Or... you know, there could be some little actual effort in shedding such addiction (sugar ain't that hard), build a bit of character and walk off better off in many regards. Winning against addiction won't kill you, break you or similar damage but makes you (much) stronger and healthier as a bonus. Why do people shy away from such things?

But no, lets do everything possible just to keep the comfortable crappy couch lifestyle, no sweat, no effort, miserable health, miserable life. Then there are articles how US population (which suffers the most these shit HFCS addictions and resulting obesity problems) is depressed... for many reasons of course, but this sort of helpless victim mindset is one of them.

> Why do people shy away from such things?

Have you ever met someone with a true addiction to food? I'm not talking about someone with a habitual craving for sweets. I'm talking about someone who consumes food compulsively like a chain-smoker; someone who, in the absence of whatever their favorites are, will consume and consume with little regard for what the food is: an entire jar of pickles, multiple pounds of grapes, a whole rotisserie chicken, et al.

I used to be one. I once ate six baked white onions¹ in one sitting before vomiting everywhere and rethinking my life.

I broke through naturally, but I wish GLP-1s had been prevalent at the time. Want to know what made breaking it so challenging?

  1. Unlike other addictions, you have to continue consuming this one or else you will die.

  2. Nearly every social event in the USA is tied in some way to food which means that you have to exercise willpower __constantly__ if you have a social life.

  3. People are more interested in shaming you than supporting you. Most want you to fail.

There's nothing wrong with HFCS either, at least not that isn't also wrong with sugar. This is all just naturalist fallacy stuff.