this post was submitted on 20 Dec 2024
244 points (95.9% liked)

Ask Lemmy

27315 readers
2999 users here now

A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions


Rules: (interactive)


1) Be nice and; have funDoxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them


2) All posts must end with a '?'This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?


3) No spamPlease do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.


4) NSFW is okay, within reasonJust remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either [email protected] or [email protected]. NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].


5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions. If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email [email protected]. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.


6) No US Politics.
Please don't post about current US Politics. If you need to do this, try [email protected] or [email protected]


Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.

Partnered Communities:

Tech Support

No Stupid Questions

You Should Know

Reddit

Jokes

Ask Ouija


Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

The article seems to be shittily written in my opinion but I figure if you watch the video (about a minute) it will get the point across.

My question lies in, do you think this will benefit the health of the people moving forward, or do you fear it being weaponized to endorse or threaten companies to comply with the mention of Kennedy being tied to its future as mentioned in the end of the article

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Bluetreefrog 4 points 1 week ago (1 children)

OP, please reword title of your post to be an open-ended question.

[–] LifeInMultipleChoice 5 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Ah, I just clicked the copy button as I thought it was one of the communities that required the title to match the articles title. (Jerboa doesn't show community rules on the side). Sorry about that

Edit: done

[–] obinice 5 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I know I'm an awful pedant who doesn't wurd gud either half the time, but you meant to say populace not populous in the title. Hope you don't mind me pointing it out :-)

[–] LifeInMultipleChoice 3 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Haha thanks. Nah I added that part in to make it fit the community rules I violated by accident. Thanks for the heads up.

Constructive critiques are always good in my book. (Wish I always kept that demeanor)

[–] [email protected] 115 points 1 week ago (34 children)

You know what would be way better than a symbol for "healthy" food would be requiring manufacturers to label food that fails to meet standards as "unhealthy." Bonus points if you tax it to death so it's no longer economically viable to sell garbage and label it "food"

Like, shit, the public perception is that I can't afford healthy food anyway. But at least if the unhealthy food was also labelled it'd be easier to avoid

[–] Anticorp 17 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Why is a Payday candy bar 1/3rd the price of a bag of peanuts with fewer peanuts than the Payday has?

[–] surewhynotlem 10 points 1 week ago

Because peanuts on their own have to be visibly pleasing as peanuts or people won't buy them. When you put them in a candy bar, you can use the crap looking ones.

Also, buying in bulk drastically decreases the price. If you had the purchasing power of Hershey, you could get your peanuts really cheap too. Join a food co-op as a starting point.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (33 replies)
[–] Zachariah 46 points 1 week ago (2 children)
[–] LifeInMultipleChoice 15 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Thanks for posting that. Honestly I would almost guess the article was compiled by AI, as it seems to assume you know information it has not previously mentioned.

If you notice it mentions the symbol multiple times but never shows it. (Not a symbol it can type) Where as a human would have written/drawn/ known it has to be shown or none of the references make sense.

Or I'm an idiot and they just are saying the term "healthy" is the symbol they are going to use?

[–] EleventhHour 4 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

I read in another article that the “healthy” symbol is currently under development.

[–] LifeInMultipleChoice 3 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Is it an actual symbol or just the word?

[–] EleventhHour 4 points 1 week ago (1 children)

No, it’s gonna be some kind of logo that can be used on labels. Like I said, it’s under development currently. What it will look like, nobody is quite sure, in the article. I read mentioned that some critics believe it will oversimplify the matter of buying healthy food, and that it should be more like a label That has some kind of explanation.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

My understanding is it will be a symbol, kind of like the USDA Organic symbol. Not necessarily similar in design, but just that the organic symbol means it’s met USDA criteria for being organic

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 week ago

Wondrously helpful to provide a link to the information's source page!!!

[–] irotsoma 26 points 1 week ago (10 children)

And it will get reversed in a month...already heard Trumpicans calling it "woke".

[–] Anticorp 10 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Damn librulz always tryna take my trans fats!

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

First, they came for frogs and made them gay, and I didn't speak up for I'm not a frog.

Then they came for my fats and made them trans.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (9 replies)
[–] [email protected] 19 points 1 week ago (3 children)

Not really.

If you cook from ingredients, you'll usually be reasonably healthy. It's not impossible to make healthy prepared foods, but it's (comparatively) expensive enough that that, not awareness, is the main limitation.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] AA5B 12 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (2 children)

This is a good try, but no I don’t see it helping. Those of us who can afford healthier choices already do so.

My simplification is that most people fall into one of these scenarios

  • just need the cheapest, possibly emphasize comfort food - doesn’t matter what’s healthy if it’s not in your budget
  • proportions and quantity. This won’t help
  • prepared food, whether frozen or restaurant, is a disaster.

I fall in to the second camp. I generally know what’s healthy and try to get it, but I don’t succeed with portion control or proportions. If the wrong things still dominate your plate, and your plate is too full, it doesn’t matter if some things have a healthy symbol.

I have no idea how to fix people like me, but for the first scenario I really believe we need a financial incentive. Back in the old days you ate a lot of vegetables because what came out of your garden was the cheapest food. Now thanks partly to government subsidies, corn syrup is both the cheapest food, and appeals to our evolutionary desire for sweetness. Let’s start by redirecting those subsidies to support a healthier food supply, but yeah I think we’re going to need a vice tax

[–] BangCrash 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I agree with most of your post except the the first 2 sentences.

We don't know what we don't know. You assume we already know what the healthy options are. But with 50 years of education propping up a food pyramid that was developed as a marketing tool by kellogs we don't actually know what's best for us.

We think grains & cereals are the best. These along with sugars have the highest caloric value. It makes absolute sense to eat these if food is scarce and difficult to get as they provide the best bang for buck.

But in modern society where food is easy to get grains and carbs aren't good.

So reeducating everyone using the understanding science has developed oner the last 50 yrs is hugely important. We've been feeding ourselves based on misinformation.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 week ago

Not subsidizing corn would be a good start. Why is HFCS shit cheaper than vegetables? Rhetorical question.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Lower fat means more sugar. Have less of full fat products.

[–] Anticorp 15 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Fat is a necessary macro, and the public's ignorant obsession with fat-free is crazy, especially since it almost always corresponds with more sugar, like you said. Guess what the body turns sugar into.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 week ago

And research is pretty clear now that it isn't fat that causes the problems, it's unstable glucose

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 week ago

Yes it is, including saturated fat, in limited quantities.

[–] LifeInMultipleChoice 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Doesn't that disagree with most of the mother'l sauces?

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 week ago

Less sauce. But I've cut out roux based sauces, except occasionally. And occasionally I will use half and half for coffee and tea. Moderation in all things, including moderation. Also I do much less bread, mainly because proper flour in a food ~~dessert~~ desert is not easy to get, and store bought bread in the USA is gross.

load more comments
view more: next ›