Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by LeifCarrotson 1725 days ago
I believe you should give valid reasoning, and also deny the harmful obsession.

Some stimulants are too addictive to trust a young child to mindfully avoid.

The people working in the social media and entertainment industries are extremely skilled at their jobs of increasing user engagement, they have huge budgets with which to accomplish that goal and little regulatory oversight.

People have a finite ability to resist obsession.

Sugar is tasty, it gives a surge of dopamine when you consume it, and fruits use that property to get animals like us to eat them so they can reproduce. But even kids can resist that with a little education and maybe a stomachache after Halloween.

Heroin is similarly addictive, in the way that a butter knife and similarly a hand grenade are dangerous to a small child.

These products are meticulously engineered to be maximally addictive and obsessive. Human nature is not necessarily up to the task of resisting them.

1 comments

> But even kids can resist that with a little education

Actually—are we sure about that?

It seems like an awful lot of adults die each year basically because they couldn’t stop themselves from eating too many sugary foods.

No, I'm not. You're correct that fruit is not sufficiently addictive for adults to gorge themselves on it to fatal levels. At the very least, it has not historically been sufficiently available to cause people to succumb to heart disease or diabetes before, on average, they had >2 children per couple: Humanity has not yet gone extinct.

Whether Nestle's next concoction will be able to do that, composed of eye-catching, almost fluorescent colored dyes, unimaginably sweet high-fructose corn syrup, surreptitiously enhanced by most of your daily recommended dose of salt, tempered by delightfully tangy citric acid, all carried in a smooth, bouncy xanthan/guar gum matrix, no one knows yet. I'm pessimistic regardless of the engineering behind the treat: it seems likely that a sufficient number of people will always be able to make it through childbearing age before succumbing to diet-based problems, if that ever ceases to be the case, then the dwindling population will soon be unable to keep the global industries its manufacturing requires in operation.

fruit is not sufficiently addictive for adults to gorge themselves

The problems isn't just which foods are addictive, it's the economics of food costs too:

Fruits are expensive relative to much worse options. Fruits mostly are not very calorie dense, so you could gorge yourself completely on strawberries, eating an entire container in a sitting and paying (near me) $4 for it @ ~150 calories.

Or you could pay $2.59 for a 3-pack of microwave "movie theatre butter" popcorn for an effective price of $0.86 and consume around ~400 calories.

Calorie-dense junk foods are simply much cheaper to begin with. If you're on a budget and love, equally, strawberries & popcorn and want a few snacks for the week, you can spend $12 for 3lb of strawberries or $2.59 for the popcorn.

Or compare the cost of a 3-liter bottle of soda (about $1.10, or 1 penny/ounce) to the cost of 100% pure apple juice, which is about 3x the price per ounce. Yes both are sugar heavy, but the carbohydrates in pure juice aren't as bad and juice at least has other nutrients, and is sometimes fortified with more. enact a course-correction, it is always more expensive to

(There is at least one partial exception to the fruit issue: bananas. Compared to other fruits, they are massively cheaper on a price-per-calorie basis. But you can't live on bananas alone.)

Fruit (and no sugar added juice) consumption can make a difference in someone's diet.

I've seen people getting fat just by eating too much fruit because "fruit is healthy, it's not candy" and not having limits.

It's a infinitesimally small problem compared to processed sugar, though, so I completely agree with your point.