• Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    First of all, that’s one “devil’s advocate however” in an article full of information to the contrary.

    Second of all, I’d be interested in seeing who funded those studies. Lobbying groups for different unhealthy foods as well as grocery stores looking for excuses to not cater to poor people often fund junk studies that say exactly what they want them to. Just like Big Tobacco did and political groups still do.

    Third, addiction still ≠ choice and sugar is more addictive than most narcotics.

    • zero_spelled_with_an_ecks@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      11 months ago

      Just on your last point, sugar is not more addictive than narcotics. That’s complete bunk. Provide a primary source for that claim if you want to refute me, but all those headlines about that topic were sensational and were basically based on sugar lighting up the same part of the brain as narcotics, namely the pleasure areas. So we like them both, but that has no bearing on addictiveness.