This story from foodnavigator-usa.com has plenty to comment on, and we'll see what I get to, but I want to start with the fifth paragraph:

Nevertheless, only 44 percent said they incorporate at least one healthy food into their diet.

Where to begin? Is one going to get healthy, or even healthier, by incorporating "a" healthy food into one's diet? Isn't the goal to eat healthily, not to incorporate a healthy food?

If you're "incorporating a healthy food," doesn't that presuppose that what you're eating now is unhealthy? That can't be a good starting point for anyone.

More than half of the survey respondents aren't even incorporating one healthy food! 'Course, considering that only 39 percent say they're "very concerned" about eating healthily, maybe that's not such a bad number.

In this dispatch from foodnavigator-usa.com, the soda industry is reported to complain that New York City's effort to bar food stamps' use for sugary beverages is discriminatory.

To which I say, "Of course it is! But what's your point?"

A comparison between increases in the rates of obesity and of soda consumption:

No, it doesn't mean one caused the other. But you can decide if it's mere coincidence.

"Food addiction — nah"

That's the dismissive headline atop another of the serially disappointing blogs of psychcentral.com, this time written by Pittsburgh therapist Pavel G. Somov, which says in part:

"If you have labeled yourself as a food addict, I suggest you retire this psychologically toxic concept from your mind. You are a seeker of wellbeing who is still mastering the learning curve of moderation."

OMG, sir, if you only knew. Which clearly you don't. (Though I'll acknowledge for the record that we're just two guys spoutin' on the Net, and that he's a Ph.D. and I'm not.)

Some people oppose any public suasion of any kinds on food choices — and even some of those do so honorably, instead of being motivated merely by their paycheck. I suspect they would object to the above.

But here's the thing, even putting aside the question of whether sugary soda is even food, or, in the coinage of Michael Pollan, a "foodlike substance." If any currently "acceptable" food or drink product warrants this sort of treatment, it is sugary soda.

First, I want to recommend to you the Lunch Tray blog, written in Houston by Bettina Elias Siegel. She really works it, and is a constant source of information and courant perspective. This morning's case in point (for me; she posted this April 26) is an interview she did with retired Air Force General Norman Seip, a member of Mission Readiness, a bipartisan coalition of 200 retired senior military leaders who bemoan — and more importantly, work to redress —the fact that 75 percent of Americans ages 17-24 are unfit for military service, because they have criminal records, haven't graduated high school, or are physically unfit.

You may remember that a couple of weeks ago, I published an interview I did with Zack Jordan, whom I met when he reached out to me on Facebook after reading my book. He told me he was a "gay gainer," someone who tries to gain mondo weight because he thinks it would fulfill him.

This morning, I got this from him, which I'm sharing with his permission:

It's a question any addict might ponder: If they told me that, beyond a medical certainty, I had just a few weeks or months to live, would I continue to abstain from the foods I've chosen to eschew?

Recent headline on the "Center for Consumer Freedom"'s blog: "News Flash: Parents Can Help Kids Overcome Obesity"

Well, duh — yet another foolish post from the bought-and-paid-for shill of the restaurant and food products industry that is wrong, even when it's right.

I'm not related to Lisa Leake by blood, but we share common roots and a common outlook. Definitely, someone to admire, someone to follow. 

Here's a piece she wrote that appeared on civileats.com.