The usual garbage produced by corporate-educated science apologists: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mGL3iT5MMdQ
This video describes the increasing obesity in the Third World and comes up with the most ridiculous explanations using selected anecdotal evidence. The only real information are as follows:
- Nestle, Kraft, and Unilever are engaging in their usual predatory marketing tactics–no different than drug dealing–targeting the desperately poor. Revealing this fact is designed to disguise the true agenda of these academic “do-gooders”.
- There is a genetic link initiated by the pregnant mother’s diet.
- Small farmers need to be supported and the value of their products allowed to rise (but not by the First World because that’s a Trojan Horse!)
- Obesity is not the result of “poor character.”
Why has the consumption of traditional foods reduced dramatically in the developing world? Is it because the people aren’t “educated” or lack “critical thinking”? Or has poverty combined with outside intervention actually reduced the wealth of the people such that they cannot afford to produce their traditional foods and therefore are forced to rely on corporate food/commodities depleted of all meaningful nutrients? Why wouldn’t an individual, family, or small community choose to be nutritionally self-reliant? Because government and industry working in partnership prevent such individuals from doing so by forcing them to assimilate and be “educated” to be dependent on industry and specialized “professionals” who have no holistic knowledge of economics and nutrition.
Obesity is a condition of malnourishment and stomach surgery won’t solve that. Giving all the obese poor people free surgery to reduce stomach capacity or free medical care won’t solve malnutrition. Malnutrition stimulates hunger especially for the insulin-resistant obese who are also burdened with lack of energy via inefficient ATP production.
The problem here isn’t lack of “science” it is simple brutal mathematics: Monopolized resources administered by a few over a burgeoning population of poor people. What is so difficult to understand?
A calorie is not a calorie: A calorie without nutrients starves the body because it requires more nutrients to metabolize it than a calorie that is accompanied by nutrients. Fat, protein, or sugar that is free of nutrients is like bad oil in an engine and sugar in the gas tank.
The concept that the problem is “food combining” of fat, sugar, and salt is simply bad science. The concept that the problem is “too much fat” or “too much sugar” is bad science. The concept that the problem is “snacking” or “availability of food” is simply bad science.
Who is “educating” the scientists? The same people who are monopolizing the resources.
Even “whole foods” can be packaged, monopolized, and marketed. Meat and dairy products are expensive to distribute whereas vegetables, fruits, and starches are cheap and with a high profit margin. Telling people that the cheap food is “healthier” is propaganda and bad science. Taxing “unhealthy food” merely makes it more valuable so that is also a “non-solution”.
The surefire “solution” is for the First World to stop interfering in the cultural matters of the Third World. Easier said than done. Academics and do-gooders, after all, have to justify their funding.