|
|
|
|
|
|
by zorga
2707 days ago
|
|
|
> Nobody's saying it's all somebody else's fault. Yes they are. > The only valid position to hold about this topic is that it's complex and multi-faceted. Incorrect. That's a valid position, it's certainly not the only one. > the carb-dependent metabolism they end up with by the time they reach adulthood will most certainly complicate their ability to make healthy choices. Nonsense, your metabolism is not set in stone, they can simply change their diets and if they don't, no one is to blame but them for their continued unhealthiness. > Why do you hold a different position regarding sugar? Sugar isn't remotely comparable to those two; they're restricted to minors because they're lethal drugs, sugar is not. |
|
|
Please link to their comments.
>Incorrect. That's a valid position, it's certainly not the only one.
It is when you're talking about an organic system like a human body or any evolved system in nature.
> they can simply change their diets and if they don't, no one is to blame but them
No they can't; this is the entire point. If they could, they would, and metabolic illness would simply cease to be a problem rather than being one of the most pernicious problems in all of medicine.
> they're restricted to minors because they're lethal drugs, sugar is not
The evidence suggests otherwise.
But what's it to you anyway? What's your motivation for being utterly dogmatic and uncompromising, rather than engaging in a good-faith examination of the evidence?