tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4900303239154048192.post1964944990217979339..comments2024-03-06T06:34:42.881-05:00Comments on EconoSpeak: Prudence, Vice and MiseryUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4900303239154048192.post-29769559733380975922019-08-27T20:40:00.012-04:002019-08-27T20:40:00.012-04:00Whoops, should read "now been verified"Whoops, should read "now been verified" Wallflyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03852136998154262919noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4900303239154048192.post-66173716274245971892019-08-27T10:22:02.473-04:002019-08-27T10:22:02.473-04:00The idea of unlimited appetite for consumption has...The idea of unlimited appetite for consumption has an interesting parallel in conventional thinking about obesity, where obesity is considered due to an energy imbalance for which the correction is behavioral, "eat less and move more".<br />However the standard treatments for obesity are notoriously unsuccessful and there was (and started to emerge again) and alternative hypothesis that obesity is not about the lack of control of an insatiable appetite but that there is an in-built system of regulating appetite (with the functional objective of maintaining a weight equilibrium or "set point"). <br />The biochemistry of this system has been known since the 60's and forms the basis of low carbohydrate approaches to weight management (where dieters are never told count calories but rather eat to satiety). The effectiveness of the approach has not been verified in dozens of randomized clinical trials.<br />So much for the theory of consumption insatiability, at least in terms of food.<br />Wallflyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03852136998154262919noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4900303239154048192.post-4282084430227005902019-08-25T21:37:40.169-04:002019-08-25T21:37:40.169-04:00Mine was published 1979 or maybe in 1978.Mine was published 1979 or maybe in 1978.rosserjb@jmu.eduhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09300046915843554101noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4900303239154048192.post-21074473255770229512019-08-25T18:26:23.682-04:002019-08-25T18:26:23.682-04:00Thanks, Barkley. Would be very interested to see. ...Thanks, Barkley. Would be very interested to see. Have you read Nancy Folbre's analysis? She also wrote a paper published in 1992, ""The Improper Arts": Sex in Classical Political Economy." Great piece!Sandwichmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11159060882083015637noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4900303239154048192.post-17006748337278482692019-08-25T18:12:33.823-04:002019-08-25T18:12:33.823-04:00S-man,
I shall try to find that copy of my old pa...S-man,<br /><br />I shall try to find that copy of my old paper.<br /><br />In the meantime, Malthus only maintained the "arithmetic growth" of food through the second edition of his Essay on the Principle of Population. In fact the "arithmetic" (linear) rate of growth was and is simply wrong, which Malthus came to realize. The "geometric" (exponential) growth rate is the general law of the growth of all populations, including vegetation suach as basic ag crops. The question that arises is how do the limits of land and resources more generally place limits on that general tendency.rosserjb@jmu.eduhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09300046915843554101noreply@blogger.com