Slim people previously allowed themselves to believe their slimness is down to some vigourous yet invisible exercise of self control on their part. Now they're concluding their mythological will isn't what's keeping them slim or enabling them to become as thin as they wannabe, after all.
What do you know, its time to control the food environment via the proposal of a sugar tax. Apart from laughable cries of faddiction, they advance this volte face behind their beloved conceit.
I say suddenly sugar, but way back in the day it fat was the enemy, on the grounds that fat in your food meant fat or your arse: pause and let the elegance flow through you again. Fat was to be reduced from an horrific 30% or thereabouts of one's intake, to half that and even 10% when of course that didn't make fatz low-fat.
This caused industrial food to obey by accelerating its mis-use of sugar to compensate for qualities lost by the removal of fat. It has also obediently reversed this. It's accused of doing nothing as fat people are, due to it not having the demanded effect.
This morality play is presented by the slimstream as dirty tricks upon its poor innocence (i.e. belief it can walk on water when it comes to weight) as if taste is not in their mouths. Et voila we have another little turn of the macronutrient whirl.
If you want to talk about the so called 'evidence' in favour of this nonsense (give me strength). I haven't had the heart to abuse my brain with it anymore. There's no more appalled, hate reading style fun, its just risible. I do not like to make a habit of not reading what I criticise. In spite of this, I can confidently sum up from the premise laid out is that it consists of; lots and lots and lots and lots of sugar in your diet is 'bad' for you ergo sugar is {{{{poison}}}}.
Look closely at anything written about this currently and I think you'll find that summation punches way above its little weight in doing justice to the sugar ist poison hoodoo.
Suffice to say this will "work" just as well as any other intention of the 'obesity' agenda, but the most salient and sinister fact is the real agenda behind this tax is to establish funding streams (this would just be the start) to promote and enable even more invasive interference in people's lives.
Not being able to thus far has held them back. Heaven help us all-regardless of weight- if they get their grubby mitts on a steady stream of filthy lucre. 'Obesity' quackery has always struggled to gain secure funding so that it can abuse people in a more sustained all encompassing way.
Whatever nonsense is spoken about Mexico, France and Scandinavia, countries like the UK and America aren't them. Even if shame taxes did the job which they don't, the will just isn't there.
Permitting people to perish trying to trap and keep any and all [fat] people trapped into starvation either free form or surgical, but that too has trapped these societies into a certain course.
Science.
Certainly it would not only have been he right thing to do, it would have been far cheaper than tormenting people with lifestyle anorexia, butchering and mutilating them and leaving their weight unchecked to go where it may, whilst vigourous attempts are made to block, block, block things that would seem just as challenging on the face of it.
Why is their no means to block weight from getting higher if that's oh so
The locus of control of shame taxes is firmly in the hands of those proposing and seeking to gain from them.
Just as there's a pretense that becoming fat as a child must seal your fate, so should the insistence on allowing industrial fast food into schools, hospitals, every nook and cranny should been seen as having sealed the actual fate of the 'obesity' lobby.
Quackery has run its course, truth is the only way out of this false consciousness.
Fighting to get money to interfere with the big business you liberated, the reasons you went along haven't really abated, is frankly a futile waste of time.
This has all gone way beyond anything but progress through objective research into metabolic function. So remember to give the 'obesity' industry, public and private what it desires so much to give to especially to fat people. Starvation.......of funds.
Starve the bastards of funding, what they call "the costs of obesity" (i.e. them). Remove any being given to the worthless slimming industry and instead fund teams of the best and brightest minds to help us all grasp how our bodies produce weight.
Stumbling on how my body produced excess hunger was the way I ended the tyranny of hyperhunger. That was effectively a rebalancing of a certain aspect of metabolic function.
The control must be put in the hands of people. If you wish to campaign to control the food people eat, do that in the open. It's interesting that some openly say they wish to abolish tobacco products, but wouldn't have said that from the start.
The logic of low fat and/or low sugar was actually the end of the food industry as we know it.
The advice to cut fat was intended to direct us to the naturally low-fat foods that existed at the time, namely vegetables, fruits, beans, lentils, whole grains, and lean meats.Whether you think that's good or bad, that has to be the endgame. That and the insistence that weight is "behavioural" is at the heart of the why of micronutrient whirl really.
Metabolic manipulation is entirely feasible, logical and achievable, to manipulate it more effectively and painlessly. It's also potentially good for way more than mere metabolic function. It simply requires honest sustained effort. Something no one involved in such as 'sugar taxing' should be allowed anything to do with.
That in itself would be a refreshing change.
No comments:
Post a Comment