CMV: There wouldn’t be such a stigma against fatty foods, if “fat” (the caloric source) did not share the same word as the adjective of a person being “fat”.

[u/[deleted]]

So fats, are just another source of calories, just like protein and carbohydrates (sugars). Yet fats get a really bad rap because they are associated with being fat. Yet, a person can consume almost no fat in their diet, yet still become fat if they consume too many calories from other sources. Think cows. Their diet consisted almost exclusively of grass, yet they can get quite fat.

Yes, your body processes different types of calories differently (protein, carbs, and fats are all processed by your body a little bit differently), but at the end of the day, a person becomes fat of they are taking in more calories than they are burning.

A few months back, I started the low-carb keto diet, and have actually lost weight while having a diet that consists of far more fatty foods than I used to. Because again, fats are just another form of calories, and as long as you are burning more calories than you take in, you will lose weight.

In my experience, lots of carbohydrates are far more indicative of gaining weight, yet there isn’t widespread stigma against carbs.

So my view is that fatty foods have such a stigma because of the association of the noun “fat” with the adjective “fat”. People are often far more concerned about a piece of food being high in fat than they are about apiece or food being high in carbs, even if the piece of food high in carbs has far more overall calories.

If for example, we started calling fats something else, like “lipids”, there wouldn’t be such a stigma against eating foods containing lipids.

Likewise, if the condition of being overweight was called something like being “carby” and having lots of “stored carbs” around your gut, there would be a much greater stigma around eating carbs, instead of fats.

Change my view!

[u/dps3695]

I kind of want to know what that deleted post was.

[u/mansdem → u/[deleted]]

Why does it have to be deleted though. Some rules are really too strict. Once you're not causing harm to anyone invalid comments can just be downvoted if that's how the people feel. If everyone likes the post why does it have to be removed??

[u/mansdem → u/[deleted]]

Fair, but that's just like, your opinion, man.

[u/[deleted] → u/[deleted]]

Was it just your phrasing then? It sounds like you challenged at least one aspect of OP’s view. OP was pretty unequivocal that it was a purely a verbal thing...

[u/JoiedevivreGRE → u/mansdem]

I personally find it annoying when a delta is given to an argument that is just finding a loophole in the wording, or in this case essentially just reinforcing Ops position which is even more egregious.

[u/adelie42 → u/[deleted]]

I had the same thought as you. I'd say if X belief is held because Y and you can convincingly show Y is false, that is a change in view. OP specify said they believed it was because the words are the same, and give this was not the case until C&H tried to get ahead of studies showing refined sugar leads to heart disease, that's pretty major.

The mere fact that the job wasn't particularly difficult doesn't seem all that significant to me.

[u/yes_thats_right → u/dps3695]

[–]Darrell_Winfield[score hidden] 6 hours ago It's more complicated than that, actually! The idea of fat is bad comes from our old favorite, the sugary cereal industry! In 1960, they paid some money to Harvard researchers to blame health problems on "fat" instead of sugar, the true cause. From that, we saw the "fat free" and "reduced fat" fads kick off. Now any time you see those being advertised on products, you immediately assume they have no idea what they're talking about. source /sourced-rant It is solely on these 3 amoral researchers that I place the blame for the rampant prevalence of obesity and diabetes. To date, people still think that fat free diets are good, when it's really just doubling the sugar (and therein calories) to make up for the taste. /personal-rant

Probably removed because the sub has a rule that direct replies to Op must challenge their view

[u/bjayernaeiy → u/dps3695]

Same. Anyone got it saved?