In the Schwab TV commercial, Carl, a salesman for a rival
stock broker, is addressing an elementary school class. When one of the
students asks what his firm has to offer, Carl says, “Good question!” But when
the kid replies to the broker’s answer with what Schwab has to offer, Carl
asks, “What are you teaching these kids?”
Now THAT’S a good question! Both kids and adults in the U.
S. have been subject to the government’s ideas about nutrition for over half a
century. It all started in the 50s and 60s and got much worse in 1977 with the
McGovern Committee’s Dietary Goals and then in 1980 with the very first Dietary
Guidelines for Americans.
The result is plain to see. We for the most part have followed the government's advice. Many have no
choice. The military eats what the government cooks for them, and they are getting fatter and fatter. You can’t
blame that on a lack of exercise, can you? Our schools and hospitals are
subject to these HHS/USDA guidelines too.
So, what have they been teaching us and our kids? To lose
weight and be healthy: eat less and move more. Don’t eat red meat or processed
meat. Don’t eat meat! Or cholesterol or salt! Don’t eat saturated (solid) fat,
found in animal products. Instead, eat processed “vegetable” oils (soybean,
corn, Canola, etc.), all of them UNHEALTHY polyunsaturated fats
manufactured by Agribusiness and subsidized by the USDA!
Doctors too are having an increasingly difficult time under
the influence of government Dictocrats. To survive they are now part of large
groups and hospital practices where corporate number crunchers are monitoring your
personal medical records to see that the clinician is recording that he advised
you to eat a mostly plant-based diet and get the recommended amount of
exercise. If your doctor hasn’t advised you to do this, you’re lucky; he or she
is still in private practice but is at risk of HHS
sanctions and increasing “negative
payment adjustments” if this is not in your patient notes. Their
Medicare reimbursements will decrease by 9% by 2022.
So, what’s to be done about it? Obviously, the macro
solution is to get legislators out of the business of telling people what to
eat, but that is not going to happen. There will always be politicians who think they know what’s best for everyone.
They will always want to impose their
will on the rest of us, by legislation. They will argue that it is the proper
role of government to look after the “general welfare” of the citizenry, to
justify with legislation anything that is not expressly “enumerated” as powers
granted to them by the Constitution.
In this they have been abetted by a Supreme Court which has
leaned slightly left and extended power to Congress to legislate away your
freedoms, all in the name of the “general welfare.” Some, who espouse a civil
libertarian point of view, objected, but others, to right of center, relented
to pressure for the “general good.”
Today, however, the tide is changing. In 2002, on the advice
of my doctor who just wanted me to lose weight, I started to eat Very Low Carb. He had been nudging me
for years, telling me to eat a “balanced” diet, but “eat less and exercise
more.” I even worked with his dietician, all to no avail. Then in July of that
year he read a NYT Sunday magazine
cover story, “What If It's All Been a Big Fat Lie.” He followed
the diet himself, quickly lost 17 pounds and suggested I try it. I lost 170
pounds and abruptly stopped almost all my diabetes meds early on.
More and more people (and many doctors) are discovering this
Way of Eating. There are now thousands of practitioners worldwide who publicly
practice this way, and 10s of thousands more who would tacitly support your
decision to change the way you eat. After all, doctors and related health
professionals are interested in results
and are persuaded by evidence. Not
only will you lose weight easily this
way, and do it without hunger, your
blood tests of metabolic markers, BP and inflammation, will improve
dramatically. That’s real evidence.
The tide is also
changing on the Supreme Court. The balance of power is now 5 to 4 for a more
conservative interpretation of the “general welfare” clause. And soon it could
be 6 to 3. Personally, I will be much happier if and when Congress and the
Courts decide that government should have less to say about what we eat.
No comments:
Post a Comment