While nearly all of history maintains the concept of a renewed sense of responsibility upon the entrance of adulthood, there is one specific subject matter that has quite clearly been granted permission to slip… and slip and slip.

It begins with a question: “Why do we weigh so much more than our parents did at our age?” It then proceeds to simmer in a concoction of knowing sighs and empathetic head nods, drain with multiple explanations of additional chemicals and preservatives, and rapidly cool with some variation of a shoulder-shrugging, “well there’s nothing we can do about it” sentiment. And then the conversation ends, poised and ready to occur in an almost identical format at the next available opportunity.

Of course the entire U.S. food industry has taken an utter nosedive in the realm of public health. No one’s arguing against that. And no, our parents were obviously not just a generation of exceptional dieters in comparison, but rather were simply not afforded the same nutritional opportunities as we are currently, opportunities like packing on numerous extra pounds, not to mention the great multitude of additional negative health effects.

It’s a good thing all generations can now sit on a nice level playing field.

The reality of the situation is that our nation is experiencing a serious health crisis, with over a third of all U.S. adults considered obese, yet we are still pointing fingers at all of the wrong culprits. Blame the government! Blame the companies! Blame the GMO’s! Just do not under any circumstances blame us.

Outside of the hugely indicative factor of genetics, which one particular study in mice linked to over 70 percent of body fat differences, arguments for why we’re becoming a progressively unhealthier society are too often centered around persistent accusations of the companies manufacturing the contributing products. If they stopped making the fatty pre-packaged treats, then we would stop eating them. And yes, that is certainly one quick fix to depleting dietary autonomy.

Here’s the opposite theory: In a capitalist society, you as the consumer are not entitled to eat unhealthy food and remain a healthy individual, because while food companies are required to align themselves with some minor FDA regulations, they still don’t owe you a “better” product; that is, unless you demand it.

Even against all desires for morality in marketing, the great majority of company models boil down to one self-explanatory formula: supply, demand and maximization of monetary gains. So if the people want bagged french fries for dinner, then that’s what the people will get. Maybe the fries will even contain a hefty portion of extra sodium to stand out from the company’s competitors in taste, and what business wouldn’t realistically strive for that bit of an edge, regardless of its potential negative health effects?

Gradually, that little edge grows and grows, and everything subsequently begins to taste better and better.

In truth, a denial of self-responsibility in exchange for a hopeless desire for a corporate one will almost always bear this same result. Products only change when people demand them to, and so without demand, there is quite obviously no reason for any positive transformations. Quite frankly, no one is currently positioned to swoop in and save us from ourselves or our poor eating habits, and as long as we wish to continue them, the epidemic will rage on.

So what happens next? Well, we diet. We contribute to a 20 billion dollar industry that thrives on consumers never reaching their goals, and that maintains a laughable success rate even despite our best efforts, because guess what business model the companies of dieting products also utilize? We forget that companies are composed of people with monetary goals rather than our personal ethical agents, and that products are never going to undergo ingredient updates unless the change is desired by the majority of buyers, thus guaranteed to increase revenue.

Armed with an utter lack of accountability, we disregard our own best interests for the sake of blaming someone—anyone—else, and dismiss the notion that the products of a company are merely the reflection of the consumer’s demands.

And if there are no demands? Well then I suppose that we as a society are perfectly fine with remaining right where we are.