malabsorption or diseases that make them lose weight or lose their appetite. Some, as research has shown, can successfully resist temptation and routinely work very hard to carefully choose what and how much they eat, but this group is the minority, as most Americans are overweight or obese. I don’t think it is appropriate to think of two-thirds of the population as irresponsible. It doesn’t square with everything we know about the American people and their general ethic of hard work.
3. What about corporate responsibility? Why should businesses have to worry about consumer choices?
Responsible businesses should not encourage people to consume more food than their bodies need to stay healthy. Businesses should not be creating conditions that result in harm to individuals. In other sectors, businesses are not allowed to encourage people to take risks without proper warnings or without obtaining signed consent forms. Right now, if a restaurant serves somebody food with an amount of fat, salt, sugar, or calories that could increase his or her risk of chronic diseases, the customer is not usually warned. Nevertheless, rather than merely warning people, a better approach would be for businesses to promote foods that are healthy and don’t require caution. Food should be promoted in a manner that makes it less likely for people to increase their risk of chronic diseases. That way, if people do eat poorly, it wouldbe their own choice and not the result of an outside party overly influencing them.
4. Can’t you teach people not to eat mindlessly?
We often eat mindlessly because we can; humans have evolved to be able to do this. In fact, our capacity to eat without having to pay attention to the food and to do other things simultaneously should be considered a valuable and important asset. We can pay attention to our surroundings, socialize, and plan for the future while eating automatically. Not only does this save us a lot of time, but it helps us create bonds and positive relationships with others. Trying to teach “mindful” eating as a consistent practice would be an uphill battle and may also have negative unintended consequences, such as interfering with social relationships.
Many weight-loss interventions try to make people more aware of what they are eating, but usually after an initial period of success people fall back into the more natural routine of eating automatically. Besides being boring, being mindful of eating all the time precludes doing other things during meals. Most people do not want to “waste” time by concentrating on every bite and would rather use their brains to ponder other things.
5. How is the obesity epidemic related to global warming?
Too much carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) in the atmosphere traps heat and warms our planet. Our lifestyles are the direct cause of the release of excess CO 2 , from our use of motor vehicles to our watching plasma televisions, which suck up lots of energy. But it isn’t obvious to most of us how our everyday actions are linked to global warming. For example, we can’t see the immediate impact on climate change of our use of air-conditioning, taking an airplane to go on vacation, or buying a steak dinner.
When we eat too much, our society has to produce more food and burn more fuel for harvesting and transport—all of which increase carbon emissions. An estimated 30–40 percent of all food is wasted, and 97 percent winds up in landfills. Food decomposes to methane, a potent global warming gas twenty-five times more powerful than CO 2 .Serving less would reduce waste, and eating less would reduce carbon emissions. Eating less meat and dairy in particular would have a huge impact because of the methane produced by cattle and dairy herds; meat and dairy products, account for about 18 percent of all greenhouse gases. Giving up meat and dairy one day a week is equivalent to driving 1,160 fewer miles per year.
Everything we do that consumes energy and/or produces
3. What about corporate responsibility? Why should businesses have to worry about consumer choices?
Responsible businesses should not encourage people to consume more food than their bodies need to stay healthy. Businesses should not be creating conditions that result in harm to individuals. In other sectors, businesses are not allowed to encourage people to take risks without proper warnings or without obtaining signed consent forms. Right now, if a restaurant serves somebody food with an amount of fat, salt, sugar, or calories that could increase his or her risk of chronic diseases, the customer is not usually warned. Nevertheless, rather than merely warning people, a better approach would be for businesses to promote foods that are healthy and don’t require caution. Food should be promoted in a manner that makes it less likely for people to increase their risk of chronic diseases. That way, if people do eat poorly, it wouldbe their own choice and not the result of an outside party overly influencing them.
4. Can’t you teach people not to eat mindlessly?
We often eat mindlessly because we can; humans have evolved to be able to do this. In fact, our capacity to eat without having to pay attention to the food and to do other things simultaneously should be considered a valuable and important asset. We can pay attention to our surroundings, socialize, and plan for the future while eating automatically. Not only does this save us a lot of time, but it helps us create bonds and positive relationships with others. Trying to teach “mindful” eating as a consistent practice would be an uphill battle and may also have negative unintended consequences, such as interfering with social relationships.
Many weight-loss interventions try to make people more aware of what they are eating, but usually after an initial period of success people fall back into the more natural routine of eating automatically. Besides being boring, being mindful of eating all the time precludes doing other things during meals. Most people do not want to “waste” time by concentrating on every bite and would rather use their brains to ponder other things.
5. How is the obesity epidemic related to global warming?
Too much carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) in the atmosphere traps heat and warms our planet. Our lifestyles are the direct cause of the release of excess CO 2 , from our use of motor vehicles to our watching plasma televisions, which suck up lots of energy. But it isn’t obvious to most of us how our everyday actions are linked to global warming. For example, we can’t see the immediate impact on climate change of our use of air-conditioning, taking an airplane to go on vacation, or buying a steak dinner.
When we eat too much, our society has to produce more food and burn more fuel for harvesting and transport—all of which increase carbon emissions. An estimated 30–40 percent of all food is wasted, and 97 percent winds up in landfills. Food decomposes to methane, a potent global warming gas twenty-five times more powerful than CO 2 .Serving less would reduce waste, and eating less would reduce carbon emissions. Eating less meat and dairy in particular would have a huge impact because of the methane produced by cattle and dairy herds; meat and dairy products, account for about 18 percent of all greenhouse gases. Giving up meat and dairy one day a week is equivalent to driving 1,160 fewer miles per year.
Everything we do that consumes energy and/or produces
Similar Books
