September 2008 Weddings
xojo1
member
Dear Community,
Our tech team has launched updates to The Nest today. As a result of these updates, members of the Nest Community will need to change their password in order to continue participating in the community. In addition, The Nest community member's avatars will be replaced with generic default avatars. If you wish to revert to your original avatar, you will need to re-upload it via The Nest.
If you have questions about this, please email help@theknot.com.
Thank you.
Note: This only affects The Nest's community members and will not affect members on The Bump or The Knot.
Our tech team has launched updates to The Nest today. As a result of these updates, members of the Nest Community will need to change their password in order to continue participating in the community. In addition, The Nest community member's avatars will be replaced with generic default avatars. If you wish to revert to your original avatar, you will need to re-upload it via The Nest.
If you have questions about this, please email help@theknot.com.
Thank you.
Note: This only affects The Nest's community members and will not affect members on The Bump or The Knot.
How involved should gov't be in health?
There is an interesting article in my paper today about how involved the government should be in solving the obesity epidemic. You can read it here.
What do you think? Do you think the government should be involved in trying to solve this problem? Do you support some policies and not others? If you support involvement, how involved should they be?
Re: How involved should gov't be in health?
this is a sticky subject. I think, on a very basic level, the most appopiate intervention is akin to the 80s "Just Say No" campaign (but promoting healthy lifestyles). I am not oppossed to the nutritional labeling in resturants etc, but I do think its inappropiate to tax food on a different scale depending on value etc.
I think part of the long term "solution" needs to be more accessible/useful public transit - help promote walking etc PLUS help avoid the inevitable bottleneck as the population outgrows our current roads and personal vehicles are less affordable to operate. Likewise, city planning should encourage development of walkable shopping districts/downtowns/groceries relative to housing/developments (including in existing communities).
I'm all for better lunches in the schools as Mariela will be attending school one day and I don't want her eating crap all day because she doesn't get it at home. Watching Jaime Oliver's Food Revolution has certainly been eye opening to me. I don't agree with having soda machines in middle schools and even high schools to some degree as some kids just drink way too much soda/sugary drinks/etc. My 2 yo nephew has already had coffee and I totally judge my SIL for it!
I don't really see how the government can do much more than provide awareness to what people are putting in their mouths and what the long term harmful effects may or may not be. I don't think the government can say "don't eat that bag of Cheetos because you are considered obese by our standards." I am overweight and considered obese by the government's guidelines yet I can run in a 5k when some skinny minnys can't even do that. My annual tests all come out stellar except for my weight and part of it is genetic for me and I know some people who are not considered overweight that have poor bloodwork (high cholestorel, diabetes, etc.) Look at my DH, he is now pre-diabetic and he is no where near obese, he doesn't eat sweets, and usually doesn't eat too horribly.
Our state already has calorie amounts listed on certain menus and I think that's a great idea. It definitely makes me think twice before I order when we're dining out.
Oh, yes, school lunches are a big thing for me. The biggest thing that I think will help with that and just with affordability overall is some review of regulations and controls that makes it cheaper to produce healthier foods, which would help drive the cost of them down in comparison to junk (this could go in to a big corn subsidy rant, though, so I'll spare you all).
Illinois taxes soda and candy at the regular sales tax rate. Grocery items are taxed at a MUCH lower state rate and not taxed locally (state tax for grocery items is right at 1% compared to 6.something for everything else plus the local tax). I don't have a problem with this because the logic behind the low tax rate on grocery items is to keep those necessary items affordable for low income people. Soda and candy are not necessary. Now, I don't know if I'd be ok with taxing above the normal sales tax rate, but to exclude them from the reduction is fine.
Blog
While I like the concept, I do not think it will work. Honestly, I think this all starts with the parents. Yes, I am aware of how much it costs to put a nutritious meal together with those on a fixed income and those who live in single family homes. How else are children supposed to know what is good vs bad if they are not taught at home? Maybe incorporating a health & fitness course into classes would help.
Maybe if the costs of fruits and veggies were not so high vs the crappy processed food, then may be we might have less of an obesity problem (not just for kids but for everyone)
Don't get me wrong, when we grew up, we ate alot of processed stuff but back then we did not know how bad it was. It was affordable and avaialble (like the chef boyardee cans of raviolis).