October 29, 2009

Extra sugar, but non-fat, please

On my way back home from campus, I stopped by a 7-11 to pick up two hard-boiled eggs to make some egg salad (with bacon bleu cheese dip and horseradish mustard... mmm baby). The 60-something clerk looked at them and remarked, "Oh that's really healthy" with a flat affect. I don't like getting health advice from people with one foot in the grave by age 60, so I told her, "I know -- they're full of B-vitamins."

One of her friends then dropped in to ask what she was up to, and she said, "Oh nothing, just eating candy." I didn't even notice it, but sure enough, she was passing the time by shoveling sugar down her piehole. But hey, at least there was no fat in all that sugar! It's no wonder that her face had been destroyed by wrinkles or that she was lugging around 70 pounds of extra fat.

It's one thing when the vegan faggots at Whole Foods give you weird looks when they see that all you're buying is butter, cheese, beef, and pate -- as misguided as their reliance on grains is, at least they aren't popping heaps of jelly beans in their mouths all day. The average person, though, is perfectly happy to chastise you for eating bacon and eggs: "Don't you know what's in that junk? Here, have some ice cream instead."

It's like those people in Starbucks who order a venti 6-pump hazelnut java chip frappuccino with extra, extra, extra caramel sauce -- oh, and can you make that non-fat? No lie, I truly heard a girl order something with "extra, extra, extra" caramel sauce, but non-fat, please. Buncha dipshits. That's how crazy everyone has become by listening to the government and the nutrition experts: if they get even a bit of whipped cream on their frappuccino, they're certain to drop dead of a heart attack on the way out, but the 50 pounds of sugar is just fine because "it gives me energy."

5 comments:

  1. I suspect people would be healthier if they just ate when they were hungry and ate what they enjoyed instead of having these issues with fat, and gobbling down tons of crap.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I was buying some groceries the other night, and ahead of me in line was a young woman who was no doubt shopping for herself.

    She had a weeks supply of microwave dinners...all prominently labeled "Low Fat" and "Non Fat."

    It just boggles the mind. She confirmed the worst stereotypes of modern american women - can't cook, and brainwashed into believing low fat and non-fat are "healthy."

    ReplyDelete
  3. Ah yes, the "Snackwell" generation. OK to eat 90grams of sugar, so long as it's fat-free. Your pancreas gasping at the load.

    I'm one of those people at Whole Foods loading up on free-range eggs, organic butter, cream, and grass-fed beef. I consider sugar to be more addictive than most substances and definitely more destructive (because it's so prevalent).

    Damn it for tasting so good though.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Patrick Bateman11/4/09, 1:46 PM

    Amen. I hear this shit all the time because I eat so much bacon & eggs but never eat bread. My RHR is ~50, my blood pressure ~110/70 and people actually notice I'm fit. No one who has ever bitched about my diet has been in good shape and most have been fat asses.

    ReplyDelete
  5. The only way to change these peoples opinions is to change the name of "FAT" on packaging. It's really misleading and becomes an easy way to target people. These brainwashed people see "FAT" on the label and automatically equate it to their belly. No Fat means it won't make them fat. People have no sense of history either. Their minds don't seem to grasp the fact that people never use to be this big. People also never use to eat low fat and tons of Sugar. Hmm I wonder if there is a correlation.

    ReplyDelete

You MUST enter a nickname with the "Name/URL" option if you're not signed in. We can't follow who is saying what if everyone is "Anonymous."