Again, claim.
It is irresponsible, because if you are correct, then there is no such a concept as "personal responsibility".
Of course there are several factors that could predispose us to chainsmoking for instance. Of course some of them could be inherited through the DNA methylation patterns of our parents. And there have to be several other factors as well. I've never denied this.
But tell me: where lies the responsibility of the individual if everything is determined in advance?
Again, where have I ever said that genetics determines everything? You're putting words in my mouth. I say that the situation is complex; there is more than one factor, hence people should be treated with empathy instead of finger-pointing. The choices that individuals make is just that - up to the individual. Giving them information does not mean that they are absolved from personal responsibility, however, it is a professional responsibility to provide ALL POSSIBLE INFORMATION. Realising that you have certain biological tendencies i.e. towards alcoholism, towards heart disease etc. can make people more self-aware about the work that they have to do to keep themselves healthy. If anything, I say that information about biology and genetics
increases personal responsibility because you can't claim that you "didn't know" that you had that tendency.
Sometimes, you can make conscious choices (even if you're influenced or predisposed to some of them in particular). Walking more than a mile a day is one of these conscious choices. Banning junk food is another. I'm not claiming it will be enough to instantly solve your obesity issue, but according to statistics, it might help. And so far, according to our limited current state of knowledge, lack of exercice and lack of nutritional education seem to be the factors the most correlated with the current obesity pandemic. Don't you agree? Can you prove me I'm wrong?
And I have never said that any of that was wrong. Exercise and changing the way that we eat are two things that I did mention in my original post! What I did also say was that it is important to study the issue further and not do finger-pointing because obesity is in itself complex and beyond just personal responsibility. Not knowing everything does not stop people from taking action, nor does it absolve people from personal responsibility. However, using "scientific studies" to point the finger only at personal responsibility is something that I disagreed with from the start. Our starting positions are not that different, again, I said in my first post that my understanding is just a bit more nuanced.
That's obvious, but that has nothing to do with the logic you are trying to use here.
So... my logic is obvious, but has nothing to do with the logic that I use?
The question is not whether we do not take new ideas into account, everybody does. You're being trivial and defensive.
Everyone does? And yet who was discounting biological factors and saying that it's irresponsible to inform people about them because they'll use it as an excuse and it's people's own fault if they're fat because they refuse to only walk 1 mile a day? And... ad hominem again because you're being nonsensical again.
You're judging me in terms of morality, with your own emotions. I haven't and I don't care.
I am judging you in terms of what you claim. My conclusions are drawn based on your claim, stated over and over agian, that because lots of data shows that factors such as eating badly and driving and not enough exercise are factors in obesity, people are at fault for their obesity and must take personal responsibility and if we mention any other factors, people will jump on it as an excuse to justify current behavior and absolve them of their responsibility. Is that not what you have stated again and again in this thread? I say that it is being biased and unscientific. Nothing to do with morals, simply to do with being accurate about the reality of research.
I'm just concerned with your logics and the resulting epistemological model. And to use your own words, bad logic means bad science.
Funny again because you said "my own words" but I've never said that. At this point I doubt your ability to read and comprehend.
Once again, if you deny everything, then you can't conclude anything. If you deny the possibility that we can make responsible choices, then why should we continue this discussion?
Never denied that we can make responsible choices. Never denied "everything", simply that what we can see now is "everything". From the very start, I have advocated making responsible choices and increased education. What I have rejected is thinking that irresponsible choice is the ONLY factor in the situation and blaming obese people because it's counter-productive.
-------------------------------------
Anyway, it seems pointless to argue with you further since you misrepresent what I say, make up quotes that I didn't say, make personal attacks and think that "because I say so" is a good enough justification in this discussion. I should've gone for a nap 3 hours ago, what a waste of my time.