Dear Obese America: Uncle Sam Wants To Regulate What You Eat

Tyler Durden's picture

It seems that the recent foray of Mayor Bloomberg into determining what one may and may not consume based on calorie count, was just the appetizer, so to say. As some may recall, back in March we wrote that based on OECD predictions, up to 75% of the US nation will be overweight or obese. Now, none other than Uncle Sam has gotten wind that his population will soon be primarily made up of fat people. So he has a solution, which is in the vein of all other solutions where Uncle Sam is concerned: regulate, regulate, regulate.

From Bloomberg: "Governments should regulate food companies on unhealthy ingredients in products that contribute to obesity, an epidemic that now affects 1-in-3 Americans and costs the U.S. $150 billion a year, said New York City Health Commissioner Thomas Farley. More than education and voluntary action by companies is needed, Farley said. New York’s limit on sugary soft drink sales is one example of the steps governments must take to stop the rise of obesity, he said today at a press conference on the topic held by the Journal of the American Medical Association." Punchline #1: "Publicly traded food companies, charged with making a profit for their shareholders, can’t be relied upon to make their foods more nutritious, Farley said." In other words, Uncle Sam knows what is best for you, always. Punchline #2: "There is a clear role for government in the solution,” Farley said. “Obesity rates have been rising considerably for the last 30 to 40 years. If we don’t do anything, I think it is a fair prediction that they will continue to rise." Surely, when it comes to things that are soaring which will not stop soaring unless something is done, the US government knows best: after all just look at Exhibit A: the US Debt, which sadly the US government has been "regulating" pretty much since the beginning.


About 60 percent of adults in New York City are overweight or obese and 1-in-8 have diabetes, which is often caused by obesity, Farley said. A person with a body mass index of at least 30 is considered obese, according to the National Institutes of Health. The BMI is calculated using height and weight. A man who is 6 feet tall and weighed more than 220 pounds would be considered obese using the formula.


The size of a soda has increased from about 6.5 ounces in the 1960s to 20 ounces today, according to Farley. He said surveys have found that Americans eat 200 to 600 more calories a day than they did in the 1970s and that sugary drinks are playing a role in that added calorie consumption.


The city’s soda size rule is not government restriction on choice, adding that people can consume as much as they want at restaurants as long as it isn’t with a cup larger than 16 ounces, Farley said.

And just in case there was any confusion where this is going...

While the idea of government regulation on portion size is new, we think it makes all the sense in the world,” Farley said.

Our advice: eat up America. Very soon you will need permission from your friendly local government constable to not only chew, but swallow.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
random shots's picture

I see an opportunity for calorie offset credits...paging Goldman Sachs. 

MillionDollarBonus_'s picture

Every four years, we are enchanted with the Olympic spirit and each of us makes a personal commitment to eat healthy and get fit. But this Olympic year is different. The honourable first lady, Michelle LaVaughn Robinson Obama, has made a monumental effort to spread the ideas of health and fitness, not just to America, but to people all across the world. The government is not going to put up with laziness, incompetence and physical neglect any longer. This is the beginning of the war on obesity - Eliminate obesity by 2014!

ndotken's picture

I'm sure the State Dept will pay Hillary's share of the new Fatass Tax, which will be considerable.

redpill's picture

You fatten the country with your fucking Food Pyramid for 30 years and now there's some suprise so many are obese?

Arthor Bearing's picture

Tax fast food, carb-laden shit, and soda, and use the procedes to pay for healthcare. Let people pay for their own unhealthy habits.

A similar effect could be more easily achieved by ending corn subsidies.

However we all know effective solutions will never be attempted if somebody is offended or if a political interest is threatened.

Pladizow's picture

You dont allow your milk cows to commit suicide!

Is it me or is TrillionDollar Anus starting to sound more and more like Hitler:

Colombian Gringo's picture

I agree, we should regulate fat people, starting with Obama's cow of a wife. Then, we should starve Hitlery, so that she knows what it feels like to bomb arabs into democracy.

iDealMeat's picture


We have a people population problem..

People are food..

Problem solved..

TruthInSunshine's picture

I get all my nutrition advice from the government. Their FDA scientists & researchers are brilliant, recommending so many carbohydrates, starches, gluten and other hyperglycemic foods.



JPM Hater001's picture

"There is a clear roll for the government"

Can I get mine glazed and cream filled?

Pladizow's picture

Hollow points solve obesity!

nope-1004's picture

I do believe there is a correlation between how much one eats and how fat they are.  I could be wrong, but seems to me the solution to getting rid of fat, when 98% of the population is too lazy to exercise, is to stop going to Buffet Land.  No?


pods's picture

Of course not, it is a genetic, GMO, thyroid issue, certainy not a simple equation.

If you eat more calories than you burn or pass, you will store them.

But amerikans will go to great lengths to continue eating the way that they want to.

So there are all these twisted diets floating around that let people eat exactly how they want to.

I have posted this before, and will post it again:

If you want to reverse your chronic disease, click the link.  If you want to keep eating the way you want to and feel good about it, feel free.



john39's picture

also, treating all calories as equal is totally incorrect.  most fat people in the United States are starving for nutrients...  thanks to monsatan and co, food is no longer food....  people have to take the world back from the corporate scum who have taken control.  you can start doing this by avoiding processed foods, and buy local, organic, non-processed foods...  and in the process, rediscover what health really is.

pods's picture

I am well aware that fat people are suffering from malnutrition.  And many if not most of the western world has not actually felt true hunger.

But exactly how are calories different?

Are you speaking of efficiency of digestion between carbohydrates, fats and proteins or the source?  


john39's picture

the source....   a carrot grown in mineral deficient soil, with pesticides and herbicides, without beneficial bacteria in the soil....  is an entirely different thing than an organic carrot grown in nutrient rich soil, without toxic pesticides and fertilizers...   and I am not even referring to GM foods which are basically an abomination to be avoided....       another example...  soy, whether GM or not, is not fit for human consumption.... yes it has calories... but, if not fermented the old way (no shortcuts), a human cannot properly digest soy and it slowly destroys your health...    soy, btw, is in just about every processed food, what a surprise.

pods's picture

Then you are speaking of nutrients, not calories.

I am curious as to what about soy makes it unfit for consumption or cannot be digested.


john39's picture

technically a calorie is just a measure of energy, but my point was the source of the calorie makes a huge difference... but no point in arguing about it.    as for soy, this article isn't perfect, but gives a taste of the issues:

pods's picture

So you are speaking of the phytic acid and the trypsin inhibitors?  These are mainly destroyed in cooking/fermenting.  Although the phytates are tougher to destroy.

I eat copious amounts of spinach, which is high in calcium but also high in oxalates.  These natural chelators make mineral absorption less efficient, but the phytonutrient density more than makes up for these almost macro nutrient minerals.

I am in agreement with you, and am not trying to argue. I just want to make sure that the talk about soy was not in fact the bogus phytoestrogen bitch tit argument.

Many beans in fact are high in phytic acid and must be soaked to reduce the amount.

Give that Dr. Fuhrman site a look, guy is fantastic.  I have 2 of his books and a set of DVDs.  He researchs everything and provides links to all the studies when he speaks of things.

A very thorough nutritionist who has accomplished amazing things with disease reversal.


john39's picture

Will do (on the book). I think i probably have read parts of it before as i try to read anything holistic health oriented that I can.

Soy is great for big business... horrible for people.  the old chinese knew, if you want to eat it... have to ferment it.   The old ways of food preparation were very wise...  In modern times we think our short cuts are without consequences...  but we couldn't be more wrong.  the propblem is, for most, their health is long gone before they have any clue what is happening.   then they want a pill to "fix" things...  it just doesn't work like that.

meat is another example...  mainstream medicine claims that red meat will cause heart disease... but what are they really studying?  soy fed beef.... which is totally unnatural for the animals and produces unhealthy meat.  Grass fed beef is an elixer... and will not cause heart issues even eaten regularly....  and it goes on and on.... trust the government or mainstream medicine... wind up unhealthy and prematurely dead.  pretty simple.

Temporalist's picture

Fen-Phen Bitchez!

Didn't they stop Cookie Monster from eating cookies years ago?  I guess that didn't work.

FrankDrakman's picture

What an ignorant pile of shit. A long term conclusive study has shown that there is ZERO difference between "organic" and regular produce, except for price. The difference in pesticides and fertilizers is made negligible by using the highly sophisticated technique of WASHING the food before you eat it.

You are as fucking clueless as the AGW whiners. BTW, Antarctic ice hit a record expanse for this day of the year today. What is it about you true believers that makes you cast away all the evidence that your theories are full of - and in this case, it's the literal truth - shit?

1911A1's picture

fat != protein != carbohydrates.  All calories are not the same.  The calorie source matters in terms of macronutrients.

It also matters in terms of metabolic efficiency.  As an example, gluconeogenesis is about 70% efficient, but there are more effects than just this when on a low/no carb diet:

The human body can live without carbohydrates, it can not live without protein and fat.


pods's picture

The brain's preferred energy source is glucose.

I will not argue with someone who wishes to live on fat and protein.

Like I said, we will go to great lengths to prove that our preferred diet is healthy.

The most long lived peoples (see The China Study) consist on a diet that is based on whole foods and is primarily vegetarian.  These peoples also avoid our chronic metabolic diseases such as cancer and heart disease.



1911A1's picture

This discussion is not about proving which diets are healthy.  It is about eliminating the belief that "all calories are equal."  They are not.  Further, preferred energy source doesn't tell us anything about health effects.  The human body uses ketone bodies more efficiently than glucose.  Does efficiency prove anything?

Why would you base any conclusions on a study that is not peer reviewed and has been repeatedly shown to be bunk?  Particularly now that some of the authors of this study have published articles in peer reviewed journals with opposite conclusions to The China Study.

BTW, those authors actually reference peer reviewed papers to back-up their conclusions.

Multivariate analysis of some of "The China Study" data shows different conclusions:

From one of Campbell's own papers:

"Erythrocyte fatty acids, plasma lipids, and cardiovascular disease in rural China” published in the December 1990 issue of the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition.

Within China neither plasma total cholesterol nor LDL cholesterol was associated with CVD [cardiovascular disease]. The results indicate that geographical differences in CVD mortality within China are caused primarily by factors other than dietary or plasma cholesterol.

1911A1's picture

Fuhrman’s calculations of nutrient density suffer from three fatal flaws: first, he excludes from these calculations many nutrients known to be essential to the body while doubling the score of other putative nutrients whose physiological functions are uncertain; second, he fails to account for variations in the bioavailability of nutrients between foods; third, he groups all nutrients present in a food into a single score as if they were interchangeable, rather than acknowledging that different types of foods provide different types of nutrients.


His definition of nutrient density as nutrients per calorie can be valuable for someone whose first priority is to restrict calories, but it can be inappropriate for others. Rather than instructing the reader about how to judiciously use the ten percent of calories allotted to animal products to select the most nutrient-dense of these foods, Fuhrman dismisses their nutritional contribution as insignificant. Although the premise of Eat to Live—nutrient density—is solid, his assumptions in the application of this principle seriously diminish the value that this book will have to many readers and may even lead some down a path that will ultimately damage their health.

mirac's picture

Could one make a healthy doughnut?  Maybe...If I could only get ahold of The Dunkin Donuts CEO...

Panafrican Funktron Robot's picture

This.  I mean, fuck, the sheer quantity of poison that gets the thumbs up from the FDA as a food additive makes me wonder what else they're going to approve once they really start ramping up their "anti-obesity" effort.  Comeback story for "anal seepage" Olean?  lol

Per usual, the answer to the obesity problem is simple.  Eat less, exercise more, and eat stuff that is the least fucked with.  Do I get a congressional medal now?  Or would I be in line for a censure?  I guess my prescription is about 1,999 pages too short to be worthy of consideration.  

TruthInSunshine's picture

The makers of edible, food-like substances have deeply captured government regulatory agencies opining wisdom on what to eat.

It's the same Deep Capture that has taken place in financial, banking, pharma and any other area of the well-regulated lives of Amerikans.

KISS plan for eating healthy:


Consume approximately as many calories as you burn in any given day (want to eat more? get off your ass more)

Don't eat crap that has a shelf life for more than a few days, comes in a box, or in a package (that eliminates about 95% of processed food, and approximately 75% of the "food" on grocery store shelves).

Eat lots of fruits, vegetables and nuts.

Eat & enjoy reasonable amounts of fresh (if you know the producer or source, all the better) red meat, fish and poultry (stay away from the processed, chemical-laden shit that's pre-packaged). Eat as many eggs as you wish (remember the government warning on eggs?)

Eat healthy fats & good-fat foods like olive oil, avacados, sunflower oil, etc.


LIMIT carbs (and if you eat carbs, make them complex ones, combined with fiber to slow the assault on your pancreas), and especially simple carbohydrates, which create a vicious insulin spiking cycle, and which is a huge reason why half the f*cking country is diabetic or pre-diabetic (the corn lobby is a very powerful bitch, bitchez).


As a side note, disregard Big Pharma's statin scam, which has been their most profitable astro-turfing campaign to date. Cholesterol is NOT the cause of heart disease, but merely accompanies the true cause, which is high levels of C-reactive protein and inflammation, in general (which is the root cause of many other serious diseases).

Statins reduce inflammation, but carry tremendous adverse side risks. There are far superior methods of reducing inflammatory conditions than taking statins. See the research by Gary Taubes for more on the great statin scam.

It's a dirty little secret that so many physicians choose to take 81 milligrams to 162 milligrams of plain aspirin daily, rather than any statin, to reduce not only their risk of cardiovascular disease, but cancer and other inflammatory marker diseases.

Imagine that, aspirin (acetylsalicylic acid), which comes from the bark of the willow tree, and is incredibly inexpensive, and most importantly, can't be patented, is treated as the ugly step-child by the captured medical establishment and Big Pharma, even though the best data to date shows it's incredibly effective at very low doses in mitigating heart disease and can both prevent cancer and literally kill hard-mass cancer tumors that's already set in...

TruthInSunshine's picture
BBC News - Daily aspirin 'prevents and possibly treats cancer'

"Now the same experts believe the protective effect occurs much sooner - within three to five years - based on a new analysis of data from 51 trials involving more than 77,000 patients."

  • Aspirin (acetylsalicylic acid) has been used for many years as a painkiller. It has an anti-inflammatory action
  • Low-dose (75mg) aspirin is already recommended for people with known cardiovascular disease to prevent stroke and heart attack

And aspirin appears not only to reduce the risk of developing many different cancers in the first place, but may also stop cancers spreading around the body.


Aspirin's 'triple whammy' effect against cancer


And by modifying aspirin in a very simple way (adding nitric oxide), it becomes a legitimate precision guided nuclear warhead upon malignant tumors and cancer cells:

Could a NOSH-aspirin-a-day keep cancer away?
Stackers's picture

Sorry you have used up your weekly alotted calorie ration already.

But its still only Thursday !

I guess you should have planned better citizen. Next please.


Next please.

JPM Hater001's picture

The obesity problem will be solved shortly.

Followed there after by famine.

Carry on.

Popo's picture

That means hotter chicks, right?

krispkritter's picture

I think you meant 'carrion'...

krispkritter's picture

Ever read Lipid Leggin'? What happens when Gov't outlaws butter...

What NY will look like in a year or two if Bloomy's still in office. Might take the rest of the US awhile longer...

BooMushroom's picture

Thanks for the link. ZH commenters are the best commenters in the whole wide web.

Abiotic Oil's picture

Don't foget to regulate the fat ass Surgeon General!

kaiserhoff's picture

Bennie should be sentenced to eat Moochelle;)

Renewable Life's picture

Ohh but new jerseys "fatter then a house" governor is cool right, fuck off hypocrite! How about Rush Limbaugh and that fat ass Carl Rove? Where do they fit in?

Being unhealthy doesn't have shit to do with politics, but thank god, when the stormin morman gets elected President, he'll fix that too on his first day in the white house!!! Mitt says, fat ass people in America, I'll give you a 10,000 tax credit if you lose weight, there fixed!! All you'll have to go is attach the before and after photos to your tax returns and check the box!!

Ohhhh wait, I said we would close all those tax deductions didn't I, ok well, not this one, let's close mortgage interest instead!!! Damn being President is easy!!! What's next????

augustusgloop's picture

just allow "sister wives" like willard mitt's gran' pappy in ol' mexico had and make them share the calories formerly allocated to the monogam. 

LULZBank's picture

Americans will provide the next source of hydrocarbon fuels to the generations living say about 2 to 3 centuries from now.

malikai's picture

Why wait?


"Thermal depolymerization (TDP) is a depolymerization process using hydrous pyrolysis for the reduction of complex organic materials (usually waste products of various sorts, often biomass and plastic) into light crude oil. It mimics the natural geological processes thought to be involved in the production of fossil fuels. Under pressure and heat, long chain polymers of hydrogenoxygen, and carbon decompose into short-chain petroleumhydrocarbons with a maximum length of around 18 carbons."

Sudden Debt's picture

this one supports your quote :)

Aaaaarrrhhhh... you dumb fucker...... hilarious :) must see :)