• protist@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      92
      arrow-down
      24
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      Healthy food is absolutely not a luxury item. I’ll accept the argument that the time to prepare healthy food is a luxury, but in almost every corner of the US you will find basic ingredients (eg rice, beans, carrots, celery, corn, potatoes, pasta) are way less expensive than the pre-prepared slop in boxes in the middle aisles of the store. People are addicted to that sugary shit and actively choose it

      • Jack Riddle@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        31
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        9 months ago

        “People are addicted” and “actively choose it” are contradictory statements. Addiction is a disease, not a personal failing.

        • GBU_28@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          9 months ago

          I’d only refute the "active"part.

          You physically choose to locomote towards the counter to make the purchase, you physically choose to lift the cup to your mouth.

          The problem is your own mind is working against you to make that physical choice seem absolutely mandatory, via the importance of chemical signaling

        • moriquende@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          9 months ago

          Agree it’s a disease, but it’s also a choice. You choose to buy a big gulp when you crave it.

        • gears@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          9 months ago

          They still are choosing sugar?

          I’m addicted to nicotine and I actively choose to hit my vape, for example.

      • original2@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        I know about the uk but not USA. Food inequality is quite a big problem for low-income households.

        https://www.turn2us.org.uk/T2UWebsite/media/Documents/Communications documents/Living-Without-Report-Final-Web.pdf

        (Millions of Britons live without a freezer or oven)

        https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8976549/

        (A large number of britons who dont own a car live over a mile from an outlet selling healthy food)

        Etc

      • Thwompthwomp@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        I was also reading an article about nutritional quality of food itself has been declining over the last 50 years. So to get the same nutritional amount, you need to eat more food period.

        There’s also bigger systemic issues about food access that is driving people to “choose” it. Lack of time, cost, availability, transportation all factor in that are beyond a simple idea if a person having a pure choice between two equal (or even somewhat equal) options.

      • onkyo@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        Many people in the US also live in food deserts where easy access to healthy food IS a luxuary due to simply not being able to buy it where they live or work.

    • IWantToFuckSpez@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      25
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      9 months ago

      Maybe it’s a bit of both though. People still have free will. You can eat unhealthy shit and not become morbidly obese.

    • GBU_28@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      Healthy food is very cheap.

      Time to prepare and access may contribute, but the food itself is not a luxury item.

      • fireweed@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        This little bit of news has been hitting the media circuit this week: Americans are eating a meal’s worth of calories in snack foods every day

        …the average American had between 400 and 500 calories worth of snacks a day, which is typically more than what they ate at breakfast. Even worse, the snacks usually carried little to no nutritional value

        All food has gotten expensive due to inflation/greedflation, but (at least in my area) snacks, desserts, and some sugary drinks got hit especially hard. Except maybe for people living in food deserts, snacks are way more of a luxury good than “whole” foods are nowadays.

    • FierroGamer@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      9 months ago

      Why is it either or? I can see a world where computer enthusiasts tend to be a bit more physically inactive than the median

    • daltotron@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      9 months ago

      Also fucked up is that fat doesn’t = bad. I dunno when this came about but you can be unhealthy and skinny as well, and you can be unhealthy and jacked. I won’t say that, kind of along the lines of a bodybuilder, it’s easy to be healthy and be fat, but you can do it. Sumo wrestlers. You want that subcutaneous fat, and not that visceral fat, and you wanna have good cardio and heart health.

      Part of the reason why people become super fat is because they enter a kind of death spiral where they don’t believe they’ll ever get better, and then they eat more, because what’s the point if you’ll never get better at all. Part of the reason why they think they’ll never get better is because people are constantly telling them that’s the case, and that they’re at fault for being the way they are, when usually people get really fat through some childhood trauma or mental disorder. I’m not gonna blame someone for that, or demand they “take responsibility” for it. Especially if them “taking responsibility” for it just ends up making them eat more slop.

      It’s really not that complicated. Positive reinforcement and active help is a lot better in these situations than demanding that people be held accountable for being so fat, or that it’s their choice, or whatever. I don’t really care to argue the semantics of philosophies of “free will” or whatever, I’m just saying people need to not be dicks to fat people, because that’s more productive to making them be healthy.

      • kase@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        9 months ago

        Hear hear. And it wouldn’t matter to me even if being fat were automatically a death sentence and the only reason people got that way was laziness. Even if it were a simple choice that someone made, it’s still none of my business, y’know?

        • daltotron@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          It’s both none of my business, and being a dick isn’t an effective way to get them to change. I dunno why so many people kind of have that as like, a default response. I guess it makes sense to get mad when someone you care about “chooses” to self-destruct, but people are complicated and delicate machines, and they require better maintenance than the nuclear option, and ultimatums.

          I think part of why people have this sort of desire for everyone to have agency, they have this narrative, is because it’s the only way that they’ll be able to keep dealing with all these shitty things in their life. It’s like a really bad survival strategy, or something, people become kind of fucked up and then they only function if they have this dire sense of internal pressure at all times, that they’re responsible for everything that happens in their life. It’s weird, and I don’t really get it.

    • lobut@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      I think you have great points, but I also don’t want to absolve personal responsibility entirely. I think I saw Boogie for on the Financial Audit and spends $900 per month on fast food? There’s definitely food deserts and busy people with busy lives and bad education. Absolutely. I also find that healthier living was easier in the UK as grocery stores had ready-made meals easier to access with better options. However, I do think there’s also a component of personal accountability for those that know the right thing to do and choose not to.

      • KevonLooney@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        Both things can be true. People can be addicted or have limited access to food, but still choose poorly from their limited choices. It’s a “diminished capacity” to make and choose healthy food.

        Yes, premade food has gotten more expensive and worse nutritionally. So choose better among your limited choices. There’s no one who actually has no options for fruit, vegetables, or meat. It just takes time to shop and cook.

    • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      I don’t disagree with you, but one aspect I think people overlook is addiction. Food has become a cheap form of entertainment for people who don’t have time to actually do anything fun, and food has also been formulated to be as addictive as possible through both chemistry and psychological trickery.

      No one wants to talk about this because it asks uncomfortable questions about free will.

  • xav@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    73
    ·
    9 months ago

    The reality is probably that kernel developers don’t get any younger nowadays. And believe me, when you get older, have children and less free time, your waistline suffers a bit. Or even a bit more than a bit.

  • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldM
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    39
    ·
    9 months ago

    The one advantage of being significantly ill this year is that I can finally fit into large shirts and medium pants after years of XXL and XL of the former and latter.

    I mean the rest sucks, but that’s pretty nice.

  • BeigeAgenda@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    30
    ·
    9 months ago

    It’s all the bloat in those distros that is transferred to the waistline, back in the day we used WindowMaker. Not all that fancy Gnome and KDE stuff.

  • skeeter_dave@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    25
    ·
    9 months ago

    I’m xxl but I’m also built like a forklift. When I was younger I could throw rolls of vinyl flooring over my shoulder. I wish I took better care of my knees though.

  • ares35@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    9 months ago

    not me! woohoo. same XL then as now.

    of course, back then when i was younger i favored oversized shirts. now they just fit.

    • Zipitydew@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      9 months ago

      I’ve technically gone down from XL. Seems L often fit me better now. But I’ve not changed.

      Seems like sizes have shifted higher. Only evidence I have for this are souvenir t-shirts from 20 years ago that say XL. Which are roughly same size as L shirts I’ve bought recently.

  • Kjatten@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 months ago

    Feel bad for all my tall bros. Hard to find a shirt that fits, always gotta be to short or too tight, gotta go larger.

  • ZetaLightning94@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    9 months ago

    To be fair, I’m still a large in my old shirts but an xlt in new shirts. Not always us getting bigger, but the cuts getting smaller