No fatties allowed...how does the Navy reduce the displacement tonnage of its sailors?

[insanebikerboy]

This is often stated, but is objectively false.

Junk foods and pre-prepared meals are some of the most expensive items in the grocery store. Most fresh produce is dirt cheap, although there are some money traps (I'm looking at you, grapes). Frozen produce is where you start to get expensive. Walmart Supercenters sell cheap, fresh produce all over the country. I guarantee you can find items like potatoes, rice, corn, tomatoes, broccoli, green beans, apples, oranges, and bananas everywhere for extremely low cost whereas a large bag of Doritos cost about $7 (after tax) - that $7 can buy a week's supply of bananas, apples, or broccoli for a family of 4.

Not to mention the exponentially more expensive cost of getting McDonald's or KFC instead of whipping up a quick meal. I also can't prove it with a study, but I tend to notice that the vice for obese men seems to be copious amounts of alcohol with way too large portions of red meat and bacon while for women it seems to be iced coffee or frappuccinos with way too many desserts. For kids, it's because mom and dad put too much junk food, frozen dinners, and ice cream in the house... all of which are expensive, optional food and drink items. When the kids say "I'm hungry" it's okay to say "great, dinner will be in 2 hours. Have an apple."

People are electing the perception of convenience over money. Hence why I think aggressive ad campaigns would go a long way. I also think that it's more likely that people are shopping like their parents, and maybe in the 1970s-1990s it was true that instant mashed potatoes, hamburger helper, and frozen hot dogs were the cheapest way to feed a family so like father/son, like mother/daughter... but it's not true anymore.

I can’t speak for everyone, but using myself as an example, I grew up in an extremely poor area and it was cheaper to go buy a box of some high fat/sugar, ultra processed food than to buy fresh food and meats. Unsurprisingly, we had a lot of fat kids in my school.

I know anecdotal evidence doesn’t prove a theorem, I’ll just say that in some areas of the country, it is 100% true that it’s cheaper to buy the unhealthy stuff.

 

[Spekkio]

It's a very real thing in many cases, though I would submit that the problem is time and energy just as much as money. You go to places like the Eastern or Western Districts of Baltimore, and there are no grocery stores in walking distance, only sketchy convenience stores. So it's a long walk plus a train ride or a taxi/Uber to get a decent selection at a decent price. If you work a menial or manual labor job with an irregular schedule and have small kids, I doubt you're getting a sitter for hours so you can go grocery shopping. And are you really going to spend an hour cooking from scratch every night after doing a job like that, when you only have a couple hours between getting home and going to bed, then getting up early to do it again?

Same situation in rural areas but replace it with a Dollar General and probably having a (crappy) car, but with longer drives.

This is a huge assumption that grocery stores are nearby.

I know anecdotal evidence doesn’t prove a theorem, I’ll just say that in some areas of the country, it is 100% true that it’s cheaper to buy the unhealthy stuff.

We shouldn't use edge cases as a measure of central tendency nor let perfect be the enemy of good.

~40% of the country is obese and another 30-40% are overweight. The average commute to a supermarket is 2.2 miles, and the average household has 1.88 automobiles. And as far as food prices - again, not really proving anything when times have changed.

Big bad corporate Walmart actually did wonders in bringing healthy, nutritious food to formerly improverished neighborhoods over the last quarter century.

I will concede that city culture revolves around eating street food, which has gotten insanely expensive (and large portions) over the last few decades. But most cities (not Baltimore) see obesity rates well below national average. There's a lot of prongs to that problem, some of which are skyrocketing local real estate / rental costs, taxes, and labor costs via increases in minimum wage.

But hey, maybe buy a banana from the local fruit market instead of a 1/4 lb bacon, 3 eggs, and cheese sandwich on a 500 calorie bagel for $15.99.

When we get obesity down to 10% and overweight under 40% we can start discussing how to attack the edge cases. Right now, it's just a red herring excuse.

I've never met anyone who is fat and actually wants to be fat. Weight loss is a many billions of dollars per year industry without thinking about GLP1s. The idea that we need more disincentives flies in the face of all that.

It's not a matter of whether they want to be overweight or the specific cost of GLP-1. Obesity is linked to a whole slew of other conditions that can be extremely expensive to treat, from chronic joint pain, to sleep disorders, to mental illnesses, to diabetes, to cardiac complications.

It is only fair that they pay the price for that risk, similar to how a 22 year old male driver pays out the nose for car insurance. Never met a 22 year old who wants to kill a family of 4 in a deadly automobile crash, but unfortunately it happens.

 

[taxi1]

But most cities (not Baltimore) see obesity rates well below national average.

An interesting thing about cities is that you typically walk your ass off to get anywhere, at least in a walkable and not drivable one. Spending a long weekend in downtown Philly, the car never left the garage but we hoofed it for miles. My daughter lives in Manhattan with no car and a shoe budget. You definitely see fewer fat people compared to rural America.

It's not a matter of whether they want to be overweight or the specific cost of GLP-1. Obesity is linked to a whole slew of other conditions that can be extremely expensive to treat, from chronic joint pain, to sleep disorders, to mental illnesses, to diabetes, to cardiac complications.

It is only fair that they pay the price for that risk, similar to how a 22 year old male driver pays out the nose for car insurance.

We cross into the 'societal good' territory is my point. Purely from economics it would make sense for the government to hand out GLP1s for free (assuming we paid only the production cost and not the profit), resulting in long term health care savings orders of magnitude exceeding the cost of the free GLP1s.

Right now, my insurance helps pay for the obese people who cost it more. You want them to pay more to offset. I want them to not be fat, which will result in them costing less and all of our rates go down. GLP1s are a powerful tool to do that.

Kind of like how vaccines are a powerful public health tool.

It echoes of the debate on demographics and replacement rates. We need kids if we want to have future taxpayers and soldiers, current fertility rates are below replacement which is a societal problem, yet having a kid is still treated as a 100% burden on the parents.

And god forbid if your kid screams on the airplane.