A l*****t rag. Cherry picked statistics. The t***h, and the world, according to Politics USA and Boner Injester.
Bo,
I am somewhat confused, I read the article you presented, and thank you. Here is my confusion. According to USA Today, "The South has the highest percentage of people (29.5%) who are too heavy, followed by the Midwest (29%), Northeast (25.3%) and West (24.3%). No state has an obesity rate of less than 20%, the findings show."
They actually start the article with Mississippi, like yours, but they say that 34.9 percent are 30 or more pounds overweight.
http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/health/story/2012-08-13/obesity-rates-states/57031440/1Likewise the Christian Monitor, says that 1 of every 3 people in Mississippi are overweight.
http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Society/2012/0814/Mississippi-most-obese-state-Southern-diet-or-culture-on-the-skidsIf they are correct in their reporting, and I am not saying they are or not, then how can the South be starving?
What really stood out, in 2008 they (Mississippi's governor) tried to pass a bill making it illegal to serve people that are overweight. Total stupid idea, but I guess their point is that Mississippi has been the fattest state for the past decade.
I am sure that you can understand my confusion. And, truly I am not trying to be rude to you or anyone, just confused.
The author was using data from various sources to make his point about unhealthy living condidtions in some states
As far as your question about obesity, it make coincide with low wages, limited or no access to proper healthcare, which includes nutrition.
That fact, along with reduced unemployment benefits, cutbacks in the SNAP and WIC programs, force more people to eat unhealthy food more often.
Most unhealthy food is higher in calories and fat and sugar.
I simply posted the article for intelligent people like you to read and decide for yourself which policies and philosophies work the best for the most.
Duckie wrote:
Bo,
I am somewhat confused, I read the article you presented, and thank you. Here is my confusion. According to USA Today, "The South has the highest percentage of people (29.5%) who are too heavy, followed by the Midwest (29%), Northeast (25.3%) and West (24.3%). No state has an obesity rate of less than 20%, the findings show."
They actually start the article with Mississippi, like yours, but they say that 34.9 percent are 30 or more pounds overweight.
http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/health/story/2012-08-13/obesity-rates-states/57031440/1Likewise the Christian Monitor, says that 1 of every 3 people in Mississippi are overweight.
http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Society/2012/0814/Mississippi-most-obese-state-Southern-diet-or-culture-on-the-skidsIf they are correct in their reporting, and I am not saying they are or not, then how can the South be starving?
What really stood out, in 2008 they (Mississippi's governor) tried to pass a bill making it illegal to serve people that are overweight. Total stupid idea, but I guess their point is that Mississippi has been the fattest state for the past decade.
I am sure that you can understand my confusion. And, truly I am not trying to be rude to you or anyone, just confused.
Bo, br br I am somewhat confused, I read the arti... (
show quote)
Bo,
What you say makes total sense to me. After I posted, I started researching foods, what is permitted on these programs and what is not; by these programs I am talking about the government supported WIC. Then income vice nutrition, and such. What I found opened my eyes. Breads, cereals, (carb loaded or fat loaded) foods are permitted on this program, and cost per item is significantly less than fresh fruit, vegetables, lean meat, and fresh fish. Fresh fish, one has to be careful, due to water pollution and lead. But, fresh ocean fish is very expensive and one on state or government programs will be less apt to buy one fish whereas they could afford 20 or more frozen meals....high in salt and fat. A family of 4 can not afford good wholesome foods on what is allocated under the government programs. Also I read about a condition that is called food poverty. Interesting. I will not go into detail, but here is a link to a study and paper.
http://archive.unu.edu/unupress/unupbooks/uu22we/uu22we0f.htmThank you for the post, and your reply. I do learn so much from your posts. Only because you make me research and think.
BoJester wrote:
The author was using data from various sources to make his point about unhealthy living condidtions in some states
As far as your question about obesity, it make coincide with low wages, limited or no access to proper healthcare, which includes nutrition.
That fact, along with reduced unemployment benefits, cutbacks in the SNAP and WIC programs, force more people to eat unhealthy food more often.
Most unhealthy food is higher in calories and fat and sugar.
I simply posted the article for intelligent people like you to read and decide for yourself which policies and philosophies work the best for the most.
The author was using data from various sources to ... (
show quote)
you are the damdest liar i have ever seen.i know
not what state your in but here unemployment is 4.9% how is your state doing.read about texas they are down to 5.5% of course you people dont want that because you might have to get a job.and as far as politico that is a lying soros c*******t rag.
Duckie wrote:
Bo,
What you say makes total sense to me. After I posted, I started researching foods, what is permitted on these programs and what is not; by these programs I am talking about the government supported WIC. Then income vice nutrition, and such. What I found opened my eyes. Breads, cereals, (carb loaded or fat loaded) foods are permitted on this program, and cost per item is significantly less than fresh fruit, vegetables, lean meat, and fresh fish. Fresh fish, one has to be careful, due to water pollution and lead. But, fresh ocean fish is very expensive and one on state or government programs will be less apt to buy one fish whereas they could afford 20 or more frozen meals....high in salt and fat. A family of 4 can not afford good wholesome foods on what is allocated under the government programs. Also I read about a condition that is called food poverty. Interesting. I will not go into detail, but here is a link to a study and paper.
http://archive.unu.edu/unupress/unupbooks/uu22we/uu22we0f.htmThank you for the post, and your reply. I do learn so much from your posts. Only because you make me research and think.
Bo, br What you say makes total sense to me. Afte... (
show quote)
too bad neither one of you mentioned work for better quality food.
I did not focus on unemployment because it was not the topic of this topic. Would you enjoy a discussion on unemployment? If so, then perhaps I can comment if you start a new topic. I would find it interesting, and I think that my thoughts and research into the subject will add, rather than be a sidebar.
vernon wrote:
too bad neither one of you mentioned work for better quality food.
I did not focus on unemployment because it was not the topic of this topic. Would you enjoy a discussion on unemployment? If so, then perhaps I can comment if you start a new topic. I would find it interesting, and I think that my thoughts and research into the subject will add, rather than be a sidebar.
Unemployment, in my opinion, has many factors. But, I believe that unemployment results from an increase in demand rates, while the economy operates below its growth rate and potential output. Henceforth, the economy faces a great blow under this circumstance.
vernon wrote:
too bad neither one of you mentioned work for better quality food.
Neil Young describes the tortured rural southern soul exquisitely in the songs, "Southern Man" and "Alabama". There are encouraging signs, though that a number of states from the former confederacy no longer have a desire to be the nation's political orphans.
Virginia, Florida, and North Carolina flipped to blue in the last p**********l e******n. How many years until Democratic strategists can flip heavily Hispanic Texas blue? They really do have a plan and estimate a time-line of approximately 10 years.
It will be sweet to not have to use the old confederacy as the butt of late night humor. We welcome a kinder gentler more Spanish speaking version of the would-be nation that used to lie south of the Mason-Dixon.
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.