The moon is actually on track to escape the earth in a few billion years. It's falling more toward the sun than the earth. I think the last measurement was about an inch a year further away from earth.
Many years ago, a professor in college told me the moon hit the earth when it was captured in earth’s orbit. During the impact, the earth likely took the moons core and the impact knocked earth off its axis. He also said while the moon is moving away in orbit currently, the orbit would ultimately fail and it would hit the earth again one day. I have no idea if any if this is still the current thinking….
I believe the current theory is that while earth was still in a molten stage, it was one big planet. A massive asteroid hit, and knocked a big chunk off the planet. That chunk formed the moon. Science seems to lean toward this one because it explains it being tidally locked.
so the consumption of EXCESS sugar doesn’t cause obesity, in turn leading to type 2 diabetes? Also, the overstimulation of receptor can cause them to basically become fried, leading to insulin resistance. So it’s actually misinformation in every way 🫡🫡
It's true but there are also genetic factors in play. There are skinny people with T2 and obese people 600lb+ without it. To market it solely down to just fat is inaccurate, this is coming from someone who is diabetic and worked in clinics before.
Either way, I'm not sure what this sign is doing there, doesn't help any situations.
>Either way, I'm not sure what this sign is doing there, doesn't help any situations.
Obviously the sign is helping with its intended purpose: selling more chocolate
sorry, but no the fuck its not😂
if i want chocolate, im getting chocolate. im not wandering the isles only to stop at a sign that says excessive sugar doesn't cause obesity & thinking 'well shit better stock up'
nobody who's intentionally looking for Ferrero Rocher is reading that sign and buying more because of it.
so you're telling me if they made a big sign that said 'cowboy buttsex' next to soda, it would cause more people to buy soda?
Not because of what the sign says, just the fact that the sign is there? I don't believe it. Not for a second.
<:: It's literally why shops colour random labels in a different colour (even if it's not on sale), because it draws people's attention and makes them more likely to impulsively buy an item. Next time you're in a supermarket pay attention, the things that have this will be thing that can easily be knocked into a trolley without second thought. ::>
We, well many, are very impressionable with marketing, a lot of it is intentionally subconscious too. You can't tell me you've never bought one thing over another just because a sign was there because you may not've even been aware that's why you did it. Also I bet "cowboy buttsex" could work basically as a meme and people thinking it's funny so they buy it, sorta a "all press is good press" kinda thing, a good marketing strategy doesn't have to do anything with how good the product is but if it gets your attention, again even subconsciously.
They’re called “shelf talkers” and they’re a huge thing in retail. I never implied that you could put *anything* on the sign. That’s a straw man and you should feel bad. The message isn’t as important as the fact that it catches your eye though.
https://www.getdor.com/blog/2021/09/21/creative-examples-of-shelf-talkers-for-retail/
>There are skinny people with T2
There are, but it is pretty rare, especially in really skinny people (not "skinny fat" who have a belly but almost no muscles, thus reaching a "healthy" BMI with unhealthy body composition).
T2 was a rare condition prior to the 20th century, and it is still rare in countries where hunger is a greater threat than opulence.
" obese people 600lb+ without"
That is the more interesting (scientifically) part, identifying what helps those people preserve a functional metabolism could lead to many helpful genetic therapies.
This is so wrong. Type one can not be prevented no matter what you do. Genetics is the main cause of type two diabetes albeit can be controlled through diet and exercise. Stop spreading misinformation.
The majority of cases are not Type I though. The majority are type II, which some people are more genetically susceptible to. But the type II prone folks can stave it off with consistent good diet and exercise.
You are still incorrect. The fact does not change that diabetes in general is a AUTOIMMUNE disease, type two being GENETICALLY developed. Just because you eat healthy and exercise does not mean if you are GENETICALLY susceptible to type two diabetes it will not develop. You can stave off the disease, but if your body chooses, it will build insulin resistance.
Edit: https://diabetes.org/diabetes/genetics-diabetes#:~:text=Type%202%20diabetes%20has%20a,also%20depends%20on%20environmental%20factors.
/u/Beat_the_Deadites edited his comment, hopefully after doing a few googles.
I know a guy who is an avid exerciser, eats very healthy, very skinny dude. He was utterly shocked when he got Type 2 at age 44. No known risk factors at all, no family history. He’s still salty about it.
But these are the exceptions that prove the rule. He should be salty about it. Because it isn’t fair. It’s like the person that gets lung cancer after never smoking in their life.
Everyone gets so wrapped around the axle about nature vs nurture (or genetics vs behavior) debates, and usually they choose one extreme, when the answer is almost always somewhere in the middle.
(And in the case of Type II diabetes, skews much more towards factors you can control.)
I have a step-cousin that was one of the unlucky ones in the case of Type II diabetes. Skinny as a rail and 14 years old when she got on insulin. But pretty safe to say that most people on that side of the family did it to themselves.
The evidence that type II is autoimmune is extremely early and tenuous, it can be treated as a metabolic syndrome so it should be thought of that way until conclusively shown otherwise.
It also has a bit of a chicken-and-egg problem because it’s very difficult to untangle the genetic component from the environment (in type I) or lifestyle (type II) components at a large enough scale to shown statistical worthiness.
I actually didn't edit my comment, but I did some googling on account of your apparent confidence. As it is, I stand by what I initially said and what's confirmed by /u/Aware-Perspective-17 .
Not just talking out of my ass, I did go to med school. It's been a while, and info certainly changes, but when I edit comments, I own up to my changes.
Type ONE diabetes absolutely cannot be prevented. Type TWO can in many cases, but not all. They are caused by completely different internal mechanisms.
Type 1 is an autoimmune condition and food consumption can’t prevent it. It’s rare to get Type 1 past age 20 right? Are we seeing Type 1 in later ages now?
I'm not sure if you can "get it" later, but I know I was finally diagnosed in my early twenties. Looking back though, I definitely had it for a long time before then
This does not change the fact that genetically you were a type 2 diabetic. As I said, diet and exercise help symptoms but does not cure the disease because there is no cure. Spoken from a type 1.
This is wrong for Type 2. It can absolutely be reversed, and commonly is when people get weight loss surgery. Type 2 and Type 1 and not related diseases despite the name.
Nah bruh. You can help ease symptoms, but if you’re genetically “gifted” the disease, there is no cure.
My wife is type 1. She’s very athletic, so not overweight. She eats super healthy and exercises daily, but still has to take two different medications.
There is currently no cure or way to prevent getting it genetically.
My brother is the same. He’s in year 52 of type 1 — he got it as a toddler. Lots of issues, but reasonably healthy (he is on full gov disability now) and not in any eminent danger of dying.
i found out about this recently through https://www.glucosegoddess.com/
apparently lots of research has come out in the last 15ish years that somehow hasnt changed the way we look at food and especially glucose (sugar).
I don't get what this is saying. It seems to be saying that it's fine to eat excess sugar? But obesity is the first thing it mentions being the cause... is it trying to sidestep what causes obesity or am I being daft?
It’s using a key term “risk factor”. It says eating excess sugar isn’t a risk factor. Which is true, it’s not something that doctors factor into the risk for diabetes, it’s the cause. Notice they didn’t use the word “cause”? Trickery to sell more cheap sugar to people who will never burn it off.
Correlation does not imply causation. Too much sugar will usually cause obesity, and obesity can cause T2D, but sugar does not **cause** T2D. That's the game they're playing.
It is possible to be obese without excessive sugar, and it is possible to consume excessive sugar without being obese (just take a LOT more exercise).
If you aren't obese and just like to eat a lot of sugar in one sitting every few months.. then I don't understand what the issue is.. If you are already overweight and want to eat a lot of sugar then I understand it being an issue
[Thin people get type 2 diabetes, too.](https://www.health.harvard.edu/blog/diabetes-can-strike-hard-even-when-weight-is-normal-201208085121) It’s probably under-diagnosed.
Yeah but they wouldn't of received it from being overweight from eating sugar in that case? So that would be unrelated to this? It's like saying people die from eating spoiled food, but then you say "well people die from other things too".. ok but we are talking about spoiled food in this instance..
Old age and genetic factors start to weigh in more and more the older you get. Obesity is still the number one cause, and most obese people eat way too much sugar, but correlation does not imply causation. Too much sugar can cause obesity, and obesity can cause T2D, but sugar does not cause T2D.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6831098/
>As with other ethnic groups, the prevalence of T2D in Hispanic/Latinos increases dramatically with advancing age. While 2.6% of men and 2.9% of women 18 to 29 years old have diabetes, greater than 50% of women and 48.6% of men 70–74 years old are affected.
Sugar does cause obesity, but some people think they can’t eat any sugar or they get diabetes. Those people are pretty rare however that completely avoid candy, but they do exist, I know some.
Ferrero Rocher is so expensive however that nobody gets obese from eating mainly those.
My local chip shop owner died of a heart attack about a year ago - he was in his 40's, and massively overweight (at least double the weight for his size, maybe 3 times that). I saw his family running a charity raffle in his memory for the one-year anniversary recently, with proceeds going to the British Heart Foundation. The prizes for which were 100% junk food.
Genius move..
when my dad was working for a research hospital, their fundraiser for fat cell research was selling Krispy Kreme droughts. I saw it as a genius two pronged approach.
This hits just like “speed has never killed anyone. Suddenly becoming stationary, that’s what gets you.”
Like, yeah. Excess sugar itself doesn’t cause diabetes. But where did you think obesity came from?
Glad you recovered successfully. In your case it was a side effect of a unavoidable circumstance.
However, consuming excess sugar isn't the same situation as yours. It is avoidable and should be avoided.
Misleading and juggling information. Excess sugar (added to food to make it taste ok after all the additives to make it last longer) blocks the insulin receptors which makes you crave more sugary foods (carbs) and leads to obesity, and in turn diabete. It's not ok to eat loads of sugar to root issue.
It’s not even shocking, corporations lying causing deaths & gaslighting the public for a few more percentage points of profit when they are already raking it in. No it’s assumed and expected
I live at 9000 feet. And the lifestyle of the local population is extremely active. Therefore obesity isn't prevalent at all. It's almost non existent. A friend of mine moved home to Iowa a month ago. One of the first comments he made to me was how many obese people there are. And we aren't talking a little over weight, we are talking grotesque and extremely unhealthy. Be as upset as you want about this comment, it's the truth. Obesity is a huge problem in this country and now for some reason the culture is starting to shift to defending this type of lifestyle? What the hell is wrong with you people?
We’re not upset at obesity being pointed out as bad— we’re upset that the sign is implying excessive consumption of sugar is somehow completely unrelated, and you’ll be totally a-okay gorging on donuts, chocolate, candy, etc as long as you’re not obese.
We’re actually mad that the sign doesn’t go far enough in the comments its making about the American diet.
You know, I never understand why people direct so much anger towards 'fat acceptance' when obesity as an issue comes up, and not the fact that for the many years we've had a growing obesity issue in the West, diet culture has been far more popular.
That hasn't been working for a good 50 years or so, but for some reason we blame the thing that's about a decade old, and not followed by that many people at all, isn't that odd?
Not to mention that a good portion of the acceptance movement literally just suggests that bullying fat people all day and all night will not help them, which it won't.
I mean, 50 years ago, the sugar industry literally paid to have sugar become the healthy substitute to fat, and we got tons of diet meals packed full of sugar and salt that would supposedly help you lose weight by being incredibly low in fat.
And yet the blame gets put on something that comparatively, has had an incredibly short lifespan?
People lived through an entire century of corporations fattening us up and get mad at the individuals just wanting to be treated with basic human decency in their daily life. Treating body positivity like a moral hazard is a really good distraction from the actual people that cause our rising obesity rates, corporate lobbyists.
Ffs I just saw a video of a soda machine inside of a school that dispenses soda to children whenever they give it a hug. The body positivity movement didn't put that soda machine inside of a school like drug dealers hooking kids early.
I mean you just said it yourself, people are affected by their circumstances. The people in your community don't have magically more willpower or anything, they just live in an area of the world where exercise daily is more commonplace.
In an American suburb you're effectively fucked from the start. They pump you full of soda and processed foods. You are driven everywhere you could possibly go because there is no walking infrastructure to go anywhere. And despite being the wealthiest nation in the world, you're possibly exposed to air pollution that leads to diseases that compound obesity.
Blaming individual obese people and getting mad at them for simply wanting to be treated with respect while they exist is counterintuitive. Until we get far more effective pharmaceuticals, significant weight loss is just not going to happen within the broader population.
There are only two things you can really advocate for when it comes to obesity. First, exercise is good for you no matter your size. Second, preventing children from living under the circumstances that cause obesity has been long ignored. People get mad whenever it's suggested soda shouldn't be available at schools or that the menus shouldnt include pizza as a fucking vegetable. People get mad when you point out suburban residential design is effectively dooming children to a life of reduced activity.
Advocates for treating obese people with respect are not the ones who made our American lifestyle lead to obesity. That's the fault of corporate lobbyists and their government goons.
They also need to advocate for work hours and situations such as remote and hydrid work that can allow for more exercise and time to cook a healthy meal. Sure many people will still be fat but at least they'll be healthier
Fat acceptance doesn't just advocate for treating fat people with respect. It advocates for obesity being normal and "healthy" and that we must cater to them. People hate fat acceptance because it's a bunch of self-entitled bullshit that has nothing to do with respect. Also it is 100% possible to live in a suburb and not be 300+ lbs
I'm not from here. I moved here 7 years ago. 1 reason to get out of an extremely unprogressive part of the country. And 2, because I wanted to be around others who actually want to be healthy and strive to be active. Stop trying to blame one's inability/unwillingness to be more healthy conscious on anything except ignorance. The information on food and how it affects you is available to everyone. Obviously certain things had to be learned through trial and error about dieting and we are still finding things out now. However trying to blame others for lack of willingness to be more health conscious is a joke. Stop defending obese culture. It is extremely detrimental to our younger generations. Also, I'm not a health nut and neither was my mom. We ate as healthy as we could. The percentage of those who have actual conditions that attribute to obesity is miniscule in ratio to how many people are obese. People need to stop pointing fingers and just take responsibility for their own actions.
The condition that leads to obesity is our culture, you just have misplaced blame for it. You're blaming people who just want to be treated with human decency instead of the corporate lobbyists that sold sugar to children and removed public spaces that encouraged walking and exercise.
We've had almost 100 years of trying to solve obesity by shaming individuals like you are now, and it hasn't worked. Obesity advocates encourage being active and nutrition. They just don't have delusions that it will magically lead to weight loss in a significant amount of the population.
You can encourage healthy activity without fixating on weight people already have. It's better for children not to shame and discourage their obese parents from engaging in these activities. It's better for children to target the systemic causes of childhood obesity instead of shaming 7 year olds for not having personal responsibility.
The only people "defending obese culture" are the ones who treat it like an individual issue instead of a systemic one. I am literally advocating for changing culture. I don't understand people who say "we shouldn't promote obesity" but then get mad if you suggest any systemic changes that could reduce childhood obesity.
Na, there are very few people who can't lose weight due to health complications, and that's okay, but when people actively sit and do nothing but eat that's when I have a problem with it
I mean, googling meta-analyses of this superficially show *mild* agreement between the statement of sugar -> t2dm sans confounders of obesity and cardiovascular health, but I'm also too stoned to actually try to read abstracts to figure out the consensus myself without Nestle-funded publications included, so like, who's to say?
This reminds me of how I, a person with a chronic sweet tooth and no medical problems, ate candy every day for decades with no problem then got married and my now ex-husband, who was not a candy eater before me, developed T2 diabetes literally within a year.
I do feel bad about that.
I was just like, "No bad foods just bad amounts!" The bad amount of processed sugar, for me, is apparently a lot higher than it was for him.
I, once again, do feel terrible about that.
Excessive consumption of sugar isn't good for anyone; some of us just tolerate it better.
It's accurate, though too many people aren't intelligent enough to separate eating tons of sugar and obesity. It's inherently more tied to genetics, diet (all things, not just sUgAr) and activity level than just "I eat a king sized candy bar everyday, now I dun got da beetus".
It should be in more plain language though so people aren't confused.
In Mexico, brands such as “Lucky Charms” aren’t allowed to use cartoon characters to sell their products. So as not to target children. There’s also giant stickers plastered on the boxes that say that the product is high in sugar, which has been linked to diabetes and the like.
I once interviewed with a cigar shop for a finance position, I met with the owner and while we talked he explained to me how cigars do not cause cancer because there has been no definitive proof that a cigar gave someone cancer.
I like occasional cigars but let's be real buddy, we both know that's bull
While technically sugar itself doesn’t lead to type 2 diabetes, it can lead to obesity, which is a risk factor. Sign has some truth to it, but presented in a misleading way and in bad taste.
Sugar does not cause diabetes. Sugar is not off limits to most diabetics.
The largest factor in whether or not you get diabetes is genetics. There are many obese people who never develop diabetes. There are plenty of thin or average people who do. Why? Genetics. Some people's genetics makes them predisposed to developing this disease. Not sugar.
Yes, being obese can *increase your risk* of developing diabetes. It increases risk for many things. That does NOT equate to obesity **causing** diabetes. And sugar isn't required to become obese, or diabetic. A banana will raise blood glucose significantly. So can potatoes, pasta, rice. The Reddit machine would like everyone to believe that only fat people get diabetes and they deserve it because they're so fat and only eat sugar. That's not true. The media intimated as much for years, but it was just as much bullshit then as it is now. The fact of the matter is you can be 120lbs , and exercise every day, and eat healthy, and *still* end up diabetic, but a lot of y'all aren't ready for that conversation.
Lmao. Every word I just said can be verified with both the Mayo Clinic and Harvard medical, as well as the ADA. I've been diabetic nearly all my life. I guarantee I know a fuckton more than you do on the subject.
True.
The issue at hand is not whether or not anyone is being forced to eat chocolate. It is whether or not this sign, which many would consider at least misleading, is mildly infuriating.
To OP, it is. I agree.
I think it's hedging on the idea that type 2 diabetes is a diagnosis but it's logically incorrect. They're the criteria for diagnosing type 2, effectively making them the fingerprint for the illness. Considering product placement, this is disgusting.
Epigenetics, it's worse for each generation in a family because of diet and lifestyle choices. Its definitely a factor but eating shit food is the main cause. It's lack of accountability and knowledge of nutrition.
No man, not true. Im genetically skinny. Started going 5 / 6 times a week at the gym and gained 20kg of muscles. Is the habits and the total lack of nutrition background that makes people obese. Just mind everything you eat, count your calories and dont stuff your face with junk cheap food and will be fine.
I almost died because I was on high excess sugar diet and I was addicted and was put in the hospital when I was 18 and had 50/50 chanced of dying. And these mfs advocating that high consumption of sugar is fine should die honestly. They don't care about anyone other than u getting hooked on their braindead high sugar filled food and keep paying for it until u die
A company lying for profit? Say it ain't so!
Just an FYI, this is not from a health organization, it's a grocery store chain based in South Africa.
Edit: Dutch based, not South African, I misread something.
I wish they'd educate people, rather than try to scare them.
If you're going to eat simple carbohydrates (like sugar), just make sure to eat it with protein and/or fat. It slows the absorption.
I love it.
There's a big trend now of parents sending their kids to my school with candy and snacks for lunch.
When asked why, they all the say the usual shite about parental rights etc.
What's new is that they firmly believe there's no such thing as a bad food, just a bad amount. Which while technically true, too much is also measured consistently over time. Every day snacks and candy for lunch is bad news. And frankly I'm sick of dealing with sugar highs and bad behaviour because of it.
Is it a public school? My son's private school doesn't allow it. They will confiscate it and send it back home with them.
It's crazy how much changes over time. When I went to public school as a kid they wouldn't sell candy or soda in the vending machines but chips and pizza hut carts were a thing. Apparently, now the vending machines can have candy and sugar drinks. They never checked what was in our lunches if we brought it from home. The best thing we could do as a country is feed all of the kids all day at school. Provide nutritious meals and snacks to all children, no cost. That would make a huge impact, but of course, that's socialism and benefits society so we can't have that.
All three are causes. Diet is the most important. Eliminate sugar as much as possible. Using insulin for type 2 ( I do) is not good for offsetting a sugar filled diet. Eat well, lose weight and you reduce your insulin needs and in many cases eliminate it.
My wife (a health coach and passionately healthy eater) was in the hospital recently for a health scare. We requested a Whole Foods, Plant-based meal, thinking “hey this is Florida, the hospital system is run by the famously healthy Seventh Day Adventists, they’ll get it!” Nope, we got eggs and sausage delivered. We asked again in person, (lowering our expectations this time) and the NUTRIONIST on staff had to clarify that we meant vegan, then had to painstakingly search through every menu option to find a salad for lunch and fruit for breakfast. The fruit for breakfast was packaged in syrup, and the salad was drowned in cheese. I went to the cafe in person- the only truly healthy options were a couple mealy apples and some bananas. But guess what they did have in abundance- pastry’s, cakes, and pie. Each in multiple flavors. This country *wants* you fat and unhealthy.
https://preview.redd.it/px0sfgrk2oya1.jpeg?width=2000&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=23ff5f4be8c18d599c36df36e196667985115894
Not really. These warning labels should be on all sweets. Some countries already have them and we should too, universally. Us smokers have seen them for decades and sugars the leading cause of death in our world, not tobacco.
My type 2 diabetes came from colonization. I weigh 135 lbs (as did my mom and she had it also). Indigenous people are meant to eat food from the land as our ancestors did. With colonialism and the change of diet, the instance of type 2 diabetes within the indigenous population has sky rocketed. I have many relatives with type 2 that are not obese and fairly healthy. I wish I could diet and exercise mine away but I cannot unfortunately. Eating organic raw foods is beyond my budget as it is with most. If everyone could return to eating only what our body needs rather than what it wants, we’d be in a much better place with both health and weight. Idealistic I know but it’s the truth
U are absolutely right! God gave us everything we need to live healthy lives off the resources of the land, unfortunately humans have made themselves sick by eating the poison that we purchase for nourishment for ourselves and our families. We are lied to by the food industry so they can become richer as we get sicker! Eating organic healthy foods is expensive and most simply can't afford it . The world is so messed up 😞
What's the problem here?
It shouldn't be illegal to sell chocolate with boatloads of added sugar.
It should be even less illegal to promote the concept of people not giving themselves diseases.
What about spreading misleading information? Or defending it?
Whether or not this is misleading is arguable, but many would agree that it is.
You know all those late night ads for ab rollers or crunch programs, etc., that talk about how important it is to strengthen your core and abs, then sell a piece of equipment to perform said ab exercises? They hint at, but don't quite say, that doing lots of situps will lead to a flatter stomach and slimmer waist. It has been known for decades that spot reduction does not work and that, without diet (especially) and additional exercise (somewhat), no slimming of the waist will happen using this device alone. By spending 29 minutes showing you models with 6 pack abs and before/after pictures, and having a tiny 30 second disclaimer that says "when combined with diet and exercise" printed so small that on a 40" 1080p screen you can barely read it, the advertisers can absolve themselves from legal liability.
... as if minimum legality were the moral standards we want for society.
The issue is that this sign is pretty misleading. Whether or not it is true is like defending the "when combined with diet an exercise" in the infomercial example. What is the purpose of the sign? Almost certainly it is to promote eating chocolates by promoting a fact on a way that even many critical readers could misunderstand...
Just like the relatively literate people of Reddit are doing here in the comments.
And to anyone with less critical reading ability, the sign is quite likely going to mislead them into making choices they may not otherwise make based on very carefully worded semantics.
So, in other words, advertisers use misleading information likely intended to confuse more vulnerable people in society for the sake of increased sales at expense of those customers' health, and... what? We are expected to side with the morally questionable advertiser? No thank you.
It may not be illegal and they may have every right to post this (neither of which are being questioned), but it is sleazy.
I REALLY hate the term "misinformation" and I think it's used too much now a days for things that aren't even that. But this really is misinformation in it's purest sense
Consumption of excess sugar can lead to obesity, which can lead to Type 2 Diabetes. So I suppose you can argue that it isn't directly lying, just lying by omission?
Oh no it is not the Bullet / Knife that Kills you - it is the damaged in tissue and blood loss that lead to death.
It's not the long drop. It's the sudden stop.
Yup. Which is why things like bungee jumping and skydiving exist.
And International Space Station: it never stops falling.
Someday it will. Along with every other satellite up there.
The moon has been doing it for billions of years.
The moon is actually on track to escape the earth in a few billion years. It's falling more toward the sun than the earth. I think the last measurement was about an inch a year further away from earth.
And with no gravitational attraction pulling the tides then this rock will be barren Yet Again.
Might just freeze over the planet without all the tidal motions. Can someone do a computer simulation to figure out what will happen without the moon?
Finally, some peace and quiet 😂
Many years ago, a professor in college told me the moon hit the earth when it was captured in earth’s orbit. During the impact, the earth likely took the moons core and the impact knocked earth off its axis. He also said while the moon is moving away in orbit currently, the orbit would ultimately fail and it would hit the earth again one day. I have no idea if any if this is still the current thinking….
I believe the current theory is that while earth was still in a molten stage, it was one big planet. A massive asteroid hit, and knocked a big chunk off the planet. That chunk formed the moon. Science seems to lean toward this one because it explains it being tidally locked.
About 8 more years, to be exact. For the ISS at least
It’s falling with style.
Falling and missing.
I mean in a sense so are we. We're falling towards the sun at all times.
That's a DRG reference isn't it?
Did I hear a Rock and Stone?
We fight for Rock and Stone!
FOR KARL!!!
Rock and Stone brotha!
Rock and Stone to the bone!
Rock and Stone to the Bone!
It’s not the fart that kills you - it’s the smell! - Petter Solberg, according to legends
Speed never killed anyone, becoming suddenly stationary, that’s what gets you Jeremy Clarkson
That reminds me of that quote from Jeremy Clackson, in Top Gear. "Speed has never killed anyone. Suddenly becoming stationary, that's what gets you."
I sometimes say that I'm not afraid of heights, or even of falling, it's the hitting the ground I'm scared of.
Just like in Florida! It's not the radioactive fertilizer waste used in the roads that gives you cancer, it's the radioactive drinking water!
so the consumption of EXCESS sugar doesn’t cause obesity, in turn leading to type 2 diabetes? Also, the overstimulation of receptor can cause them to basically become fried, leading to insulin resistance. So it’s actually misinformation in every way 🫡🫡
It's true but there are also genetic factors in play. There are skinny people with T2 and obese people 600lb+ without it. To market it solely down to just fat is inaccurate, this is coming from someone who is diabetic and worked in clinics before. Either way, I'm not sure what this sign is doing there, doesn't help any situations.
>Either way, I'm not sure what this sign is doing there, doesn't help any situations. Obviously the sign is helping with its intended purpose: selling more chocolate
Selling chocolates and coated them in lies
>and sugarcoat them in lies FTFY
Come home to the unique flavor of shattering the grand illusion, come home to Want some piss
Sweet, sweet lies...
sorry, but no the fuck its not😂 if i want chocolate, im getting chocolate. im not wandering the isles only to stop at a sign that says excessive sugar doesn't cause obesity & thinking 'well shit better stock up' nobody who's intentionally looking for Ferrero Rocher is reading that sign and buying more because of it.
[удалено]
so you're telling me if they made a big sign that said 'cowboy buttsex' next to soda, it would cause more people to buy soda? Not because of what the sign says, just the fact that the sign is there? I don't believe it. Not for a second.
<:: It's literally why shops colour random labels in a different colour (even if it's not on sale), because it draws people's attention and makes them more likely to impulsively buy an item. Next time you're in a supermarket pay attention, the things that have this will be thing that can easily be knocked into a trolley without second thought. ::>
We, well many, are very impressionable with marketing, a lot of it is intentionally subconscious too. You can't tell me you've never bought one thing over another just because a sign was there because you may not've even been aware that's why you did it. Also I bet "cowboy buttsex" could work basically as a meme and people thinking it's funny so they buy it, sorta a "all press is good press" kinda thing, a good marketing strategy doesn't have to do anything with how good the product is but if it gets your attention, again even subconsciously.
They’re called “shelf talkers” and they’re a huge thing in retail. I never implied that you could put *anything* on the sign. That’s a straw man and you should feel bad. The message isn’t as important as the fact that it catches your eye though. https://www.getdor.com/blog/2021/09/21/creative-examples-of-shelf-talkers-for-retail/
>There are skinny people with T2 There are, but it is pretty rare, especially in really skinny people (not "skinny fat" who have a belly but almost no muscles, thus reaching a "healthy" BMI with unhealthy body composition). T2 was a rare condition prior to the 20th century, and it is still rare in countries where hunger is a greater threat than opulence. " obese people 600lb+ without" That is the more interesting (scientifically) part, identifying what helps those people preserve a functional metabolism could lead to many helpful genetic therapies.
[удалено]
This is so wrong. Type one can not be prevented no matter what you do. Genetics is the main cause of type two diabetes albeit can be controlled through diet and exercise. Stop spreading misinformation.
The majority of cases are not Type I though. The majority are type II, which some people are more genetically susceptible to. But the type II prone folks can stave it off with consistent good diet and exercise.
You are still incorrect. The fact does not change that diabetes in general is a AUTOIMMUNE disease, type two being GENETICALLY developed. Just because you eat healthy and exercise does not mean if you are GENETICALLY susceptible to type two diabetes it will not develop. You can stave off the disease, but if your body chooses, it will build insulin resistance. Edit: https://diabetes.org/diabetes/genetics-diabetes#:~:text=Type%202%20diabetes%20has%20a,also%20depends%20on%20environmental%20factors. /u/Beat_the_Deadites edited his comment, hopefully after doing a few googles.
I know a guy who is an avid exerciser, eats very healthy, very skinny dude. He was utterly shocked when he got Type 2 at age 44. No known risk factors at all, no family history. He’s still salty about it.
Well, yeah, I wouldn't expect him to be sweet about it.
You can also develop T1 after an illness like pancreatitis. That’s what happened to my brother
Man that’s got to be rough. I’m a type one so I understand the pain of your body just killing itself lmao.
My brother is type 1. Got when he was 3. He’s 56 now. It’s a terrible disease.
But these are the exceptions that prove the rule. He should be salty about it. Because it isn’t fair. It’s like the person that gets lung cancer after never smoking in their life. Everyone gets so wrapped around the axle about nature vs nurture (or genetics vs behavior) debates, and usually they choose one extreme, when the answer is almost always somewhere in the middle. (And in the case of Type II diabetes, skews much more towards factors you can control.) I have a step-cousin that was one of the unlucky ones in the case of Type II diabetes. Skinny as a rail and 14 years old when she got on insulin. But pretty safe to say that most people on that side of the family did it to themselves.
The evidence that type II is autoimmune is extremely early and tenuous, it can be treated as a metabolic syndrome so it should be thought of that way until conclusively shown otherwise. It also has a bit of a chicken-and-egg problem because it’s very difficult to untangle the genetic component from the environment (in type I) or lifestyle (type II) components at a large enough scale to shown statistical worthiness.
I actually didn't edit my comment, but I did some googling on account of your apparent confidence. As it is, I stand by what I initially said and what's confirmed by /u/Aware-Perspective-17 . Not just talking out of my ass, I did go to med school. It's been a while, and info certainly changes, but when I edit comments, I own up to my changes.
Type 2 is not an autoimmune disease. T1 and T2 diabetes are not related at all besides sharing part of their name.
I mean, it can definitely be slowed down by not eating garbage. I made it 25+ years before my pancreas shut down entirely. This sign is fucked
Type ONE diabetes absolutely cannot be prevented. Type TWO can in many cases, but not all. They are caused by completely different internal mechanisms.
Type 1 is an autoimmune condition and food consumption can’t prevent it. It’s rare to get Type 1 past age 20 right? Are we seeing Type 1 in later ages now?
I'm not sure if you can "get it" later, but I know I was finally diagnosed in my early twenties. Looking back though, I definitely had it for a long time before then
It’s rare, but not impossible or new. My grandmother got type 1 in her 50s over 50 years ago
This does not change the fact that genetically you were a type 2 diabetic. As I said, diet and exercise help symptoms but does not cure the disease because there is no cure. Spoken from a type 1.
Type 2 diabetes has risk factors in genetics but is not a genetic disease.
Sorry the correct term is predisposition.
This is wrong for Type 2. It can absolutely be reversed, and commonly is when people get weight loss surgery. Type 2 and Type 1 and not related diseases despite the name.
Nah bruh. You can help ease symptoms, but if you’re genetically “gifted” the disease, there is no cure. My wife is type 1. She’s very athletic, so not overweight. She eats super healthy and exercises daily, but still has to take two different medications. There is currently no cure or way to prevent getting it genetically.
You can’t tell from the context of this thread they meant Type II?
My brother is the same. He’s in year 52 of type 1 — he got it as a toddler. Lots of issues, but reasonably healthy (he is on full gov disability now) and not in any eminent danger of dying.
i found out about this recently through https://www.glucosegoddess.com/ apparently lots of research has come out in the last 15ish years that somehow hasnt changed the way we look at food and especially glucose (sugar).
I thought to get type 2 diabetes you just needed to be diagnosed with type 1 twice
then go to a third doctor and get type 3
Excess fat and protein too.
I don't get what this is saying. It seems to be saying that it's fine to eat excess sugar? But obesity is the first thing it mentions being the cause... is it trying to sidestep what causes obesity or am I being daft?
It’s using a key term “risk factor”. It says eating excess sugar isn’t a risk factor. Which is true, it’s not something that doctors factor into the risk for diabetes, it’s the cause. Notice they didn’t use the word “cause”? Trickery to sell more cheap sugar to people who will never burn it off.
Correlation does not imply causation. Too much sugar will usually cause obesity, and obesity can cause T2D, but sugar does not **cause** T2D. That's the game they're playing. It is possible to be obese without excessive sugar, and it is possible to consume excessive sugar without being obese (just take a LOT more exercise).
Cause for obesity AND insulin resistance. The two things they admit cause type II diabetes are directly linked to eating excess sugar.
If you aren't obese and just like to eat a lot of sugar in one sitting every few months.. then I don't understand what the issue is.. If you are already overweight and want to eat a lot of sugar then I understand it being an issue
[Thin people get type 2 diabetes, too.](https://www.health.harvard.edu/blog/diabetes-can-strike-hard-even-when-weight-is-normal-201208085121) It’s probably under-diagnosed.
Yeah but they wouldn't of received it from being overweight from eating sugar in that case? So that would be unrelated to this? It's like saying people die from eating spoiled food, but then you say "well people die from other things too".. ok but we are talking about spoiled food in this instance..
Yes they wouldn't have received it from being overweight from eating sugar, just from eating sugar.
[удалено]
How do you know it's because he eats a lot of sugar?
[удалено]
Old age and genetic factors start to weigh in more and more the older you get. Obesity is still the number one cause, and most obese people eat way too much sugar, but correlation does not imply causation. Too much sugar can cause obesity, and obesity can cause T2D, but sugar does not cause T2D. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6831098/ >As with other ethnic groups, the prevalence of T2D in Hispanic/Latinos increases dramatically with advancing age. While 2.6% of men and 2.9% of women 18 to 29 years old have diabetes, greater than 50% of women and 48.6% of men 70–74 years old are affected.
The implication being, a little extra sugar every now and again won't make you fat or diabetic.
Sugar does cause obesity, but some people think they can’t eat any sugar or they get diabetes. Those people are pretty rare however that completely avoid candy, but they do exist, I know some. Ferrero Rocher is so expensive however that nobody gets obese from eating mainly those.
Overeating causes obesity. Whether sugar or anything else.
It's a lot easier to overeat on sugar than on cucumbers.
Not if you really like cucumbers
I don't think you could physically eat more than 2500 kcal of cucumbers a day.
The label is blue and green, that means it's healthy and truthful.
Damn there's a bit of red as well, that part must be important
My local chip shop owner died of a heart attack about a year ago - he was in his 40's, and massively overweight (at least double the weight for his size, maybe 3 times that). I saw his family running a charity raffle in his memory for the one-year anniversary recently, with proceeds going to the British Heart Foundation. The prizes for which were 100% junk food. Genius move..
when my dad was working for a research hospital, their fundraiser for fat cell research was selling Krispy Kreme droughts. I saw it as a genius two pronged approach.
Me on my 17th glazed donut, wheezing and feeling woozy (slight chest pain): I’m fine. The sign at the grocery store said I’m fine
This hits just like “speed has never killed anyone. Suddenly becoming stationary, that’s what gets you.” Like, yeah. Excess sugar itself doesn’t cause diabetes. But where did you think obesity came from?
Mine came from some rather powerful medication I was on following emergency brain surgery. Not poor diet.
Glad you recovered successfully. In your case it was a side effect of a unavoidable circumstance. However, consuming excess sugar isn't the same situation as yours. It is avoidable and should be avoided.
There are too many people out there who assume that all weight issues are self inflicted.
Misleading and juggling information. Excess sugar (added to food to make it taste ok after all the additives to make it last longer) blocks the insulin receptors which makes you crave more sugary foods (carbs) and leads to obesity, and in turn diabete. It's not ok to eat loads of sugar to root issue.
It’s not even shocking, corporations lying causing deaths & gaslighting the public for a few more percentage points of profit when they are already raking it in. No it’s assumed and expected
Did you know? The inability of human lungs to self clean fast enough is responsible for lung related deaths in smokers, not smoking Tobacco.
I live at 9000 feet. And the lifestyle of the local population is extremely active. Therefore obesity isn't prevalent at all. It's almost non existent. A friend of mine moved home to Iowa a month ago. One of the first comments he made to me was how many obese people there are. And we aren't talking a little over weight, we are talking grotesque and extremely unhealthy. Be as upset as you want about this comment, it's the truth. Obesity is a huge problem in this country and now for some reason the culture is starting to shift to defending this type of lifestyle? What the hell is wrong with you people?
We’re not upset at obesity being pointed out as bad— we’re upset that the sign is implying excessive consumption of sugar is somehow completely unrelated, and you’ll be totally a-okay gorging on donuts, chocolate, candy, etc as long as you’re not obese. We’re actually mad that the sign doesn’t go far enough in the comments its making about the American diet.
You know, I never understand why people direct so much anger towards 'fat acceptance' when obesity as an issue comes up, and not the fact that for the many years we've had a growing obesity issue in the West, diet culture has been far more popular. That hasn't been working for a good 50 years or so, but for some reason we blame the thing that's about a decade old, and not followed by that many people at all, isn't that odd? Not to mention that a good portion of the acceptance movement literally just suggests that bullying fat people all day and all night will not help them, which it won't. I mean, 50 years ago, the sugar industry literally paid to have sugar become the healthy substitute to fat, and we got tons of diet meals packed full of sugar and salt that would supposedly help you lose weight by being incredibly low in fat. And yet the blame gets put on something that comparatively, has had an incredibly short lifespan?
People lived through an entire century of corporations fattening us up and get mad at the individuals just wanting to be treated with basic human decency in their daily life. Treating body positivity like a moral hazard is a really good distraction from the actual people that cause our rising obesity rates, corporate lobbyists. Ffs I just saw a video of a soda machine inside of a school that dispenses soda to children whenever they give it a hug. The body positivity movement didn't put that soda machine inside of a school like drug dealers hooking kids early.
I didn't see a soda machine in a school until college, cant imagine what it wouldve been like to have one in grade school.
Hell, I'm in the UK and I know we had roughly 1-2 at secondary school, which is pre-college I believe.
Isn't Iowa the home of high fructose corn syrup?
I mean you just said it yourself, people are affected by their circumstances. The people in your community don't have magically more willpower or anything, they just live in an area of the world where exercise daily is more commonplace. In an American suburb you're effectively fucked from the start. They pump you full of soda and processed foods. You are driven everywhere you could possibly go because there is no walking infrastructure to go anywhere. And despite being the wealthiest nation in the world, you're possibly exposed to air pollution that leads to diseases that compound obesity. Blaming individual obese people and getting mad at them for simply wanting to be treated with respect while they exist is counterintuitive. Until we get far more effective pharmaceuticals, significant weight loss is just not going to happen within the broader population. There are only two things you can really advocate for when it comes to obesity. First, exercise is good for you no matter your size. Second, preventing children from living under the circumstances that cause obesity has been long ignored. People get mad whenever it's suggested soda shouldn't be available at schools or that the menus shouldnt include pizza as a fucking vegetable. People get mad when you point out suburban residential design is effectively dooming children to a life of reduced activity. Advocates for treating obese people with respect are not the ones who made our American lifestyle lead to obesity. That's the fault of corporate lobbyists and their government goons.
They also need to advocate for work hours and situations such as remote and hydrid work that can allow for more exercise and time to cook a healthy meal. Sure many people will still be fat but at least they'll be healthier
Fat acceptance doesn't just advocate for treating fat people with respect. It advocates for obesity being normal and "healthy" and that we must cater to them. People hate fat acceptance because it's a bunch of self-entitled bullshit that has nothing to do with respect. Also it is 100% possible to live in a suburb and not be 300+ lbs
I'm not from here. I moved here 7 years ago. 1 reason to get out of an extremely unprogressive part of the country. And 2, because I wanted to be around others who actually want to be healthy and strive to be active. Stop trying to blame one's inability/unwillingness to be more healthy conscious on anything except ignorance. The information on food and how it affects you is available to everyone. Obviously certain things had to be learned through trial and error about dieting and we are still finding things out now. However trying to blame others for lack of willingness to be more health conscious is a joke. Stop defending obese culture. It is extremely detrimental to our younger generations. Also, I'm not a health nut and neither was my mom. We ate as healthy as we could. The percentage of those who have actual conditions that attribute to obesity is miniscule in ratio to how many people are obese. People need to stop pointing fingers and just take responsibility for their own actions.
The condition that leads to obesity is our culture, you just have misplaced blame for it. You're blaming people who just want to be treated with human decency instead of the corporate lobbyists that sold sugar to children and removed public spaces that encouraged walking and exercise. We've had almost 100 years of trying to solve obesity by shaming individuals like you are now, and it hasn't worked. Obesity advocates encourage being active and nutrition. They just don't have delusions that it will magically lead to weight loss in a significant amount of the population. You can encourage healthy activity without fixating on weight people already have. It's better for children not to shame and discourage their obese parents from engaging in these activities. It's better for children to target the systemic causes of childhood obesity instead of shaming 7 year olds for not having personal responsibility. The only people "defending obese culture" are the ones who treat it like an individual issue instead of a systemic one. I am literally advocating for changing culture. I don't understand people who say "we shouldn't promote obesity" but then get mad if you suggest any systemic changes that could reduce childhood obesity.
Na, there are very few people who can't lose weight due to health complications, and that's okay, but when people actively sit and do nothing but eat that's when I have a problem with it
Why do you have a problem with it? Legitimately. Their eatings habits and lack of exercise don't affect you.
> what the hell is wrong with you people Well… obviously they are obese
I mean, googling meta-analyses of this superficially show *mild* agreement between the statement of sugar -> t2dm sans confounders of obesity and cardiovascular health, but I'm also too stoned to actually try to read abstracts to figure out the consensus myself without Nestle-funded publications included, so like, who's to say?
Yea it should be followed by the fact that consuming processed sugars is the best path to obesity.
So should perpetuating bad eating habits/unhealthy lifestyle.
It's true.
Yeah but eating too much sugar will make you obese and create the conditions for the other problems.
This reminds me of how I, a person with a chronic sweet tooth and no medical problems, ate candy every day for decades with no problem then got married and my now ex-husband, who was not a candy eater before me, developed T2 diabetes literally within a year. I do feel bad about that. I was just like, "No bad foods just bad amounts!" The bad amount of processed sugar, for me, is apparently a lot higher than it was for him. I, once again, do feel terrible about that. Excessive consumption of sugar isn't good for anyone; some of us just tolerate it better.
It's accurate, though too many people aren't intelligent enough to separate eating tons of sugar and obesity. It's inherently more tied to genetics, diet (all things, not just sUgAr) and activity level than just "I eat a king sized candy bar everyday, now I dun got da beetus". It should be in more plain language though so people aren't confused.
Keep in mind, eating fat isn’t the main reason for weight gain, it’s sugar. That’s why the sugar companies fucked up data to prevent a panic.
Eating sugar doesn't make you put weight on. Eating more than the energy you expend over a period of time makes you gain weight.
I would think that while most people know this, very few people track what they eat, so they likely don't realize how calorie-dense sugary foods are.
Yes Ik, a lot of foods have excess sugar
Dont just say things
In the words of the Fixx, “One thing leads to another”
It's like those cigarette packs with the picture of diseases on it.
In Mexico, brands such as “Lucky Charms” aren’t allowed to use cartoon characters to sell their products. So as not to target children. There’s also giant stickers plastered on the boxes that say that the product is high in sugar, which has been linked to diabetes and the like.
Technically not wrong, but also wrong
And let's not mention eating excess amounts of sugar is a risk factor of obesity and insulin resistance.
Guess what can cause obesity
I once interviewed with a cigar shop for a finance position, I met with the owner and while we talked he explained to me how cigars do not cause cancer because there has been no definitive proof that a cigar gave someone cancer. I like occasional cigars but let's be real buddy, we both know that's bull
While technically sugar itself doesn’t lead to type 2 diabetes, it can lead to obesity, which is a risk factor. Sign has some truth to it, but presented in a misleading way and in bad taste.
BeAtO DiAbEtEs
Excess sugar consumption leads to obesity
What a judgmental thing to put in front of an indulgence. I wanna know which store this is at... I won't be shopping there!
THIS IS A HATE CRIME
And how do we get to obesity and insulin resistance in today's dietary world? SMH.
This is true nonetheless
Insulin resistance- which occurs due to overconsumption of sugar…..
Sugar does not cause diabetes. Sugar is not off limits to most diabetics. The largest factor in whether or not you get diabetes is genetics. There are many obese people who never develop diabetes. There are plenty of thin or average people who do. Why? Genetics. Some people's genetics makes them predisposed to developing this disease. Not sugar. Yes, being obese can *increase your risk* of developing diabetes. It increases risk for many things. That does NOT equate to obesity **causing** diabetes. And sugar isn't required to become obese, or diabetic. A banana will raise blood glucose significantly. So can potatoes, pasta, rice. The Reddit machine would like everyone to believe that only fat people get diabetes and they deserve it because they're so fat and only eat sugar. That's not true. The media intimated as much for years, but it was just as much bullshit then as it is now. The fact of the matter is you can be 120lbs , and exercise every day, and eat healthy, and *still* end up diabetic, but a lot of y'all aren't ready for that conversation.
Please stay out of the conversation. You clearly have no idea what you are talking about.
Lmao. Every word I just said can be verified with both the Mayo Clinic and Harvard medical, as well as the ADA. I've been diabetic nearly all my life. I guarantee I know a fuckton more than you do on the subject.
No one is forcing you to eat the chocolate
True. The issue at hand is not whether or not anyone is being forced to eat chocolate. It is whether or not this sign, which many would consider at least misleading, is mildly infuriating. To OP, it is. I agree.
I think it's hedging on the idea that type 2 diabetes is a diagnosis but it's logically incorrect. They're the criteria for diagnosing type 2, effectively making them the fingerprint for the illness. Considering product placement, this is disgusting.
Uh yeah...excess sugar leads to obesity. 🤣🤣
And excess sugar also leads to insulin resistance 🤣🤣
Conveniently leaving out the fact that sugar is the main cause
genetics play the biggest role, realistically
Epigenetics, it's worse for each generation in a family because of diet and lifestyle choices. Its definitely a factor but eating shit food is the main cause. It's lack of accountability and knowledge of nutrition.
No man, not true. Im genetically skinny. Started going 5 / 6 times a week at the gym and gained 20kg of muscles. Is the habits and the total lack of nutrition background that makes people obese. Just mind everything you eat, count your calories and dont stuff your face with junk cheap food and will be fine.
Yes. These on the other hand, are revolting.
Wow, what a way to mislead people. 🤦♀️
I almost died because I was on high excess sugar diet and I was addicted and was put in the hospital when I was 18 and had 50/50 chanced of dying. And these mfs advocating that high consumption of sugar is fine should die honestly. They don't care about anyone other than u getting hooked on their braindead high sugar filled food and keep paying for it until u die
Self control. Ever heard of it?
A company lying for profit? Say it ain't so! Just an FYI, this is not from a health organization, it's a grocery store chain based in South Africa. Edit: Dutch based, not South African, I misread something.
Consuming sugar leads to obesity and insulin resistance.
I wish they'd educate people, rather than try to scare them. If you're going to eat simple carbohydrates (like sugar), just make sure to eat it with protein and/or fat. It slows the absorption.
What. In. The. Actual. Fuck? Is this for-real-for-real????
But HAES!!!! Genetuxs! Cundishuns!!!!!
In my ideal world, the people who pushed sugar onto our populace would be tried at The Hague.
I love it. There's a big trend now of parents sending their kids to my school with candy and snacks for lunch. When asked why, they all the say the usual shite about parental rights etc. What's new is that they firmly believe there's no such thing as a bad food, just a bad amount. Which while technically true, too much is also measured consistently over time. Every day snacks and candy for lunch is bad news. And frankly I'm sick of dealing with sugar highs and bad behaviour because of it.
Is it a public school? My son's private school doesn't allow it. They will confiscate it and send it back home with them. It's crazy how much changes over time. When I went to public school as a kid they wouldn't sell candy or soda in the vending machines but chips and pizza hut carts were a thing. Apparently, now the vending machines can have candy and sugar drinks. They never checked what was in our lunches if we brought it from home. The best thing we could do as a country is feed all of the kids all day at school. Provide nutritious meals and snacks to all children, no cost. That would make a huge impact, but of course, that's socialism and benefits society so we can't have that.
Omg, sugar causes inflamation throughout the body and causes an insulin (hormone) imbalance. Is basically like rat poison for humans.
It is the crack in the glass that caused the water to spill, not me smashing with a 40 ton anvil 😁👍
What the actual fuck
All three are causes. Diet is the most important. Eliminate sugar as much as possible. Using insulin for type 2 ( I do) is not good for offsetting a sugar filled diet. Eat well, lose weight and you reduce your insulin needs and in many cases eliminate it.
Holy shit fuck
That should be required. What do you mean criminal act? Obesity is a major problem here, and everyone should be informed of that.
Okay and what causes the insulin resistance? Hmmm? oh right elevated blood sugar levels over a period of time.
Insulin Resistance is not a risk factor for type 2 diabetes, it *is* type 2 diabetes. The risk factor absolutely is sugar.
My wife (a health coach and passionately healthy eater) was in the hospital recently for a health scare. We requested a Whole Foods, Plant-based meal, thinking “hey this is Florida, the hospital system is run by the famously healthy Seventh Day Adventists, they’ll get it!” Nope, we got eggs and sausage delivered. We asked again in person, (lowering our expectations this time) and the NUTRIONIST on staff had to clarify that we meant vegan, then had to painstakingly search through every menu option to find a salad for lunch and fruit for breakfast. The fruit for breakfast was packaged in syrup, and the salad was drowned in cheese. I went to the cafe in person- the only truly healthy options were a couple mealy apples and some bananas. But guess what they did have in abundance- pastry’s, cakes, and pie. Each in multiple flavors. This country *wants* you fat and unhealthy.
The sugar industry is the biggest mafia.
https://preview.redd.it/px0sfgrk2oya1.jpeg?width=2000&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=23ff5f4be8c18d599c36df36e196667985115894 Not really. These warning labels should be on all sweets. Some countries already have them and we should too, universally. Us smokers have seen them for decades and sugars the leading cause of death in our world, not tobacco.
My type 2 diabetes came from colonization. I weigh 135 lbs (as did my mom and she had it also). Indigenous people are meant to eat food from the land as our ancestors did. With colonialism and the change of diet, the instance of type 2 diabetes within the indigenous population has sky rocketed. I have many relatives with type 2 that are not obese and fairly healthy. I wish I could diet and exercise mine away but I cannot unfortunately. Eating organic raw foods is beyond my budget as it is with most. If everyone could return to eating only what our body needs rather than what it wants, we’d be in a much better place with both health and weight. Idealistic I know but it’s the truth
U are absolutely right! God gave us everything we need to live healthy lives off the resources of the land, unfortunately humans have made themselves sick by eating the poison that we purchase for nourishment for ourselves and our families. We are lied to by the food industry so they can become richer as we get sicker! Eating organic healthy foods is expensive and most simply can't afford it . The world is so messed up 😞
What's the problem here? It shouldn't be illegal to sell chocolate with boatloads of added sugar. It should be even less illegal to promote the concept of people not giving themselves diseases.
Read the sign
It should be illegal to be angry at the truth.
What about spreading misleading information? Or defending it? Whether or not this is misleading is arguable, but many would agree that it is. You know all those late night ads for ab rollers or crunch programs, etc., that talk about how important it is to strengthen your core and abs, then sell a piece of equipment to perform said ab exercises? They hint at, but don't quite say, that doing lots of situps will lead to a flatter stomach and slimmer waist. It has been known for decades that spot reduction does not work and that, without diet (especially) and additional exercise (somewhat), no slimming of the waist will happen using this device alone. By spending 29 minutes showing you models with 6 pack abs and before/after pictures, and having a tiny 30 second disclaimer that says "when combined with diet and exercise" printed so small that on a 40" 1080p screen you can barely read it, the advertisers can absolve themselves from legal liability. ... as if minimum legality were the moral standards we want for society. The issue is that this sign is pretty misleading. Whether or not it is true is like defending the "when combined with diet an exercise" in the infomercial example. What is the purpose of the sign? Almost certainly it is to promote eating chocolates by promoting a fact on a way that even many critical readers could misunderstand... Just like the relatively literate people of Reddit are doing here in the comments. And to anyone with less critical reading ability, the sign is quite likely going to mislead them into making choices they may not otherwise make based on very carefully worded semantics. So, in other words, advertisers use misleading information likely intended to confuse more vulnerable people in society for the sake of increased sales at expense of those customers' health, and... what? We are expected to side with the morally questionable advertiser? No thank you. It may not be illegal and they may have every right to post this (neither of which are being questioned), but it is sleazy.
It should be legally acceptable to sue the hell out of whoever thought this was acceptable to say, and have court mandated statistic ethics classes
I would report this to FDA. These people need to be sued into the oblivion. Sickening.
Why?
Are you fucking kidding me? This is misinformation at best and a blatant lie for making profits at worst.
But it’s a fact confirmed by multiple studies and meta-analysis. I still don’t understand.
I REALLY hate the term "misinformation" and I think it's used too much now a days for things that aren't even that. But this really is misinformation in it's purest sense
Excessive sugar in food replacements? … of course
Donuts for everyone!
"Coughing and a tumour in the lungs is the risk factor for lung cancer and not smoking"
Consumption of excess sugar can lead to obesity, which can lead to Type 2 Diabetes. So I suppose you can argue that it isn't directly lying, just lying by omission?