of the start, in the end, the result is uniform: nicotine addiction. That is the difficulty in quitting, as nicotine is a narcotic.

---

Well, I had smoked for 2 years before quitting, my granddad had smoked for 45 before quitting for 8. People believe what tv tells them about how difficult it is, and go buy nicorettes when they just don't want to quit badly enough to actually quit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SwordsMaster

Well, I had smoked for 2 years before quitting, my granddad had smoked for 45 before quitting for 8. People believe what tv tells them about how difficult it is, and go buy nicorettes when they just don't want to quit badly enough to actually quit.

---

Ahh, I see :yes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SwordsMaster

Words

Really? Is that where we've gone?

---

Yes, and it's evident in most aspects of modern life.

Quote:

---

Besides, eating so much salt will cause other illnesses.

---

Hypertension is your enemy and rises with big ammounts of salt in foods.

Quote:

---

That is the difficulty in quitting, as nicotine is a narcotic.

---

??

Narcotics are opiates. Drugs like morphine, heroin, codeine, etc. are considered to be narcotics. Nicotine is a stimulant.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aemilius Paulus

Meh, here in the Southern US battered and fried candy bars (Snickers, Milky Way, Twix) are quite common. While fried chicken with fried pickles with fried apple pie and fried ice cream for dessert, washed down with fried coke being a very much possible dish combination. In fact, fried apple pie and fried pickles are quite an old dish.

---

Now that we have established that in terms of culinary prowess the Southern United States is the most advanced area of the world, can we move to the next item on the agenda?