This
title is intended to evoke two thoughts.
First I have reached my target weight in Weight Watchers after seven months. What I have learned is that I need to be a Homo Economicus about food. Homo Economicus is constantly weighing the price of all goods in the market against each other and against his/her spending money.
For most of us who didn't gain weight until we passed 40, we could eat all we wanted, the money price was irrelevant.
What
Weight Watchers has taught me is that I have a daily spending budget
of 1,500 calories. Above that I gain weight, below it I lose.
Weight Watchers has given me a handful of tools to measure and control
my caloric spending. First are all the chemical miracles of modern
life: spray butter that tastes like butter, countless non-fat salad
dressings that taste great and low calorie tapioca pudding.
Second are handy measures. Most skinless, fat-less roasted or baked
meats are 200 calories for a palm sized amount. The same is true for
most cupfulls of cooked grains. Nearly all fruit and veggies are
insignificant in calories.
The main thing is that I have 1,500 calories to spend and I now have to chose carefully. Sometimes I prefer a peanut butter and jelly sandwich to a baked potato at the same number of calories. I constantly weigh my choices just as I would buying electronic goods costing $100.
The second thought I want to evoke is that every demographic group is gaining weight except for yuppies, because going over their caloric count violates their yuppie life goals. That suggests that the cost of food has somehow become so low for everyone that food is being treated as a free good and consequently abused. Cost of food 'low'/ 'free good'-- are hard to measure terms.
Just a thought. I haven't figured out how to test the thesis.