["McDougall didn't talk about their politics, just their health and eating habits to the extent he was aware of them, and extrapolating from that who seemed more likely to promote a healthier climate next term. Of course that's not the only thing that matters and of course people will choose which one, two or many issues will influence their choice. But given that McDougall is primarily concerned about the laws and general climate surrounding health and medicine, it's perfectly understandable that he'd be seeing the candidates in this way.
This is his forum and his newsletter - nobody has paid a cent to be here or read it - and he has the right to say what he wants"
Forgive me for extrapolating, "a healthier climate" of what? I really don't care what the politicians are eating. I want them to do their jobs and give us a healthier economic future.
I also cannot agree that anyone that smokes is considered healthy. PERIOD! Regardless of their trim body and steamed veggie and salmon diet. And let's not forget the excercise. PEOPLE WHO SMOKE ARE NOT HEALTHY!
As for this being Dr. McDougall's forum and newsletter..........you are correct, and he has invited us here to share our thoughts as well. I signed up for a Nutritional Newsletter not a political one, although I welcome the discussion.
I won't argue with you about the smoking - you'd be hard pressed to find anyone more revolted by smoking than I am. But I'm lucky - I've always been nauseated by the smell and thought so was never tempted. I hope that Obama can stay off the cigarettes, whether he becomes president or not.
I could have expressed myself more clearly about the climate of health thing. I meant that the president can exert a great deal of influence on the FDA and other organisations and individuals that create laws about food production, labelling, dietary advice and requirements, school lunch programs, and so on to make them more accountable to science and health rather than corporate interests of the meat, dairy, drug and nutritional supplement industries. The president has the power to significantly affect whether the US healthcare system continues down the route of the ambulance and drugs at the bottom of the cliff (continuing to allow companies to peddle poisonous "food" to us and our children) or the preventative fence at the top (promoting scientifically sound healthy eating). Maintaining the current course is a bottomless black hole into which we can pour billions of dollars and still have people with impaired health dying too young of diseases that are largely caused by lifestyle choices.
I agree it's a stretch to assume that Obama is anything more than a half step closer to McDougall than McCain, without more information than I think any of us has. But I think it's pretty clear that McCain is miles away, based on his diet.
You may choose to focus on who you feel would be better for the economy. Someone else will focus on abortion. Another person will focus on health, or education. Hopefully many will consider more than just a single issue, as they're mostly inter-related anyway. I wouldn't write the health of Americans, individually and as a group, off as being a non-issue, though.