It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The Coca Cola Conspiracy: The secret cause for the U.S. obesity epidemic

page: 23
141
<< 20  21  22    24  25  26 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 31 2012 @ 03:20 PM
link   
reply to post by DevolutionEvolvd
 

I don't disagree but eating enough, eating too much and starving yourself are all different. I don't recall fleabit saying that you should starve yourself. He said eat healthier. If you are consuming exessive amount of calories then that has to be cut back. I know that what makes up those calories is more important then the number but that is getting into details which isn't going to make a difference if a person keeps telling themselves that they don't understand why their fat when they hardly eat anything.




posted on Jan, 31 2012 @ 03:35 PM
link   

I don't think that fleabit doesn't get it he is just stating it in the simplest terms. You don't need the government controlling what you put in your mouth or watching coca-cola co. fall in order to make the changes which will put your body back in balance but you have to make a conscious choice to do so. Blaming anything else is a cop out.


Yes, basically just so.

Not only does everyone have the tools and ability to lose weight, most could actually afford to go to a gym (if they don't have facilities available), if they stopped spending outrageous amounts of money eating out, because it's just easier than cooking meals themselves. The government doesn't control squat. I can buy what I want, make what I want, eat what I want, exercise how I want. So can everyone else. They choose not to.


Obesity researchers readily admit that dieting (eating less) and exercise (burning more) doesn't work well in the long term for obesity treatment.


That's ridiculous - if you eat smarter (and NORMAL portions - not the oversized portions served), and exercise regularly, you will most certainly maintain a healthy weight and body. Long term reality is people get lazy again. Being healthy is a lifestyle choice - not an 12 week program where you can go back to bad habits once you reach a weight goal. That's what people don't seem to get. They want fast solutions, easy solutions, with long standing results.

And I do get it - I've been healthy for years and years. I was overweight for a couple years after I got out of the Army. I, like everyone else, am not immune to laziness and eating smart. But I simply did a bit of research, developed a smart workout plan, ate a little better, and reached my goal weight, which I maintained without a problem. It is NOT impossible.

And yes, people don't see results because they think 20 minute workouts 3 days a week is the answer. It's not. Burning 280 calories, 3 days a week isn't going to do much. But that's what people do, and are unhappy they don't see results. I guarantee if someone has a solid workout plan and a reasonable diet, they will lose the weight. And as much as 3 pounds a week. And if they maintain a healthy lifestyle, they will keep it off.

I've not know a single person who SERIOUSLY approached weight loss and healthier eating, that failed to lose the weight and get healthier. You are talking as if there is some mysterious FDA approved disease that makes it impossible for people to get in shape. That's a load of baloney.



posted on Jan, 31 2012 @ 03:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by yourmaker
lately i've stopped drinking all pop, eating any mcdonalds or fast food, basically anything I see as a root cause of the problem, but what's ended up happening is everyone around me have become irritated over it, questioning me and my sanity because I refuse to buy any of this crap lately, anyone else experiencing this?
like there is now a huge gaping hole in my character because I can't buy into any of it anymore..


Owh man it drives me crazy.

Everybody thinks im nuts. They mock me be taking gmo pudding and drinking from it in front of my face.
See nothing happens. ..
I don't buy anything bad anymore. Lately I took an biscuit from someone. Later I discovered that it has gmo in it. I literately felt sick. I refuse to eat poison anymore. Msg is a thing I refuse to eat also

Result is I don't eat much anymore


Luckily here in the Netherlands we have Muslim supermarkets. I like halal now. Even the fruit is imported.
The difference in taste is in comparison of the supermarket fruits are huge.

You must be proud at yourself. Its your job to make people sick of your BS. In the end I believe they will respect you for it.

In 2 years I dropped 30 kg. Never felt better. I even went back kickboxing
edit on 31-1-2012 by TribeOfManyColours because: (no reason given)

edit on 31-1-2012 by TribeOfManyColours because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 31 2012 @ 03:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by TribeOfManyColours

Originally posted by yourmaker
lately i've stopped drinking all pop, eating any mcdonalds or fast food, basically anything I see as a root cause of the problem, but what's ended up happening is everyone around me have become irritated over it, questioning me and my sanity because I refuse to buy any of this crap lately, anyone else experiencing this?
like there is now a huge gaping hole in my character because I can't buy into any of it anymore..


Owh man it drives me crazy.

Everybody thinks im nuts. They mock me be taking gmo pudding and drinking from it in front of my face.
See nothing happens. ..
I don't buy anything bad anymore. Lately I took an biscuit from someone. Later I discovered that it has gmo in it. I literately felt sick. I refuse to eat poison anymore. Msg is a thing I refuse to eat also

I think these things happen when people become preachy or holier than thou about their new lifestyles. Like when vegetarians start preaching about the evils of meat while others are trying to enjoy their meal.

Sure you may want to get your friends off things that you consider bad but if you tell them about it once and they didn't listen then don't bring it up again unless they ask.



posted on Jan, 31 2012 @ 03:58 PM
link   
Sure you may want to get your friends off things that you consider bad but if you tell them about it once and they didn't listen then don't bring it up again unless they ask.

So true. But its the mother of our Son. So its pressing hard on me.
edit on 31-1-2012 by TribeOfManyColours because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 31 2012 @ 04:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by fleabit
The government doesn't control squat. I can buy what I want, make what I want, eat what I want, exercise how I want. So can everyone else. They choose not to.


Actually it was a remark about the OP posting that HFCS should be regulated like alcohol.



posted on Jan, 31 2012 @ 04:08 PM
link   
reply to post by TribeOfManyColours
 


I was speaking in general but it is true that you can't change people until they are ready to change. Any pressure that you put on them will result in them pressing back. I'm sure she has the information and even someone who can guide her. If she hasn't acted on it then nagging probably isn't going to do any good. And that is probably how she will percieve it.



posted on Jan, 31 2012 @ 05:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by daskakik

Originally posted by fleabit
The government doesn't control squat. I can buy what I want, make what I want, eat what I want, exercise how I want. So can everyone else. They choose not to.


Actually it was a remark about the OP posting that HFCS should be regulated like alcohol.


HFCS already is regulated -- it's not only promoted by the government -- it's subsidized by tax welfare:



Of the $113.6 billion in commodity subsidy payments doled out by the USDA between 1995 and 2004, corn drew $41.8 billion — more than cotton, soy, and rice combined.





Cheap corn, underwritten by the subsidy program, has changed the diet of every American. It has allowed a few corporations — including Archer Daniels Midland, the world’s largest grain processor — to create a booming market for high-fructose corn syrup. HFCS now accounts for nearly half of the caloric sweeteners added to processed food, and is the sole caloric sweetener for mass-market soft drinks. Between 1975 and 1997, per-capita consumption jumped from virtually nothing to 60.4 pounds per year — equal to about 200 calories per person, per day. Consumption has generally hovered around that level since.





According to Drewnowski and his student Pablo Monsivais, cheap and abundant additives such as HFCS allow manufacturers to sweeten food liberally without adding much to their production costs. For people on a tight budget, these additives can also make cheap food the most efficient way to get calories. To illustrate his point, Drewnowski distinguishes between “energy-dense” and “nutrient-dense” foods. For energy-dense, think of a package of Ding Dongs — 360 calories, 19 grams of fat, and a liberal dose of high-fructose corn syrup. For nutrient-dense, think of a three-ounce chunk of wild salmon, delivering high-quality protein and essential fatty acids, among other nutrients, in a 185-calorie package. The former will run you about a buck at any convenience store, bodega, or supermarket in the country. For the latter, prepare to sidle up to a pristine Whole Foods fish counter and shell out about $5. From a short-term economic viewpoint, the Ding Dongs present a better deal: 360 calories per dollar, and no need for the time or skill to cook. “If you’re on a limited income trying to feed a family, in a sense you’re behaving rationally by choosing heavily sweetened and fat-laden foods,” Drewnowski says. The price gap between these two categories is growing. Drewnowski and Monsivais show that the overall cost of food consumed at home, when adjusted for inflation, has been essentially unchanged since 1980. But over the same time, the price of soft drinks plunged 30 percent, and the price of candy and other sweets fell 20 percent. Meanwhile, the price of fresh fruits and vegetables rose 50 percent.


So the HFCS regulations need to be changed

This is a great analysis of the structural reasons why low income urban neighborhoods have the obesity epidemic

So basically the low income neighbors are loaded with fast food restaurants, mobile vendors, and "one aisle" corner stores which don't carry healthy food options. The cost of healthy food is too high for low income people to get enough calories.

So there are new "Healthy Mobile Vending Ordinances" being passed in low income cities.

That means less HFCS and more fresh fruit sold to kids in low income neighborhoods.



posted on Jan, 31 2012 @ 06:05 PM
link   
reply to post by fulllotusqigong
 


Lame. That is not regulated like alcohol which is what you posted. You want government to tell people what they can and can't eat. Not going to happen. Neither the people or the corporations will allow it.



posted on Jan, 31 2012 @ 06:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by daskakik
reply to post by fulllotusqigong
 


Lame. That is not regulated like alcohol which is what you posted. You want government to tell people what they can and can't eat. Not going to happen. Neither the people or the corporations will allow it.


Obesity expert: Sugar is toxic and should be regulated 28 September 2011




Do you think fructose - which along with glucose makes table sugar - drives obesity? I don't think fructose is the cause of obesity, but I do think it is the thing that takes you from obesity to metabolic syndrome, and that's where the healthcare dollars go - diabetes, hypertension and cardiovascular disease. So the idea that "a calorie is a calorie" is wrong? As far as I'm concerned that's how we got into this mess. If a calorie is a calorie, the solution is eat less and exercise more. Except it doesn't work. And the reason is that fructose is toxic beyond its caloric equivalent, so if you consume it instead of glucose you get more of a negative effect even if the calories are the same. It's important that people recognise that the quality of our diet also dictates the quantity. In addition, "eat less" is a really crappy message that doesn't work. "Eat less sugar" is a message that people can get their .s around. Why do we consume so much sugar? One reason is that it's addictive. The food industry knows that when they add fructose we buy more. That's why it's in everything. There are five tastes on your tongue: sweet, salty, sour, bitter and umami. Sugar covers up the other four, so you can't taste the negative aspects of foods. You can make dog poop taste good with enough sugar. In essence, that is what the food industry has done. You say that sugar is a chronic toxin. Why? We have three levels of toxins: things like cyanide where one part per million will kill you; arsenic and lead where 30 to 50 parts per million kills you; and toxins where high doses of thousands of parts per million can kill you. A lot of the last category are nutrients, for instance vitamin A, vitamin D and iron. Well, fructose falls in that category. You think fructose should be regulated. Why treat it differently to vitamin D or iron, say? The difference is that for vitamin D and iron there is no abuse potential. With fructose there is. We don't regulate toxic substances that aren't abused. We don't regulate abuse substances that are not toxic, like caffeine. Where we get excited is where we have toxic substances that are also abused like coc aine, ethanol, heroin and nicotine. Well, fructose is a toxic substance that is also abused. By that analogy, we ought to regulate it. Do you think sugar regulation will happen? Obviously, no one is ready to do that. The question is how much more metabolic syndrome and diabetes do we need to see before we consider changing that policy? That's a decision for policymakers, but they can't make the decision without the science. I'm supplying the science.



posted on Jan, 31 2012 @ 06:18 PM
link   
reply to post by fulllotusqigong
 


Even more lame. You and all your obesity experts are nothing more than alarmists. Let's give up more freedoms because people can't make healthy choices.



posted on Jan, 31 2012 @ 06:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by daskakik
reply to post by fulllotusqigong
 


Even more lame. You and all your obesity experts are nothing more than alarmists. Let's give up more freedoms because people can't make healthy choices.


Moreover, every $1 of profits earned by ADM's corn sweetener operation costs consumers $10,



posted on Jan, 31 2012 @ 08:23 PM
link   
reply to post by fulllotusqigong
 


And this is the government that you hope will outlaw hfcs. Stop being naive.

Spread your gosple but stop trying to cram it down peoples throats.
edit on 31-1-2012 by daskakik because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 31 2012 @ 09:04 PM
link   
Well, ok.. y'all keep wallowing in your "omg they are out to get us and we are fat as a result" misery.

The rest of us will try to just eat a bit better, exercise, and be healthy as a result. There is no doubt companies that make fattening foods are doing great. They taste good. How well does Kashi do? Not nearly as well. People enjoy tasty and fattening, not healthy and bland. There -is- a happy medium, but people don't bother to take it. Exercise is the key, and it's laughable to hear some of you say that exercise isn't the key to getting fit, and it isn't the answer to obesity. Laughable...



posted on Jan, 31 2012 @ 10:01 PM
link   
This was an interesting video but not exactly extremely informative. Clearly large amounts of sugar consumption are horrible for you. Clearly drinking 1 soda, let alone 3 or 4 in a day is horrible for you. Clearly filling your body with tons of processed foods that don't contain any real nutrients is bad for you.

A few years ago I had a traveling job across the US. The hours sucked and there was never much down time and always being on the road I essentially had no choice but to eat # for food. I ended up gaining around 30-40 lbs or so in a 6-7 month window. I came back home after it was done and dropped right back down to my normal weight eating normal food again. I don't exercise, ever (in fact my job required me to stand over 14 hours some times so if anything I was getting MORE exercise while away from home). I'm a lazy #, but I try to eat healthy most of the time (I still eat fast food, I just don't eat it daily) and as a result my BMI is actually even a little under what is considered normal/healthy for my height. All of this weight change is just purely based on diet. This isn't rocket science - YOU ARE WHAT YOU EAT quite literally.

I think the fundamental issue with obesity is portion size, followed by the actual foods people eat. The compound issue that leads to both of those problems is just education and people being ignorant. And to a certain point what is said in the video is true - this # is never going to change if it is up to people to regulate it themselves (why? because the general population is made up of morons -- probably has something to do with why a third of kids aren't even graduating high school). The food industry in the US makes a huge profit off of selling non-nutritious addictive food over selling things like produce or meat. Nearly a quarter of our exports consist of food products so neither the government nor the food industry will turn anything around voluntarily -- it isn't in their best interest. The most the government will do is try to explain what healthy plans are for people to eat - of course even suggesting what a healthy diet might be from a government official is seen by the radical far right as some sort of take over of peoples rights (HERP DERP GOVT TELLING ME WUT TO EAT OMGZZ).

I don't think any of this should be regulated by the government because people shouldn't have their hand held. If people are too stupid to know that drinking a soda (or a few) every day is harmful -- if people are too stupid to realize eating portion sizes 2 or 3 times what people use to eat just a few decades ago might be harmful -- # 'em. Let natural selection take its course, we are facing population issues on this planet anyway. If people don't understand a 64 oz big gulp wasn't the way soda was originally intended to be consumed I don't think there is much else you can do. You know what a proper serving size of meat is? It's only a few oz, basically the size of a deck of cards. Think of that the next time you see someone munching down on a few double cheeseburgers and a giant "diet" coke with their side of deepfried carbs.

Yeah these horrible foods with addictive qualities are priced low so poor and working class people end up sucked in - guess what? Plenty of nutritious food can be purchased cheap too - ever look at the price of beans and rice? There is a reason why bean/rice dishes are staples in cultures all across the world. They are cheap and extremely healthy. You don't need to buy a $300 juicer to get healthy. If you bother to educate yourself with basic cooking skills you can make cheap food filled with important nutrients taste better than all that processed food crap! There is this huge misconception that healthy foods must taste bland - I think it comes from that fact that people don't know how to cook anything unless its frozen and goes into a microwave or oven. Ever heard of spices, seasonings, and herbs? That # adds mountains of flavor and MORE nutrients. There is more to flavoring food than just salt and pepper. People don't want to educate themselves with a wealth of this information out there? People don't want to pick the right things to eat and are really that dumb to think eating a frozen pizza for dinner is better than something like a beans and rice dish can just get bloated up and have an early heart attack. No skin off my back.

I don't see why the government should have any business regulating this, nutrition labels are there, facts about what to eat are out there, study after study is out there, if people want to voluntarily take decades off their life for some #ty tasting empty nutrient diet, let them. It isn't hard to educate yourself and realize you shouldn't eat that type of food ALL the time and that it is only okay in small portions sparingly. As long as the information is out there - let natural selection take its course with the ignorant. We got over 7 billion people on this planet now - we are going to need all the natural thinning we can get soon...
edit on 31-1-2012 by quimbydogg because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 1 2012 @ 01:35 AM
link   
reply to post by daskakik
 


i think you analogy is false.
spreading the scientific truth is not alarmist.
when condoms are promoted for safe sex ex disease, is that alarmist also?

i do agree that education, not banning is the key.
however, spreading facts is not alarmists.
your own reactions show, how you have your . in the sand.



posted on Feb, 1 2012 @ 02:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by fleabit



I've not know a single person who SERIOUSLY approached weight loss and healthier eating, that failed to lose the weight and get healthier. You are talking as if there is some mysterious FDA approved disease that makes it impossible for people to get in shape. That's a load of baloney.


I do know of, personally and through reading countless clinical data, people who approach weight loss seriously and fail.

Stop the straw man position. I never once said there is a disease tat makes it impossible for people to lose weight. I'm simply saying that your idea of energy in vs. energy out is flawed. And I'm telling you that obesity is not a psychological disease, it's a physiological disease.



posted on Feb, 1 2012 @ 03:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by fleabit

That's ridiculous - if you eat smarter (and NORMAL portions - not the oversized portions served), and exercise regularly, you will most certainly maintain a healthy weight and body. Long term reality is people get lazy again. Being healthy is a lifestyle choice - not an 12 week program where you can go back to bad habits once you reach a weight goal. That's what people don't seem to get. They want fast solutions, easy solutions, with long standing results.


Ignore my sources as you will, but the data doesn't lie.


And I do get it - I've been healthy for years and years. I was overweight for a couple years after I got out of the Army. I, like everyone else, am not immune to laziness and eating smart. But I simply did a bit of research, developed a smart workout plan, ate a little better, and reached my goal weight, which I maintained without a problem. It is NOT impossible.


Although I'm glad you were able to achieve your goal, your results are irrelevant in this discussion.


And yes, people don't see results because they think 20 minute workouts 3 days a week is the answer. It's not. Burning 280 calories, 3 days a week isn't going to do much. But that's what people do, and are unhappy they don't see results. I guarantee if someone has a solid workout plan and a reasonable diet, they will lose the weight. And as much as 3 pounds a week. And if they maintain a healthy lifestyle, they will keep it off.


You're still not getting it. Jesus christ.

20 minute workouts 3 days a week can be sufficient. It depends on what you're doing. However, once again, working out has little effect on weight loss in obese/overweight subjects. Do I need to dig up the mounds of research that says so?

Working out with the objective of burning calories is absolutely horse sh!t. Every single expert that has any knowledge of biochemistry and exercise physiology knows this. I don't know how to make this much clearer than saying:

For weight loss: We exercise to increase insulin sensitivity, which, subsequently, leads to fat loss in the following days after the workout.

For muscle gain: We lift heavy weights, tear muscles and through diet, mainly, we build muscle in the following days after the workout..

It's the same principle.

Would you like an anecdote, since you're so willing to provide your own? The gym at which I train people is full of guys who play basketball daily. I play with them....daily. Many of these guys play 5+ days a week of full court basketball for 2+ hours. Now, if you were to total the number of calories these guys burned.... you'd probably assume, based on the numbers, that these guys are in perfect physical shape....

Well, I've got news for ya... They're not.. I've seen the same guys for the past few years, playing basketball for multiple days a week...burning who knows how many calories a day, and half of them are still overweight.

You idiots who think exercise is an answer have no clue what you're talking about.

Exercise can help, but it's not the answer. Diet is the answer. Not eating less; but eating right. Eating less has the same effect as does working out more.

The dumbass who says a calorie is a calorie should look at the OP in more depth. 1gm of Fructose has a completely different effect as does 1gm of Glucose. One is used as fuel by every cell in the body and the other is only used by the liver.

There is a such thing as a good calorie and a bad calorie (see the difference between one calorie of protein digestion/absorption and one calorie of carbohydrate digestion/absorption).

edit on 1-2-2012 by DevolutionEvolvd because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 1 2012 @ 10:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by LittleBlackEagle
most people who are over weight, obese or morbidly obese have one problem, taking in more calories than they burn. chemical additives aside and their potential affects.

most people would rather blame all the companies for junk food, than themselves for over eating it.

Well put! I don’t think the people responding to this thread is actually realizing that the Coke corporation isn’t tying you to a chair and forcing you to intake large quantities of their product!
Come on people, you act like you can’t control what you eat or drink and have to have ‘somebody’ to blame other than yourself! I drink too much Coke and I have known since I was a child it wasn’t good for you (it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure that out) but I drink it because I want too, nobody forced me to go to the store, buy the product, and drink it!
It’s time people stop always trying to find the ‘BAD GUYS’ that made them fat, etc. and look in the mirror! Take control of yourselves and not expect corporations to look after and take care of you!
What concerns me more than the obvious bad health of too much sugar is all the products on the shelves that say “artificially flavored” that is what I think is the real issue. I always look for products that says “no artificial flavors, etc”. Sometimes you even have to pay more but they are out there, as an example look at the vanilla ice cream, a lot of it says “artificially flavored” and the higher priced says, “made with all natural ingredients”
Instead of worrying about the “Coca Cola Conspiracy” take control of your own purchasing and worry about everything you purchase for you and your family, avoiding chemically foods/drinks. Also, avoid ‘diet foods/drinks’ these are worse than any sugar! SHOP SMART!



posted on Feb, 1 2012 @ 12:05 PM
link   
reply to post by BBalazs
 


The problem is that the scientific truth is that huge amounts of sugar can be harmful to the body but in moderation the body is quite capable of handling them. That is not the meassage in the OP.

Using words like toxic and poison is indeed alarmist. People have consumed different forms of free fructose for thousand of years without the obesity or metobolic syndrome rates seen today. That would imply that the reason for the increase in these ailments is more than just the availabilty.

Also, the fact that most people do consume or have consumed soda at some point in their life and did not become addicted or did not sonsume in quantities that led to this type of ailments negates the OP's claim that it is like heroin and that people become powerless to make healthier choices. This seems to be true for at least a large portion of the population and in cases like Japan this is even more pronounced.
edit on 1-2-2012 by daskakik because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
141
<< 20  21  22    24  25  26 >>

log in

join