zlacker

[return to "Eat Real Food"]
1. schmuc+54[view] [source] 2026-01-07 17:37:52
>>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.

◧◩
2. bruceb+L4[view] [source] 2026-01-07 17:40:33
>>schmuc+54
Pure partisan spite. The gov't not spending money on candy and sugary drinks is good. Just like when Michelle Obama pushed for better school lunches.
◧◩◪
3. ecshaf+kf[view] [source] 2026-01-07 18:15:54
>>bruceb+L4
One of the best litmus tests for Democrat or Republican I have found is "Should people on food stamps be able to buy mountain dew / candy / etc with them?", very low false positive rate in either direction.

But regardless I have it on very good authority that with the BBB some within the Republican party wanted to limit EBT to only be able to purchase healthy food. No soda, no candy, no chips, etc. A couple calls from Coke, Pepsi, etc lobbyists shot that down.

◧◩◪◨
4. acoust+Dk1[view] [source] 2026-01-07 22:51:59
>>ecshaf+kf
People should be able to get cash transfers to buy goods on the general market. There shouldn't be food stamps.

The success of SNAP comes despite its inherent inefficiency, friction, and the indignity of its limitations. We structure the program the way we do in order to mollify voters who twitch at the idea of the poor ever enjoying anything.

Inequality isn't just about healthcare costs, biological metrics, etc. It is also deeply corrosive socially and psychologically, and this side of things is systemically underappreciated in policy circles.

To be sure, our food and diets are bad. Americans broadly should eat healthier. But are society's interests really better served by insisting that a poor child not be allowed to have a cake and blow out the candles on his birthday, the way all of his friends do?

◧◩◪◨⬒
5. modusp+aB1[view] [source] 2026-01-08 00:32:28
>>acoust+Dk1
It seems unnecessarily reductive to insist that we must choose between endlessly subsidizing Mountain Dew and Twinkies or that poor children should never be allowed to have cake.
[go to top]