If the poor are so hungry why are they so fat?

Started by TheNightStalker

This political chat room is for you to sound off about any political ideology and discuss current political topics. Everyone is welcome, yes, even conservatives, but keep in mind, the nature of the No Holds Barred political chat forum platform can be friendly to trolling. It is your responsibility to address this wisely. Forum Rules

78 replies to this topic Sticky this thread

SallyForth's Photo
Posted by SallyForth
  2,586 09 Jan 2014, 9:41 am

SallyForth      
     

Posts: 2,202
Independent Independent political affiliation
Politics: N/A
Money: 2,585.99

Log in or register to remove this ad..
TheNightStalker » 08 Jan 2014 7:20 pm wrote:
I see these fat fucks waddling around the grocery store with their fat fucking kids and paying for it with an EBT card. So why are libs always crying about poverty and kids going hungry? What BULLSHIT. Fucken liars.


They're fat not because of how much they eat but the fact that they eat processed, fast-acting carbohydrates in breads, cereals, fruit juices and soft drinks as opposed to eating whole foods like corn, beans, fruits, leafy greens and other slow-acting carbohydrates.

Fast-acting 'bad' carbs in processed foods turn to sugar almost instantly; the body cannot use all this instant energy and stores it as fat. Whole foods do not turn into those sugars and are not stored as fat. If you're poor and live in inner cities, your access to whole foods is limited, and what is available is usually more expensive than what suburbanites can buy at their supermarkets. Food stores in poor areas usually charge more for everything they sell because they know their customers don't have enough money to go elsewhere; they're trapped.


When bad stuff is what is in the stores where you live, what are you going to do?
0
Log in or register to remove this ad..

SallyForth's Photo
Posted by SallyForth
  2,586 09 Jan 2014, 9:45 am

SallyForth      
     

Posts: 2,202
Independent Independent political affiliation
Politics: N/A
Money: 2,585.99

Truthwarrior757 » 08 Jan 2014 8:08 pm wrote:
Care to explain libs? why was that store so chaotic ? and the store in my home town is quiet peaceful and efficient? please explain? is it Bush's fault?


The answer to that is anything but simple. If you want to know why, it'll take a fair amount of looking up a lot of stuff on the internet.
0

SallyForth's Photo
Posted by SallyForth
  2,586 10 Jan 2014, 12:57 am

SallyForth      
     

Posts: 2,202
Independent Independent political affiliation
Politics: N/A
Money: 2,585.99

golfboy » 09 Jan 2014 8:50 am wrote:
"Bad" foods and "good" foods exist in EVERY store in EVERY neighborhood.
These people eat the "Bad" foods because they are too lazy to expend the effort to actually cook a healthy meal.


I've read up on it. Whole foods are less likely -- and more expensive -- to exist in inner-city markets.
I would very much like to see a credible source cited for that 2nd sentence.
0

SallyForth's Photo
Posted by SallyForth
  2,586 10 Jan 2014, 9:33 am

SallyForth      
     

Posts: 2,202
Independent Independent political affiliation
Politics: N/A
Money: 2,585.99

Southern indep » 10 Jan 2014 2:52 am wrote:
I have never been in a grocery store with out a produce section or one that did not sell wheat bread....
Good job on taking personal responsibility away from fat people
:clap:


Take it up with people who've actually studied it.


Limited resources and lack of access to healthy, affordable foods.
Low-income neighborhoods frequently lack full-service grocery stores and farmers’ markets where residents can buy a variety of fruits, vegetables, whole grains, and low-fat dairy products (Beaulac et al., 2009; Larson et al., 2009). Instead, residents – especially those without reliable transportation – may be limited to shopping at small neighborhood convenience and corner stores, where fresh produce and low-fat items are limited, if available at all. One of the most comprehensive reviews of U.S. studies examining neighborhood disparities in food access found that neighborhood residents with better access to supermarkets and limited access to convenience stores tend to have healthier diets and reduced risk for obesity (Larson et al., 2009).


When available, healthy food is often more expensive, whereas refined grains, added sugars, and fats are generally inexpensive and readily available in low-income communities (Drewnowski, 2010; Drewnowski et al., 2007; Drewnowski & Specter, 2004; Monsivais & Drewnowski, 2007; Monsivais & Drewnowski, 2009). Households with limited resources to buy enough food often try to stretch their food budgets by purchasing cheap, energy-dense foods that are filling – that is, they try to maximize their calories per dollar in order to stave off hunger (Basiotis & Lino, 2002; DiSantis et al., 2013; Drewnowski & Specter, 2004; Drewnowski, 2009). While less expensive, energy-dense foods typically have lower nutritional quality and, because of overconsumption of calories, have been linked to obesity (Hartline-Grafton et al., 2009; Howarth et al., 2006; Kant & Graubard, 2005).


When available, healthy food – especially fresh produce – is often of poorer quality in lower income neighborhoods, which diminishes the appeal of these items to buyers (Andreyeva et al., 2008; Zenk et al., 2006).

Low-income communities have greater availability of fast food restaurants, especially near schools (Fleischhacker et al., 2011; Larson et al., 2009; Simon et al., 2008). These restaurants serve many energy-dense, nutrient-poor foods at relatively low prices. Fast food consumption is associated with a diet high in calories and low in nutrients, and frequent consumption may lead to weight gain (Bowman & Vinyard, 2004; Pereira et al., 2005).

http://frac.org/initiatives/hunger-and- ... o-obesity/

Wheat bread turns to sugar the instant it hits your gut, and gets turned into fat in the bloodstream. Fast-acting carbs like that are quite fattening.
Last edited by SallyForth on 10 Jan 2014, 9:40 am, edited 1 time in total.
0

SallyForth's Photo
Posted by SallyForth
  2,586 10 Jan 2014, 4:57 pm

SallyForth      
     

Posts: 2,202
Independent Independent political affiliation
Politics: N/A
Money: 2,585.99

Technocrat » 10 Jan 2014 1:26 pm wrote:
What they ought to do is eliminate the entire welfare system and provide everyone with a type of check for basic living. Similar to that proposed by Milton Friedman. Not only would this eliminate a lot of government waste in bureaucracy, it would be more streamlined and still provide the social safety net. At the same time, the department of health and human services should offer bonus subsidies for healthful living purchases.


Refute the points made in Post #50. They were accumulated by people who work for companies whose business it is to provide information like that to other businesses and government. Companies like that do their level professional best to come up with reports on what's really out there, and if you don't mind, I choose to believe them.
0



Return to No Holds Barred Political Forum

Who is online

Users viewing this topic: No registered users and 1 guest

Who has visited this topic






cron