Two Great Experiments: Junk Food; Junk Energy

In the last 100 years, humanity is doing 2 great experiments (even if unintentional) to answer the following questions:

• If 4,000 calories per person are available daily, how will this impact the quality of your health and your lifespan? Especially when the calories are in the form of pizza, cake, soda, beer – [put in your favorite food or beverage that is bad for you]
• If we increase the CO2 levels in the atmosphere from the low 300 ppm to over 400 ppm how will this impact the health of the planet for the next 10, 50 and 100 years?

As the 2 graphs below show, I would think that most people would agree that we are running these experiments.

https://jaymans.wordpress.com/2013/04/08/fun-facts-about-obesity/

https://climate.nasa.gov/news/916/

A human needs ~2,000 calories/day to live. Until the last 100 years, the challenge for life was how to get food (harness energy). As an example, “Between 108 BC and 1911 AD there were no fewer than 1,828 major famines in China, or one nearly every year in one or another province.” Even Europe had its share of famines into the 1940s. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_famines

Today, “Obesity is a bigger health crisis globally than hunger, and the leading cause of disabilities around the world, according to …the British medical journal The Lancet. … "The world is now obese and we're seeing the impact of that. ... “The report revealed that every country, with the exception of those in sub-Saharan Africa, faces alarming obesity rates -- an increase of 82% globally in the past two decades. Middle Eastern countries are more obese than ever, seeing a 100% increase since 1990. The health burden from high body mass indexes now exceeds that due to hunger.” https://www.cnn.com/2012/12/13/health/global-burden-report/

“Being obese may take up to 8 years off a normal human lifespan. …. They estimated that depending on age and gender, overweight patients (BMI 25-30) would lose 0 to 3 years of life expectancy, obese patients (BMI 30-35) would lose 1 to 6 years, and very obese patients (BMI 35 and up) would lose 1 to 8 years. … The greatest losses were seen among young adults ages 20 to 39, including 18.8 years for very obese men and 19.1 years for very obese women.” https://www.medpagetoday.com/Endocrinology/Obesity/48953

Yet as one who has struggled with weight since I was young and know all these facts, I still eat excess calories more than I should. Being overweight (I would have to weight 169 lbs. to not be) and active, I am hoping that my life expectancy loss is closer to 0 than 3. So often, the short term pleasures of excess food and drink overcomes the potential long term health benefits of eating right. If it was easy, the health, financial and social benefits of not being overweight or obese would drive everyone to the recommended BMI.

Another fact to consider is that “More and more studies show that being overweight does not always shorten life.” https://www.nature.com/news/the-big-fat-truth-1.13039 As highlighted in the following graph, being slightly overweight can actually help you live longer as you get older.

Scientist has been sending mix messages about food choices for some time:

• Eggs are bad for you – Eggs are good for you
• Butter bad – margarine good – margarine bad – butter good
• Cereal good – now bad

I could go on and on.

Obesity is the poor management of energy at the individual level that is hard to overcome because our appetite overrides will power so often. “The spirit is willing, but the flesh is weak.” This got me thinking about the debate of climate change because of the increase in CO2. I think trying to reduce CO2 energy consumption is a little like telling an obese person to just diet and exercise and only eat fruits and vegetables while all that junk food is cheap and available.

I am part of a science discussion group and last week they had a presenter on global warming, which opened with the following question: what statement do you agree with:

1. Climate change is the greatest threat to the planet

Or

1. Climate change is the greatest hoax

Most people in the group picked “Climate change is the greatest threat to the planet,” even though it is likely very few people car pooled to the event. I do not agree with either statement but so many people see this issue in black and white that I believe the extreme points of view are actually harming the planet more than a balanced approach to solving the energy / excess CO2 problem. In the book “The Rational Optimist: How Prosperity Evolves” by Matt Ridley, he highlights we live like kings and queens because of access to energy. Dr. Ian Morris’ book, “Why the West Rules--for Now: The Patterns of History, and What They Reveal About the Future,“ outlines Social Development through 15,000 years of history measuring four traits: 1) energy capture, 2) organization/ urbanization, 3) war-making and 4) information technology. This is illustrated from the following chart on energy from his book:

Right now the cheapest and easiest forms of energy to capture and use is in the form of carbon (or nuclear). Just like a little excess weight is not bad for a person but a lot of excess weight is very bad, this could be the same for CO2 for our planet.

The problem with excess CO2, is that we are all joined together in producing CO2 to get the benefit of energy harvesting. It is liked we are a conjoined twin with all humanity and even if one twin tries to do the right thing, the millions or billions of other twins eating bad will overwhelm the good. We all share one stomach – one planet – one earth.

If we are not willing to eat better when our own health is impacted, how can we expect society to do better at balancing short term and longer energy use decisions? Especially when our own energy choices make so little difference to the planet but so beneficial to the individual?

The following table highlights different activities and how they impact your health and the environment.

If you are interested in this topic, I would encourage you to read the book: How Bad Are Bananas?: The Carbon Footprint of Everything Paperback – April 1, 2011 by Mike Berners-Lee. Where Mike Berners-Lee points out that driving 1 mile, purchasing a rose, drinking a beer can generate the same amount of CO2.

I listed in this table the actions that help my health and the environment and action that hurt and actions that I never do. If I was dictator, it would cost me nothing to get rid of the action that I do not do. That is the problem with improving the health of the planet. We all want to stop the actions that do not impact our lifestyle and only impact others. We either can have shared responsibility or shared irresponsibility. It is very hard to act responsible when those around are acting irresponsibly. So eat, drink and fly on a corporate jet, for tomorrow we (or the planet) may die.

One motivation of writing this essay now is the report that “Obamas take his and hers flights to LA”

https://www.cnn.com/2015/03/13/politics/barack-michelle-obama-los-angeles-flights/

The following blog highlights the CO2 use for a trip like this:

“President Obama's two day trip deposited as much CO2 into the atmosphere as 430 American families do in an entire year.”

https://www.examiner.com/article/calculating-the-carbon-footprint-of-president-obama-s-olympic-trip

Depending if you are a supporter or critic of the President, you probably have a different response to these articles but I would like to take a step back and highlight that these trips demonstrate how hard it is to minimize CO2 usage when the benefits of using energy are so tempting. (Just like giving up beer, soda, pizza or cake) Even if you care about CO2 usage, if you have the choice to fly a corporate jet everywhere or only fly coach, most of us would pick the corporate jet - just like most of us picks the beer, pizza, chips or soda over broccoli and water.

So what’s the solution? We should encourage each other to make good health and environmental choices as often as possible. Even if you believe there is no risk to global warming, you should be a good stewards of the planet (plus your own health may improve by driving less, walking more and eating better). If you believe that climate change is the greatest threat to the planet, by setting a good example and reducing your CO2 footprint, you may encourage others to do the same. Finally, it is through energy innovation that we will solve the energy/excess CO2 problem. We should encourage this innovation in whatever form it may take: solar, wind, nuclear, natural gas and conservation. Every solution should be considered even if your personal bias does not want to consider it. I am trying to make better food, exercise and environmental choices. If we can just try a little harder every day, we can all live a little healthier today and pass on a healthier world to the next generation.

P.s.

I wrote an essay related to this topic. If interested, see below

https://www.dhirubhai.net/pulse/what-important-truth-do-very-few-people-agree-you-doug-hohulin?trk=prof-post

“What important truth do very few people agree with you on?”

We live in a Universe of abundant energy (with just a little bit of regular matter – “4.56% baryonic matter” / atoms (“the stuff of us”)). The story and progress of life and humanity is the story of harnessing energy. With wise planning, innovation and hard work, humanity can continue to find better ways to harness energy for the improvement of all while protecting the planet -- or we can be poor managers of the planet and harm the planet and restrict energy access to the poor which will keep them poor.