The know what’s best, part deux

Continuing from my previous post, this MSNBC article discusses it further.

The decision of San Francisco city officials Tuesday to crack down on restaurant meals that include free toys unless they meet particular nutritional guidelines is — depending on whom you ask — either taking away a parents’ right to choose what to feed their children, as some msnbc.com readers have commented, or a gift to frazzled parents up against a massive marketing machine.

What it most likely isn’t, however, is a solution to the childhood obesity epidemic.

Indeed. It’s not going to solve obesity. So, what is?

That’s fine if the child is eating a Happy Meal only for special occasions, not every day. But studies have shown that fast food makes up a substantial portion of kids’ calorie intake, and research suggests that children and adolescents who consume fast food tend to consume more total calories, fat, and sodium and have less healthful diets than those who do not.

So perhaps the first thing we can start with is WHY is fast food making up a substantial portion of kids’ calorie intake?

Furthermore, and I know my father and grandfather wouldn’t necessarily agree with this, but we need to get away from the notion of “clean your plate”. Back when portions were small and we didn’t have much food, no, food shouldn’t go to waste. I still don’t think food should go to waste, but the trouble is portion sizes are huge. If you can’t order smaller sizes, then don’t eat it all. Or, don’t get it all. For instance, I’ll order a “small drink” and be given a bucket… there is nothing saying I have to fill that bucket all the way up and then nothing saying I have to drink it all. Yet, that’s what we do. We are given this vat and feel a need to fill it up and consume it all. Why?

Nevertheless, we’re not getting to the heart of the matter. If the problem is too much caloric consumption, why are kids (and people in general) consuming too many calories? If it’s too many calories because of eating calorie-dense food like fast food, then why are people eating so much fast food? Then what can you do to improve upon that?

Sure, parents can, and do, have a say about what their kids eat, but it’s increasingly tough for them to ignore all the temptations out there. Kids are bombarded with food marketing: in 2006 about $870 million was spent on advertising meals to the under 12 set, the prime target for Happy Meals, according to a 2008 Federal Trade Commission report.

Oh…. pity. It’s TOUGH to ignore all the temptations out there.

Boo-fucking-hoo.

Learn to ignore it. Stop being a wuss. Toughen up.

But, the article attempts to offer some solutions:

“What about a grilled chicken sandwich instead of fried nuggets?” asks New York nutritionist and Bonnie Taub-Dix, author of “Read it Before You Eat It.” “There’s no grilled chicken sandwich for kids at McDonalds. And what about a fish sandwich that’s not breaded and fried with breading that’s thicker than the fish?”

Well, there are grilled chicken sandwiches on the menu. Why not order that for your kids? Oh.. .it’s not “for kids”. What does that mean? If the kid doesn’t want the sauces and veggies on it, ask for it plain and dry. If it’s “too big” for your kid, cut it in half and take the other half home to eat later… or maybe split the sandwich with Junior to save a little money and save yourself some caloric intake.

The trouble is, there’s far greater lifestyle choices involved here… you have to ask people to change how they live and function in a day. No law is going to affect that. People need to have the motivation on their own to care about such things.

2 thoughts on “The know what’s best, part deux

  1. The current issue of Reason magazine has an article observing that yes, there are more fat people now than their used to be, but those in America that are fit are fitter than citizens in the past. That’s why performance in races, bike rides, etc has gone up so much.

    20-50 years ago US citizens were thin because they all smoked and died young of smoking related causes
    If they all hadn’t had their hunger suppressed by nicotine and the other poisons in cigarette smoke, they might have been fat back then too – -because most food had real sugar and butter in it, and a lot of it was deep fried.

    • That’s why a lot of Europeans are thin, because they smoke like chimneys.

      But it all still comes back to the same thing: calorie intake vs. output. If you take in more than you burn off, body will store it somewhere. So even if you are sedentary, so what? If you take in just what you need, you’re fine (at least, in this area). I’ve got a gut because I’ve eaten more than I’ve burned off, but I’ve dropped about 13# and a notch on my belt because I’m taking in far less now. It’s simple math on paper, but I know it’s harder to do in reality.

      Still, you gotta try.

Comments are closed.