New Scientist reports that some ecologists are calling for Americans to adjust their diets as a means of reducing energy consumption.
Were we to cut our junk food consumption by 80%, we could reduce our overall intake by a third. This would also lead to a reduction in energy usage, as junk foods are apparently energy intensive products.
Apparently most Americans take in about 1000 calories more than is recommended by the FDA, so of course this wouldn't just reduce our energy consumption, it could very well have an impact on our obesity rates, heart disease, strokes, etc.
Skyrocketing gas prices have unquestionably altered driving habits. But can the same be said for say, cigarette consumption? Lance Armstrong stated on CNN this morning that he believes this to be the case, at least among kids in their early teens. I have my doubts. New York City's cigarette taxes are sky high, but that doesn't stop people from smoking, at least as far as I can see on the street and even in (yes, inside) certain bars.
People have advocated a "junk food" tax in the past as a means of combating the obesity "epidemic." Now here's a twofold rationale for raising prices on empty calories - reducing our energy consumption as well as the collective American waistline.
What say you, Soulcasters? Time to raise the cost of Cheetos, Fritos, Tostitos, and other sundry munchitos? Will either political party come within arm's reach of your Superbowl chips n' dips?
I do love my buttered popcorn, I must admit. Does that count as junk food? Actually that begs the question: What is junk food, anyway? How about bacon or corned beef or sausage of all kinds, or pepperoni or salami? Or how about pizza, noodles in all their forms, french fries, tortillas, beef brisket, barbecue pork? Anything fried, breaded?
What are we left with but steamed vegetables, beans, wild rice and barley?
