In absence of a caloric surplus / chronic overfeeding, also known as energy poisoning, you have absolutely no proof for the claim. There isn't even an association, let alone causation.
And it would be naive to think that eliminating added sugar and meat would prevent people from eating too much.
Which actually beats dying of starvation, which is what people used to do ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ — comparing food with cigarettes or viruses is completely ridiculous.
In absence of guns being fired at people, guns are completely safe. There isn't even an association, let alone causation.
> And it would be naive to think that eliminating added sugar and meat would prevent people from eating too much.
I guess that people could still gorge themselves on potato chips, popcorn... Maybe a few other foods? But surely it's clear that 90%+ of overeating occurs with meat and sugar?
bad_user|6 years ago
And it would be naive to think that eliminating added sugar and meat would prevent people from eating too much.
Which actually beats dying of starvation, which is what people used to do ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ — comparing food with cigarettes or viruses is completely ridiculous.
vraivroo|6 years ago
mdemare|6 years ago
> And it would be naive to think that eliminating added sugar and meat would prevent people from eating too much.
I guess that people could still gorge themselves on potato chips, popcorn... Maybe a few other foods? But surely it's clear that 90%+ of overeating occurs with meat and sugar?