From: Mxsmanic on
Martin writes:

> You don't reach 75 living on junk food no matter how far you walk to and from
> McDs from/to your apartment.

A lot of people live to that age and beyond despite having all the bad habits
that are supposed to shorten lifespan. A big part of it is genetic.
From: Mxsmanic on
Earl Evleth writes:

> You don't understand the possible problems of old age for some.
> It is not a question of not affording it but can't or can't
> very much.

A person in normal health should be able to remain active until he dies. Some
people do have health problems that limit mobility, but they are a minority.
And there is evidence that not remaining active throughout life encourages
some of these health problems to develop.
From: Mxsmanic on
John Rennie writes:

> No it isn't although your main point is valid. If the calories
> you eat taken longer to digest, as they will if they are low in GI,
> you won't feel the need for so many of them.

What you feel is irrelevant. It's what you eat and what you burn that counts.

Additionally, some people experience and react to postprandial dips much more
strongly than others.
From: Mxsmanic on
Martin writes:

> Are you getting these quotes from Xmas crackers?

No, I'm getting them from looking at the ingredients.
From: Mxsmanic on
Earl Evleth writes:

> The next time you buy a can of peas, read the fine print.
> Sugar is added to a lot of things now not to make them
> sicky sweet but to give the appearance that natural
> plant sugars are there but even more so.

Or to serve as a preservative. But even sugar doesn't always have as strong a
taste appeal as fat. Personally I don't like things that are sickly sweet,
which is why I prefer plain milk chocolate to chocolate candies with hideously
sweet fillings.