No — according to Dr. Diane Finegood, obesity is more "complex" than rocket science. Surely that can't be right. If rocket science was less complex than eating a super sized fast food meal we would be seeing rockets being launched from every other backyard in the country. as it is, these backyards usually sit idle when they are not being inhabited by a bunch of fat people barbequing.
Dr. Finegood is the scientific director of the Canadian Institutes of Health Research's Institute for Nutrition, Metabolism and Diabetes, which, on the off chance that you haven't already guessed, is an agency of the government of Canada. addressing a conference in Montreal last weekend, Dr. Finegood told the audience that the obesity that is plaguing Canada and other countries is more "complex" than rocket science. and naturally society is to blame for all the obese that walk among us. It seems that there is apparently just too much darn choice for Canadians and we just can't help ourselves. We are "bombarded" with junk food advertising by those bad, bad capitalists and it's just so easy to pick up junk food rather than eat healthy meals.
Whatever credibility Dr. Finegood might otherwise have went out the window when she made her obesity vis á vis rocket science comparison. There is nothing complex about choosing to snack on carrot sticks rather than eat a bag of potato chips. Her reference to the complexity of obesity as far as it is caused by eating non healthy is a slam against the citizens of this country that hasn't been seen since, well, a couple of months ago when Paul Martin's mouthpiece, Scott Reid criticized Stephen Harper's plan to give Canadian parents money for daycare because they would spend it all on "popcorn and beer". Even the dullest of the unwashed masses know that certain foods such as vegetables and fruits are healthier and less likely to cause obesity than such as chocolate bars and greasy hamburgers. Because it is "easier" to find junk food that healthy food and because people prefer fattening foods to something healthier does not make the choice "complex". Perhaps it makes the doctor feel better to think that her area of expertise encompasses the complexity of the ages, but her comparison to rocket science is simply laughable. It may be difficult for some people to forgo junk food but that does not make healthy eating an issue that involves complexity.
Dr. Finegood's views are typical of the operation of the nanny state. Since people are just way too dumb to solve this "complex' problem on their own, the state will solve it for us. Hey, let's just ban all junk food. It's amazing how when governments discover complex problems, the first thing that they to is to suggest the simplest (ie. the least "complex") solution. Too many gun murders? Ban guns. Too many cancer deaths? Ban pesticides. It is so much easier to ban something than it is to allow people to make their own choices. Junk food is popular because it tastes good and people like it. If some overeat, that's their problem. You can try and educate people to the dangers of overeating, but hand wringing as a prelude to banning items like junk food and denying people a choice of what to eat is simply wrong in a free society.
Finegood's statements are a good illustration of how some, especially those on the left, view their fellow citizens. When given a choice, other than abortion of course, some people will make bad choices and therefore the solution is to take that choice away. There are those in society that would love to deprive the citizenry of any free will and have the government mandate everything that the population does. It would be one thing if Dr. Finegood's views were simply her views but they aren't. In seeking employment with the government, she certainly has found her niche.
Perhaps the doctor would prefer to live in a society where the population is not "bombarded" with advertisements for Big Macs and Whoppers. Iraq might be a good place. There she would only be bombarded by rockets — you know the things that were designed by those simple rocket scientists.
Pursuant to Title 17 U.S.C. 107, other copyrighted work is provided for educational purposes, research, critical comment, or debate without profit or payment. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for your own purposes beyond the 'fair use' exception, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. Views are those of authors and not necessarily those of Canada Free Press. Content is Copyright 1997-2024 the individual authors. Site Copyright 1997-2024 Canada Free Press.Com Privacy Statement