this post was submitted on 12 Jan 2025
226 points (99.1% liked)

politics

19336 readers
2209 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Summary

Senator Roger Marshall (R-Kan.) claimed that "70 percent" of health outcomes depend on individual choices, blaming Americans for poor health while Republicans plan to cut healthcare protections.

Marshall, a former OBGYN and leader of the Make America Healthy Again (MAHA) Caucus, emphasizes nutrition and preventative care but ignores systemic issues like poverty and racism.

Proposals from the Trump administration and GOP Congress may weaken Affordable Care Act (ACA) protections, reduce access to care, and increase uninsured rates.

Marshall has also supported physician-owned hospitals, benefiting financially from the industry.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Plebcouncilman@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 day ago (2 children)

I agree with him to an extent. But people can’t make right choices if they don’t know what are the right choices. As with most American ills, it’s an education problem, which is systemic and not individual. So I’d lower his number to 50% now that we all have access to the internet and can research what a good diet looks like.

[–] bss03@infosec.pub 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

There is still a lot of disagreement about what a good diet looks like. The government propaganda on behalf of the agri-industrial complex that was the food pyramid is still around out there, for one.

It also takes time many people don't seem to have to eat well. Ready-to-eat food is near universally bad for you, tho it is at least labeled as such if you read nutrition labels or visit the nutritional information page of your favorite chain.

I'm all for better information resources with the best information we do have about diet and any other health maintenance, to reduce "self-inflicted" health conditions. But, I'm against reducing funding for treatment of people's current health conditions, whatever the cause.

[–] Plebcouncilman@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

There’s actually not that much disagreement. There’s disagreement about whether certain foods cause or increase the likelihood of diseases, like red meat and cancer. But it is almost universally accepted that a varied diet made up of Whole Foods like vegetables, grains, meat and fish and as little ultra processed foods as possible, is the best diet. Only social media influencers trying to get engagement are the ones saying that vegan,vegetarian or carnivore diet (or other more farfetched diets) are the “optimal diet”. That being said there’s some nuance to the ultraprocessed food label, because some of them could be good or at least better than most others of their kind, but as a rule of thumb if it doesn’t look like something that can grow out of the earth or came from an animal you can bet that it is ultra processed and is best avoided and eaten only on occasion.

It doesn’t take that much time either imo, just last Sunday I meal prepped for the entire week and it took me 3 hours. I know maybe not everyone can have the time for it but I’m confident in stating that most people can find 3 hours to meal prep, but they choose not to because they don’t know how to and the alternative is easier than trying to figure it out.

Education is the solution, school should be teaching people nutrition and food preparation because parents that don’t have these skills can’t teach them. It’s unbelievable that we will teach people calculus at school which they are unlikely to ever need in their lives unless they go into a technical field, but we won’t teach them the basic skills that keep us alive and healthy as a society.

[–] AA5B@lemmy.world 1 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

Blame education levels when medical advertising is no longer allowed and when companies need to be able to substantiate any health claims. A huge part of the problem is our exploitational and dishonest system: we don’t need an education as much as a skeptical eye and being able to spot the scans, fakes, and lies

[–] Plebcouncilman@sh.itjust.works 2 points 22 hours ago

I still cannot abolish personal responsibility. But I agree with you, that that is also a big part of the issue but for me a skeptical eye comes from being well educated on at least basic stuff. When you don’t know much about anything it’s really hard to decide what is fact or fiction and because trying to untangle the lies from the truth is hard work most people just default to taking everything at face value and accepting it without much skepticism.