zlacker

>>atestu+(OP)
Speaking from personal experience, this is consistent with multiple doctors over the years recommending high-protein, low carb diets. (Clarification: low does not mean no carb.)

I don't understand people freaking out over this - outside of a purely political reflex - hell hath no fury like taking away nerds' Mountain Dew and Flamin' Hot Cheetos.

Nor do I understand the negative reactions to new restrictions on SNAP - candy and sugary drinks are no longer eligible.

>>schmuc+54
> Nor do I understand the negative reactions to new restrictions on SNAP - candy and sugary drinks are no longer eligible.

I can think of one issue here. Ultra-processed foods, candy, and sugary drinks are cheap and shelf-stable. They're cheap because they're subsidized. Fruits and vegetables are more expensive, and they don't last very long. So a person on a very limited SNAP budget will get less food under the new restrictions.

The answer, of course, is to make it so that fresh produce and other healthy options are cheaper than the junk food. I have a hard time seeing that happening, given how susceptible the administration is to being "lobbied".

>>baggac+441
I think you answered your own question with the last sentence. Have cattle ranchers, chicken farmers, vegetable and fruit farmers lobby for same or higher subsidies than grains.