Right. It's habitual/cultural. A lot of kids are like that when they are young. If the parents keep putting good food in front of them, though, and the other kids around them have an interest in food, then they change. So you have one generation of Marin eaters raising a new generation of Marin eaters. England is similar to the U.S. The Northern working class lads eat appallingly, whereas the Londoners are starting to adopt a cosmopolitan diet.
Thereby demonstrating my point. How many people in Owsley County are taking dietary advice from National Geographic?
“It has nothing to do with its calories,” says endocrinologist Robert Lustig of the University of California, San Francisco. “Sugar is a poison by itself when consumed at high doses.” Johnson summed up the conventional wisdom this way: Americans are fat because they eat too much and exercise too little. But they eat too much and exercise too little because they’re addicted to sugar, which not only makes them fatter but, after the initial sugar rush, also saps their energy, beaching them on the couch. “The reason you’re watching TV is not because TV is so good,” he said, “but because you have no energy to exercise, because you’re eating too much sugar.” The solution? Stop eating so much sugar. When people cut back, many of the ill effects disappear. The trouble is, in today’s world it’s extremely difficult to avoid sugar, which is one reason for the spike in consumption. Manufacturers use sugar to replace taste in foods bled of fat so that they seem more healthful, such as fat-free baked goods, which often contain large quantities of added sugar. http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2013/08/sugar/cohen-text
Just to clarify, this is artificial sugar right? Not just carbs, which can be natural? What I mean, is it ok to eat things like bananas, grapes, etc, which have natural sugars? Or are they off too?
Interesting piece that appeared in my newsfeed today: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/linda...d-decisions-make-perfect-sense_b_4326233.html When I got pregnant the first time, I was living in a weekly motel. I had a minifridge with no freezer and a microwave. I was on WIC. I ate peanut butter from the jar and frozen burritos because they were 12/$2. Had I had a stove, I couldn't have made beef burritos that cheaply. And I needed the meat, I was pregnant. I might not have had any prenatal care, but I am intelligent enough to eat protein and iron whilst knocked up. I know how to cook. I had to take Home Ec to graduate high school. Most people on my level didn't. Broccoli is intimidating. You have to have a working stove, and pots, and spices, and you'll have to do the dishes no matter how tired you are or they'll attract bugs. It is a huge new skill for a lot of people. That's not great, but it's true. And if you ******** it up, you could make your family sick. We have learned not to try too hard to be middle-class. It never works out well and always makes you feel worse for having tried and failed yet again. Better not to try. It makes more sense to get food that you know will be palatable and cheap and that keeps well. Junk food is a pleasure that we are allowed to have; why would we give that up? We have very few of them. /quote
http://www.salon.com/2013/11/26/conservative_think_tank_appalled_when_guys_with_mbas_take_over/ Many people noticed how much the organization had changed during the recent government shutdown/”defund Obamacare” fight, a giant waste of everyone’s time and general self-inflicted disaster engineered and designed by Heritage Action, the 501(c)(4) “pressure group” Heritage launched in 2010. On the right, there was much consternation over the direction this once-respected think tank had taken. Truth be told, Heritage was always mostly political hacks, they just used to be effective political hacks with a realistic agenda. What was different now was the cheerful absense of any coherent and/or achievable goal — beyond fundraising and image-boosting for Heritage Action itself. Many blamed this on new Heritage President Jim DeMint, a former congressman not particularly known for his intellect, but Ioffe says the new tone at Heritage, and the tactics of Heritage Action, were both largely directed by Michael Needham, a 31-year-old former Giuliani staffer brought on to be the CEO of Heritage Action when it launched. Needham is a child of privilege, the Manhattan-raised son of a banker and a Saks executive. Basically the minute he was hired to run Heritage Action, he began acting like any upjumped MBA with an executive position. He and his lieutenant, “a 31-year-old evangelical named Tim Chapman who had a few years experience working on the Hill,” promptly took over the organization, assisted by DeMint, who took over as president when his kindly old predecessor retired. “I was always struck at how they felt absolutely no intellectual modesty,” says the former veteran Heritage staffer. “They felt totally on par with people who had spent thirty years in the field and had Ph.D.s.” /quote
Slightly off topic, but this is how I feel when Tea Partiers feel that they know more than PhD scientists about evolutionary biology, economics, and climate science.
Indeed. But is an attitude shared by more educated people, specially MBA types, they have no respect for people who is not about money.
I rarely say this, but Alex Pareene makes an interesting point in that article... Yes, what happened to Heritage — what has old Heritage hands appalled and quitting or talking to liberal New Republic reporters — is what Heritage has long argued should happen to basically all large American institutions, from the schools to the government to corporations. They are gutting the place and remaking it according to business school rules divined from decades of corporate consulting and leveraged buyouts. The overpaid, underperforming old-timers obviously don’t like it, but the new Heritage is more efficient without them. It’s just interesting how so many of them object to being at the mercy of some business school assholes with no respect for credentials or experience, though. I mean, take it fromthis inspiring Heritage Foundation ode to the wonderful work of private equity firms, which “make something busted luster again,” mostly by firing everyone: “Whatever the problems, if under the flaws remains something of real value, then with the right tools, that value can be brought to the surface again.” Your think tank just had to be destroyed in order to find what was of real value, which turned out to be, I guess, your email list. Good call.
Maybe cocky young MBAs. But not "educated" in general. My son is at a research university now. People there take pride in knowing their field, but they sure as hell don't think that just because they are good at physics that they know more than economists, historians, or chemists do in their fields. Irony being that MBAs are the least capable of being experts outside their field. MBA aren't the brightest of grad students, as a general rule.
My older brother, with an undergrad degree in accounting and an MBA, would agree with this. Mostly because of all the times an MBA consultant tried to implement strategies that managed to be, paradoxically, focused on the bottom line while ignoring what the rest of the proverbial books said was actually going on.
Eh, it's simpler than that. The MBA students have lower IQs. You gotta be effing smart to be a PhD student in physics or philosophy at UChicago. You don't have to be terribly bright to get into the MBA program. Modestly intelligent, hard working, and a bit lucky will do.
No one ever learned anything in kindergarten which couldnt be overcome by an MBA. For example. Kindergarten: When you make a mess you are responsible for cleaning it up. MBA: What do you mean I have to clean it up? Its not in my backyard. http://voices.suntimes.com/early-an...ntain-of-refinery-waste-be-your-new-neighbor/ This lesson brought to you by the Petcoke brothers.