October 11, 2009
Britain's Central Planning Death Panels
October 11, 2009
Free Market M.D.
October 11, 2009
Economies of Scale in Compliance
October 11, 2009
Balan's Challenge
October 10, 2009
The Pleasure of Telling Others What to Do
October 10, 2009
Gonick the Great - and How He Could Have Been Greater
October 9, 2009
More Scott Sumner
October 9, 2009
Not From The Onion
October 9, 2009
Thoughts on a Second Stimulus
I for one think that it is far from proven that high-fat food is bad for you. It seems to me that fat, protein or carbs does not matter, it is how much calories that you eat. (That is assuming that you get enough vitamins and minerals-and for that you can take a one a vitamin like Centrum).
Didn't I read somewhere that the whole thing with high-fat foods being bad for you was just that there tends to be a positive relationship between the amount of fat and the number of calories (probably because fat contains more calories per gram than carbs or protein)? Once people started making high-calorie low-fat foods (like all those "low-fat snacks" you see in the junk-food aisle that are high in calories), that relationship went away and there was no longer a link between high-fat foods and obesity.
Which makes sense, given that your body is basically just a battery, storing excess calories (independent of how you obtain them) in the form of fat and burning them in lean times.
Of course we won't ever run out of resources. As things get rarer, prices go up, and less of it is used, and alternatives are used. Basic economics. It's nice to know that at least 38% of the people at the time understood economics to that level.
I roll my eyes at the evolution answer, but understand why the numbers are so high. Oh well.