I now have a set of videos that I hope will be another avenue to spread word of "Fat Boy Thin Man" and the ideas contained therein. A couple of them are readings from the book, but this one is the centerpiece:

One of my repeating tropes lately has been to ask those who rail against government involvement in setting nutrition standards, "what's your solution?" To me, it's not enough to wax nostalgic on parental guidance as the way to resolve the national obesity crisis, not necessarily because it wouldn't work, but because so few are using it!

A robot assigned to me by Google hunts the internet relentlessly for uses of the term "food addiction," and it succeeds many times a day. One of the reports from 11/22 has 10 of them, which is on the larger size, but I get three to four of these reports every day.

On the face of it, that should hearten someone who's determined to broaden the discussion of obesity in America to include food addiction as a cause of some of it. (I assure those who might wonder if I realize: Food addiction is larger than obesity, but obesity as a result of food addiction is the one I am best versed in.)

But when I wade into these robo-reports, I see that we're not nearly there yet.

To be fair, when Cherrie Herrin-Michehl, a therapist in Seattle, wrote the phrase of the headline in her post about "Fat Boy Thin Man," she was speaking more about the details of my story, rather than my telling of it.

That's an important distinction: A joke, for example, can be really funny but can still be ruined by the jokester. My opinion is that "FBTM" has both, but as the author, I'd better think so, no? I hope you'll investigate for yourself, of course. 

I'm excited and honored to be the first visitor to Meredith Terpeluk's new "Healthy Voice" radio show, which she's debuting on blogtalkradio.com a week from today, Nov. 18, at 12:30 p.m. Eastern.

Today's headline has multiple meanings: Food addicts often experience medical complications as the result of their actions, for which they (we) are responsible. But that's not what I meant with the headline.

For multiple reasons (more complication!), a problem eater could have several reasons for their problem. Notice that my organizing principle is "problem eaters," not "food addicts." All food addicts are problem eaters, but not all problem eaters are food addicts.

CBS has a stupid little poll up right now (no link, deliberately), springing off San Francisco's move to ban the use of toys as a food-sales come-on. These are the two options: 

Yes. Parents are responsible for feeding their children and teaching them healthy habits - not the government.

No. It's hard enough to parent without being targeted by greedy corporations. Government should reign them in.

Here's the headline to which I refer in the headline of this post:

How Michael Prager’s Book Helped Me Make Lunch for My Kid 

I greatly enjoyed my first foray onto public radio this morning, sharing the air with Dr. David Kessler, the author of "The End of Overeating." 

I'd only give my appearance a B- or so, — lots of "ums" and "uhs," etc. — and I hope I'll get better with more opportunity.

A kerfuffle in Australia has arisen over an advocacy ad that likens abuse of food with abuse of heroin, and I like it. The tagline asks a question not unlike I've asked before: If we acknowledge that whole classes of food are junk, why do we eat it?

From the Australian Broadcasting Co. story: