The archive link isn't really working for me but I've seen a bit of reporting on the issue. Can't say I'm surprised corporates are spreading misinformation that directly impact customers health,...
The archive link isn't really working for me but I've seen a bit of reporting on the issue.
Can't say I'm surprised corporates are spreading misinformation that directly impact customers health, just to make a quick buck. The food pyramid, low/no-fat foods, fad diets. Hell, I grew up with cereal being pushed as part of a complete breakfast and I'm surprised there hasn't been more of marketing push since. At least where I am, cereal isles went from a long shelf of bright colors and all sugar to a few popular nostalgia lines and mostly bland health-ish options like all brand, oats and granola. The biggest sign of brand failure would be my kid have more of a reaction to my milk choice over any cereal.
But it seems like this new strategy is particularly insidious and targeting adults. It really pisses me off, especially in this atmosphere with all the discussions around weight loss medications and the post-pandemic body image problem. I'm all for people being comfortable and and accepting of their body and lifestyle. It gets a little muddy when people put themselves at risk, be it through weight gain or weight loss methods and their are logical limits for intervention. But to subversively manipulating people to harm themselves, by preying on deep seeded insecurities all while presenting the message as professionally advised and a virtuous position. Fuck. Someone needs to go to jail for this. And I don't think it should be the influencers.
Like marketing is one thing. Slap a name on your message and people can figure out the agenda if they want. "9 out of 10 doctors say Sugar Bombs are good for you in a study funded by BigSugerLLC". But who's reading the description on a 30sec video for the #ad. In a rapid fire of a few hundred posts, can a vulnerable or susceptible person reliably differentiate genuine information and marketing spin? If someone was in a medically precarious situation, how do we know one innocent little snack, recommended by a nutritionist, isn't going to push them over the edge?
I've seen a lot of weight related issues. Myself, friends and family all seem to deal with it constantly. From my view the people who convince themselves to just let go don't fair well. So seeing stuff like this allowed to happen really grinds at me.
There’s this insane dance performed when someone wants to talk about an overweight person’s life and how they are treated. I want to be clear, I am perfectly happy letting people live their lives...
There’s this insane dance performed when someone wants to talk about an overweight person’s life and how they are treated. I want to be clear, I am perfectly happy letting people live their lives eating what they want. I eat what I want and enjoy it. I do try to encourage healthy eating among those close to me. But I know a number of outright fatphobic people and can see the vast difference in our thoughts.
There are times where an overweight person interacts with a health professional and the trainer or whomever is completely disconnected from reality. There’s this article I read (maybe posted to Tildes?) of a cyclist who was quite large but had been cycling hundreds of miles down the California coast for years. She got a personal trainer and they treated her like she’d never exercised before. The absolute cognitive dissonance required to hear “biked a 500 mile ride last year” and then treat someone as a rookie cyclist is astounding.
That being said, I loath the frequent discussion about how being overweight might not really be bad for you. How maybe it’s all misunderstood. Clearly being obese isn’t instantly lethal. Just look around, there are plenty of older obese adults. But it is a net negative in many aspects. We can say that and not hate obese people at the same time.
And the crazy part is, as someone that used to be much larger and ate pretty unhealthy, there’s not really any good reason to eat in a way that makes you that size. It’s just down to corporations abusing employees and consumers. Not giving people good options will force many to pick cheaper, easier food which forces them to pick less active modes of transport in a vicious cycle. When the alternative, diet wise, is still very enjoyable and exercising feels good and it all becomes a beautiful self-sustaining cycle.
As a side note - I have to be honest, as much as I love sugar and am aware it’s warped my mind, it’s not that good. I watch my friends crave and then consume unhealthy food in excess and the high is so short lived. There’s a good cognitive behavioral therapy technique here I found on my own. After you eat something really unhealthy focus strongly on the negative effects. Still eat that jumbo slice of cake but force your memory to record how uncomfortable your stomach feels, how quickly the euphoria from the sugar dissipates. Don’t feel guilty just feel physically unwell. Part of this is actually a crafted sensation. Go so far as to imagine feeling sick to your stomach because of the food. Your brain will recall these memories, constructed or authentic, the next time you consider eating the same thing.
This was a weird article for me to read. Disclaimer, I've lost 30+ pounds since last August. I also eat Taco Bell at least once a week. On one hand, I really do think that weight shaming is...
This was a weird article for me to read. Disclaimer, I've lost 30+ pounds since last August. I also eat Taco Bell at least once a week.
On one hand, I really do think that weight shaming is counter productive and not exactly a great motivator. Who wants to be shamed into going to the gym every time? And in any case, forcing yourself to eat foods that you don't enjoy for the rest of your life seems miserable anyways.
On the other hand, it does feel yucky that the food industry can just sneak into the health industry and promote their own shitty things. I only follow one fitness influencer, and I don't think she promotes specific brands thankfully.
Jacob Mey, a dietitian and nutrition researcher at the Pennington Biomedical Research Center in Louisiana, said Rochon’s story is not unique. He said some of his clients have gained as much as 60 pounds in six months while working with anti-diet dietitians.
It seems kinda strange, if you're going to (and presumably paying for) a dietician, presumably you're looking to cut weight/have specific goals, and you're going in the complete opposite direction, wouldn't you... stop going?
These are likely vulnerable people. It's possible that they are in a cognitive dissonance loop where the anti-diet dietician justifies the poor choices while giving positive attention.
It seems kinda strange, if you're going to (and presumably paying for) a dietician, presumably you're looking to cut weight/have specific goals, and you're going in the complete opposite direction, wouldn't you... stop going?
These are likely vulnerable people. It's possible that they are in a cognitive dissonance loop where the anti-diet dietician justifies the poor choices while giving positive attention.
Look, bias upfront, I've always been against 'Healthy at any size' and all of that. Granted, plenty of people in my family are big. Alright, that said, how dumb does someone need to be? "I started...
Look, bias upfront, I've always been against 'Healthy at any size' and all of that. Granted, plenty of people in my family are big.
Alright, that said, how dumb does someone need to be? "I started eating Nutella and cupcakes and gained 50 pounds because YouTube told me." What? You're inside your body. You started eating sugary foods and gaining weight and didn't... Stop? When I started stress eating at one point, I began to have acid reflux, I felt discomfort from that so I adjusted my diet and portions. I lost a few pounds and got back to where I was comfortable. I probably need to get a bit more restrictive with my diet as my activity levels (and types of stress) changed but I know that because I pay attention to my body. Any content I do consume (ha) regarding diets is more about how I can incorporate different foods or flavors into mine. I don't count macros or anything and, yes, I am genetically lucky to a degree. Like I said, it's a wonder that I'm not huge but also it takes effort.
I know that the powers that be in any industry don't have my best interest in mind. I wouldn't expect General Mills (or their shareholders) to be concerned about the truth when there's profits on the table. I know that (in America) health professionals are often motivated by profit as well. You're managing your body directly though. There's no 'easy' answers. Stop eating so much and when you do it make it worthwhile. You're going to feel hunger pangs but that's because you're retraining your body.
Just the phrase "anti diet" ticks me off. A diet is what you eat. The only anti diet is a hunger strike. If you make a list of all the things you eat, that's your diet. Overly restrictive diets may help you lose weight but a bad diet is still a diet. Just eat vegetables people, seriously. It's better to be fat off of pasta than Twinkies but, seriously, eat less and eat better. I know it sucks, I know why people use food to cope, I know that the deck is stacked against people... But, fuck man, don't blame YouTube for you deciding Nutella is healthy.
There used to be a poster here who was super into that. She left (or was banned I'm not sure) during the Reddit exodus. She used to argue some wild stuff like saying "just because you weigh 600...
I've always been against 'Healthy at any size' and all of that.
There used to be a poster here who was super into that. She left (or was banned I'm not sure) during the Reddit exodus. She used to argue some wild stuff like saying "just because you weigh 600 pounds doesn't mean you're unhealthy."
Fat activist spaces are really good grounds for this type of thought. "Food is food" so they will unironically believe eating Twinkies and Nutella is equivalent to eating broccoli. There's also pretty big "intuitive eating" dietitians. The one I'm most familiar with is Abby Sharp, who will make videos criticizing people who eat too little, but will often defend people who eat too much. Case in point: there was a TikTok that went viral recently of a young mother feeding her daughter doughnuts and apple sauce for breakfast. That became a whole topic of discussion, but Sharp defended it saying "at least the mother is feeding the daughter."
I'm also biased to all of this since I was previously morbidly obese. I've since lost 120 pounds. But any notion of people saying you can still be healthy at that size is just ridiculous. Even if you're in your early 20s (like I was) and your blood work is fine (mine was mostly fine until the last year of my morbid obesity when I became pre-diabetic), the amount of pressure that amount of weight adds to your bones should be enough for people to reconsider. The amount of damage I did to the muscles around my knees and my hips was purely due to my weight. I couldn't walk pain free, I was so slow. I felt 60 years old when I was 21.
I think a lot of this has to do with people wanting to live in a deluded state, because it's easier than trying to turn things around. Nobody wants to get hit with reality like that so they will watch content that affirms their current situation. And companies decided to take advantage of that.
Do you need to be this heartless? Was it necessary to call these people dumb? If anyone's being ignorant here, it's you. These people are not dumb; they are trying to live their lives the best...
Do you need to be this heartless? Was it necessary to call these people dumb? If anyone's being ignorant here, it's you. These people are not dumb; they are trying to live their lives the best that they can. They may be misguided, but it's not for lack of trying. Do you honestly believe that they haven't tried to put any effort into losing weight or eat vegetables? If it were as easy as having willpower than nobody would be fat.
Your criticism of these people does not help them in the least and your statements only serve to boost your ego. As someone who has taken drastic measures to lose weight, I can tell you that if I had read your statement a year or two ago I would have simply ignored everything you had to say and lean back into denial. These so-called "anti-diet activists" are doing the exact same thing. This kind of response actively harms people. The things these food corporations are doing is absolutely evil, but they are empowered by the environment that comments like these have created.
Anti-fat hate is the worst part of the Tildes community. I honestly feel sick when I see that five people have voted for your comment. Being fat is not a moral failure, but failing to have sympathy for people with weight problems is.
I don't know how well regulated the dietician trade is, but my goodness someone who says that for money, ignoring the fact they are sending kids to an early grave, deserve to have whatever...
The rapid spread of anti-diet messaging — and the alliance between some of the country’s registered dietitians and the food industry — has alarmed some in the public health community.
“I will always advocate for fearlessly nourishing meals, including cereal,” the Kansas City, Mo., dietitian told her followers in the video, which was labeled “#sponsored” and disclosed that she was working with General Mills. “Because everyone deserves to enjoy food without judgment, especially kids.”
I don't know how well regulated the dietician trade is, but my goodness someone who says that for money, ignoring the fact they are sending kids to an early grave, deserve to have whatever professional standing stripped.
Without judgement from bystanders maybe. But certainly not without discernment from the child, their parents, and health professionals.
Health at any weight isn't the same as health is any weight. But it's very easy to lose sight of that in modern Western civ, where the average person you meet is obese and the "regular" size people would be actually considered plus size in (say) East Asian cities.
I would know....I'm a "small" North American person wearing large size Asian clothing: my size is anything but healthy.
As someone who's spent a ton of time learning about what's real knowledge with regards to the dietary sciences, I can tell you that there are a ton of MDs who don't even understand the real state...
I don't know how well regulated the dietician trade is
As someone who's spent a ton of time learning about what's real knowledge with regards to the dietary sciences, I can tell you that there are a ton of MDs who don't even understand the real state of dietary sciences. The literature has been so incredibly poisoned, and not just by capitalism representing it's own interests, but by other doctors who have an idea such as Ancel Keys being convinced that fat = bad. Some of these highly credentialed individuals have zeroed in on true statements, such as refined sugar = bad, but many go off to make entire careers publishing science which just muddies the waters because they are reaching their results with bad study design or worse p-hacking and other forms of deception. To make things more confusing it become a political issue when the food pyramid was developed, further complicating who was contributing to research and making it difficult to sort the bunk studies from the real ones.
The best summary of dietary sciences I've seen by someone else was this talk by a Stanford PhD who works in dietary sciences. I've set the link at the relevant point in the talk where he goes into a summary of what's actually supported by the sciences, and it's at a high enough level and simple enough to understand that just about anyone can consume it and get away with making slightly healthier choices in their day to day.
It's interesting to me cereal companies are going hardcore on funding this because pro-diet culture is hurting their sales. Sugary cereal like Lucky Charms are actually kind of low calorie! Two...
It's interesting to me cereal companies are going hardcore on funding this because pro-diet culture is hurting their sales. Sugary cereal like Lucky Charms are actually kind of low calorie! Two bowls with milk would be like 400 cals. I keep a rough count of my calories and it's my go-to easy, small meal. I also eat "healthy" cereals like Frosted Mini Wheats and Raisin Bran and they have more calories than the sugar cereals (but way more fiber).
So clearly they're going the route of making consumers think sugary cereals are a treat and an indulgence food. But General Mills also makes Pillsbury and Haagen Dazs, so I guess taking the "high calorie food is good" covers more of their brands than trying to teach people they're wrong about cereal calories.
I think they've previously exhausted the avenues of avoiding sugar content. In the 60s it was fat that caused health issues, not sugar. Then they moved to calories since sugar is surprisingly low...
I think they've previously exhausted the avenues of avoiding sugar content. In the 60s it was fat that caused health issues, not sugar. Then they moved to calories since sugar is surprisingly low in calories for how unhealthy it is. With those already being used up I think it makes sense to move to the current strategy.
On calories, sugar may have little but that doesn't paint the full picture. Calories from sugar provide a limited feeling of fullness, provide little nutrition, and bring on all the unhealthy metabolic processes that come from blood sugar spikes.
Not to be a dick about it (because it’s not your fault - it’s intentional misinformation pushed by seemingly respectable institutions), but you’re reciting the General Mills propaganda to a tee...
Not to be a dick about it (because it’s not your fault - it’s intentional misinformation pushed by seemingly respectable institutions), but you’re reciting the General Mills propaganda to a tee here.
Calories aren’t fungible, macros aren’t either, and Lucky Charms isn’t at all sugary compared to Frosted Flakes or Raisin Bran. The full GM lineup is processed to hell and back, so the dietary fiber you’re getting per the nutrition label isn’t equivalent to the fiber you’d get from greens/nuts/vegetables - and same for the other carbohydrates/proteins/micronutrients. Metrics like fiber are proxies for “healthiness”, not direct indicators of it - so companies can and will game the metrics.
IIFYM can be a fine maintenance strategy, but the trick to being able to adhere to it is a solid base dietary composition - and that’s the part naive dieters most often bungle. Generally speaking, all processed breakfast cereals are a bad base to build on.
The archive link isn't really working for me but I've seen a bit of reporting on the issue.
Can't say I'm surprised corporates are spreading misinformation that directly impact customers health, just to make a quick buck. The food pyramid, low/no-fat foods, fad diets. Hell, I grew up with cereal being pushed as part of a complete breakfast and I'm surprised there hasn't been more of marketing push since. At least where I am, cereal isles went from a long shelf of bright colors and all sugar to a few popular nostalgia lines and mostly bland health-ish options like all brand, oats and granola. The biggest sign of brand failure would be my kid have more of a reaction to my milk choice over any cereal.
But it seems like this new strategy is particularly insidious and targeting adults. It really pisses me off, especially in this atmosphere with all the discussions around weight loss medications and the post-pandemic body image problem. I'm all for people being comfortable and and accepting of their body and lifestyle. It gets a little muddy when people put themselves at risk, be it through weight gain or weight loss methods and their are logical limits for intervention. But to subversively manipulating people to harm themselves, by preying on deep seeded insecurities all while presenting the message as professionally advised and a virtuous position. Fuck. Someone needs to go to jail for this. And I don't think it should be the influencers.
Like marketing is one thing. Slap a name on your message and people can figure out the agenda if they want. "9 out of 10 doctors say Sugar Bombs are good for you in a study funded by BigSugerLLC". But who's reading the description on a 30sec video for the #ad. In a rapid fire of a few hundred posts, can a vulnerable or susceptible person reliably differentiate genuine information and marketing spin? If someone was in a medically precarious situation, how do we know one innocent little snack, recommended by a nutritionist, isn't going to push them over the edge?
I've seen a lot of weight related issues. Myself, friends and family all seem to deal with it constantly. From my view the people who convince themselves to just let go don't fair well. So seeing stuff like this allowed to happen really grinds at me.
There’s this insane dance performed when someone wants to talk about an overweight person’s life and how they are treated. I want to be clear, I am perfectly happy letting people live their lives eating what they want. I eat what I want and enjoy it. I do try to encourage healthy eating among those close to me. But I know a number of outright fatphobic people and can see the vast difference in our thoughts.
There are times where an overweight person interacts with a health professional and the trainer or whomever is completely disconnected from reality. There’s this article I read (maybe posted to Tildes?) of a cyclist who was quite large but had been cycling hundreds of miles down the California coast for years. She got a personal trainer and they treated her like she’d never exercised before. The absolute cognitive dissonance required to hear “biked a 500 mile ride last year” and then treat someone as a rookie cyclist is astounding.
That being said, I loath the frequent discussion about how being overweight might not really be bad for you. How maybe it’s all misunderstood. Clearly being obese isn’t instantly lethal. Just look around, there are plenty of older obese adults. But it is a net negative in many aspects. We can say that and not hate obese people at the same time.
And the crazy part is, as someone that used to be much larger and ate pretty unhealthy, there’s not really any good reason to eat in a way that makes you that size. It’s just down to corporations abusing employees and consumers. Not giving people good options will force many to pick cheaper, easier food which forces them to pick less active modes of transport in a vicious cycle. When the alternative, diet wise, is still very enjoyable and exercising feels good and it all becomes a beautiful self-sustaining cycle.
As a side note - I have to be honest, as much as I love sugar and am aware it’s warped my mind, it’s not that good. I watch my friends crave and then consume unhealthy food in excess and the high is so short lived. There’s a good cognitive behavioral therapy technique here I found on my own. After you eat something really unhealthy focus strongly on the negative effects. Still eat that jumbo slice of cake but force your memory to record how uncomfortable your stomach feels, how quickly the euphoria from the sugar dissipates. Don’t feel guilty just feel physically unwell. Part of this is actually a crafted sensation. Go so far as to imagine feeling sick to your stomach because of the food. Your brain will recall these memories, constructed or authentic, the next time you consider eating the same thing.
https://archive.is/1Na1K
This was a weird article for me to read. Disclaimer, I've lost 30+ pounds since last August. I also eat Taco Bell at least once a week.
On one hand, I really do think that weight shaming is counter productive and not exactly a great motivator. Who wants to be shamed into going to the gym every time? And in any case, forcing yourself to eat foods that you don't enjoy for the rest of your life seems miserable anyways.
On the other hand, it does feel yucky that the food industry can just sneak into the health industry and promote their own shitty things. I only follow one fitness influencer, and I don't think she promotes specific brands thankfully.
It seems kinda strange, if you're going to (and presumably paying for) a dietician, presumably you're looking to cut weight/have specific goals, and you're going in the complete opposite direction, wouldn't you... stop going?
These are likely vulnerable people. It's possible that they are in a cognitive dissonance loop where the anti-diet dietician justifies the poor choices while giving positive attention.
Look, bias upfront, I've always been against 'Healthy at any size' and all of that. Granted, plenty of people in my family are big.
Alright, that said, how dumb does someone need to be? "I started eating Nutella and cupcakes and gained 50 pounds because YouTube told me." What? You're inside your body. You started eating sugary foods and gaining weight and didn't... Stop? When I started stress eating at one point, I began to have acid reflux, I felt discomfort from that so I adjusted my diet and portions. I lost a few pounds and got back to where I was comfortable. I probably need to get a bit more restrictive with my diet as my activity levels (and types of stress) changed but I know that because I pay attention to my body. Any content I do consume (ha) regarding diets is more about how I can incorporate different foods or flavors into mine. I don't count macros or anything and, yes, I am genetically lucky to a degree. Like I said, it's a wonder that I'm not huge but also it takes effort.
I know that the powers that be in any industry don't have my best interest in mind. I wouldn't expect General Mills (or their shareholders) to be concerned about the truth when there's profits on the table. I know that (in America) health professionals are often motivated by profit as well. You're managing your body directly though. There's no 'easy' answers. Stop eating so much and when you do it make it worthwhile. You're going to feel hunger pangs but that's because you're retraining your body.
Just the phrase "anti diet" ticks me off. A diet is what you eat. The only anti diet is a hunger strike. If you make a list of all the things you eat, that's your diet. Overly restrictive diets may help you lose weight but a bad diet is still a diet. Just eat vegetables people, seriously. It's better to be fat off of pasta than Twinkies but, seriously, eat less and eat better. I know it sucks, I know why people use food to cope, I know that the deck is stacked against people... But, fuck man, don't blame YouTube for you deciding Nutella is healthy.
There used to be a poster here who was super into that. She left (or was banned I'm not sure) during the Reddit exodus. She used to argue some wild stuff like saying "just because you weigh 600 pounds doesn't mean you're unhealthy."
Fat activist spaces are really good grounds for this type of thought. "Food is food" so they will unironically believe eating Twinkies and Nutella is equivalent to eating broccoli. There's also pretty big "intuitive eating" dietitians. The one I'm most familiar with is Abby Sharp, who will make videos criticizing people who eat too little, but will often defend people who eat too much. Case in point: there was a TikTok that went viral recently of a young mother feeding her daughter doughnuts and apple sauce for breakfast. That became a whole topic of discussion, but Sharp defended it saying "at least the mother is feeding the daughter."
I'm also biased to all of this since I was previously morbidly obese. I've since lost 120 pounds. But any notion of people saying you can still be healthy at that size is just ridiculous. Even if you're in your early 20s (like I was) and your blood work is fine (mine was mostly fine until the last year of my morbid obesity when I became pre-diabetic), the amount of pressure that amount of weight adds to your bones should be enough for people to reconsider. The amount of damage I did to the muscles around my knees and my hips was purely due to my weight. I couldn't walk pain free, I was so slow. I felt 60 years old when I was 21.
I think a lot of this has to do with people wanting to live in a deluded state, because it's easier than trying to turn things around. Nobody wants to get hit with reality like that so they will watch content that affirms their current situation. And companies decided to take advantage of that.
Do you need to be this heartless? Was it necessary to call these people dumb? If anyone's being ignorant here, it's you. These people are not dumb; they are trying to live their lives the best that they can. They may be misguided, but it's not for lack of trying. Do you honestly believe that they haven't tried to put any effort into losing weight or eat vegetables? If it were as easy as having willpower than nobody would be fat.
Your criticism of these people does not help them in the least and your statements only serve to boost your ego. As someone who has taken drastic measures to lose weight, I can tell you that if I had read your statement a year or two ago I would have simply ignored everything you had to say and lean back into denial. These so-called "anti-diet activists" are doing the exact same thing. This kind of response actively harms people. The things these food corporations are doing is absolutely evil, but they are empowered by the environment that comments like these have created.
Anti-fat hate is the worst part of the Tildes community. I honestly feel sick when I see that five people have voted for your comment. Being fat is not a moral failure, but failing to have sympathy for people with weight problems is.
I don't know how well regulated the dietician trade is, but my goodness someone who says that for money, ignoring the fact they are sending kids to an early grave, deserve to have whatever professional standing stripped.
Without judgement from bystanders maybe. But certainly not without discernment from the child, their parents, and health professionals.
Health at any weight isn't the same as health is any weight. But it's very easy to lose sight of that in modern Western civ, where the average person you meet is obese and the "regular" size people would be actually considered plus size in (say) East Asian cities.
I would know....I'm a "small" North American person wearing large size Asian clothing: my size is anything but healthy.
As someone who's spent a ton of time learning about what's real knowledge with regards to the dietary sciences, I can tell you that there are a ton of MDs who don't even understand the real state of dietary sciences. The literature has been so incredibly poisoned, and not just by capitalism representing it's own interests, but by other doctors who have an idea such as Ancel Keys being convinced that fat = bad. Some of these highly credentialed individuals have zeroed in on true statements, such as refined sugar = bad, but many go off to make entire careers publishing science which just muddies the waters because they are reaching their results with bad study design or worse p-hacking and other forms of deception. To make things more confusing it become a political issue when the food pyramid was developed, further complicating who was contributing to research and making it difficult to sort the bunk studies from the real ones.
The best summary of dietary sciences I've seen by someone else was this talk by a Stanford PhD who works in dietary sciences. I've set the link at the relevant point in the talk where he goes into a summary of what's actually supported by the sciences, and it's at a high enough level and simple enough to understand that just about anyone can consume it and get away with making slightly healthier choices in their day to day.
If companies are so fond of their ESG ratings these days, maybe marketing against their own ESG goals should be made illegal.
It's interesting to me cereal companies are going hardcore on funding this because pro-diet culture is hurting their sales. Sugary cereal like Lucky Charms are actually kind of low calorie! Two bowls with milk would be like 400 cals. I keep a rough count of my calories and it's my go-to easy, small meal. I also eat "healthy" cereals like Frosted Mini Wheats and Raisin Bran and they have more calories than the sugar cereals (but way more fiber).
So clearly they're going the route of making consumers think sugary cereals are a treat and an indulgence food. But General Mills also makes Pillsbury and Haagen Dazs, so I guess taking the "high calorie food is good" covers more of their brands than trying to teach people they're wrong about cereal calories.
I think they've previously exhausted the avenues of avoiding sugar content. In the 60s it was fat that caused health issues, not sugar. Then they moved to calories since sugar is surprisingly low in calories for how unhealthy it is. With those already being used up I think it makes sense to move to the current strategy.
On calories, sugar may have little but that doesn't paint the full picture. Calories from sugar provide a limited feeling of fullness, provide little nutrition, and bring on all the unhealthy metabolic processes that come from blood sugar spikes.
Not to be a dick about it (because it’s not your fault - it’s intentional misinformation pushed by seemingly respectable institutions), but you’re reciting the General Mills propaganda to a tee here.
Calories aren’t fungible, macros aren’t either, and Lucky Charms isn’t at all sugary compared to Frosted Flakes or Raisin Bran. The full GM lineup is processed to hell and back, so the dietary fiber you’re getting per the nutrition label isn’t equivalent to the fiber you’d get from greens/nuts/vegetables - and same for the other carbohydrates/proteins/micronutrients. Metrics like fiber are proxies for “healthiness”, not direct indicators of it - so companies can and will game the metrics.
IIFYM can be a fine maintenance strategy, but the trick to being able to adhere to it is a solid base dietary composition - and that’s the part naive dieters most often bungle. Generally speaking, all processed breakfast cereals are a bad base to build on.