Our Food is Killing Us!

farfromglorified

Abookamongstthemany wrote:

In helping to aid people to make sound decisions, I think products should have to put warnings for possible negative side effects and other health problems their products may cause. Nothing wrong with an aware, well informed population...especially when we expect them to make good choices. You can't make wise choices without the needed information to do so.

While I don't disagree with you here, you seem to be forgetting something. How about the idea that you shouldn't buy something if you're not informed about it? The excuse "well I didn't know my Nachos Bel Grande was loaded with Trans Fat because Taco Bell didn't tell me" doesn't hold much water for me when the person had the option to simply not buy the damn nachos. If "being informed" is so important, how come people are buying this shit in the first place?????

Vedderlution_Baby

I'm overweight and I know it. I don't blame it on the corporations though. I blame it on myself for paying for convenience instead of quality. I'm trying to change that though.

sourdough

LikeAnOcean wrote:

First off, there's just as many healthy grocery stores as there are fast food places, in the country even more so. Secondly, even at fast food places you have a choice to eat healthy. Get the Chicken sandwich, no fries and a glass of friggen water. I've been on road trips and actually eat healthier on the move. So many farms selling fresh fruits, local grocery stores, and get this... You can pack your own food before you leave if you don't like the convenient deadly roadside choices. What do you think people did 100 years ago when they traveled?

People are obese because they don't have the will to eat healthy. It's their choice. You are a fool if you beleive other wise.

Would you really consider the chicken sandwich to be healthy? The suger loaded bun, ketchup and other condiments, nutrient void lettuce, processed "chicken"... This is Healthy???

Milhouse VanHouten

VictoryGin wrote:

One thing on the subject that upsets me the most is soda/junk food machines in schools (as well as fast food!). Get the corporations and disgusting products out of schools. Let the parents feed that shit to kids. I also think it's creepy how McDonalds will strategically plan to build locations near schools (and reel the kids in with play areas and happy meals).

Lots of school districts are seduced by big monetary donations from soft drink companies. Pepsi gives a few million dollars towards a new football field or something, and the school board allows Pepsi to put machines in the school. It's a crock of shit.

Abookamongstthemany

farfromglorified wrote:

While I don't disagree with you here, you seem to be forgetting something. How about the idea that you shouldn't buy something if you're not informed about it? The excuse "well I didn't know my Nachos Bel Grande was loaded with Trans Fat because Taco Bell didn't tell me" doesn't hold much water for me when the person had the option to simply not buy the damn nachos. If "being informed" is so important, how come people are buying this shit in the first place?????

Because I view it as wrong to knowingly distribute harmful items into the public and not give a fair warning.

LikeAnOcean

sourdough wrote:

Would you really consider the chicken sandwich to be healthy? The suger loaded bun, ketchup and other condiments, nutrient void lettuce, processed "chicken"... This is Healthy???

Then DON'T EAT FAST FOOD. There wasn't a Burger King every city block 100 years ago. It wasn't too long ago in our existance that you had to actually work on a farm all day or hunt down your food to survive.

Cosmo

Abookamongstthemany wrote:

In helping to aid people to make sound decisions, I think products should have to put warnings for possible negative side effects and other health problems their products may cause. Nothing wrong with an aware, well informed population...especially when we expect them to make good choices. You can't make wise choices without the needed information to do so.

...
The thing is... we all sort of know this already.
Like we already know that snack foods, like potato chips, are loaded with crap we probably shouldn't be putting into our bodies... but, the crap tastes good. In small doses, we can probably take it. But, when the whole damn bag is dragged out to the couch for the 'Deal or No Deal' marathon... then, it's a problem.
And fast food still works... as long as it isn't ingested in large amounts, followed by hours upon hours of physical inactivity. A kid can get obese on a homecooked meal if he eats 3 portions and sits around like Jabba the Hut.
Diet and exercise... feed the kid, don't stuff him and make sure he's out there doing kid stuff... like playing tag or hide and seek or anything that requires him to run around a bit.

surferdude

Milhouse VanHouten wrote:

Lots of school districts are seduced by big monetary donations from soft drink companies. Pepsi gives a few million dollars towards a new football field or something, and the school board allows Pepsi to put machines in the school. It's a crock of shit.

But it goes back to the parents letting their kids develop a taste for that crap so they then buy it when it's available. It doesn't bother me that my son's school has pop machines, I trust my son that he will not act like a retard and start buying it everyday. He's been raised to be health and diet aware.

Personally I'd like to see them get rid of the drugs in schools then worry about the pop machines. At least the schools are getting something out of the pop and theres not too much peer pressure to do pop nor too much stupid and risky behavior occurring after pop usage. Perspective, it's a neat thing.

even flow?

Cosmo wrote:

Buy your spawn ONE Happy Meal and let them romp around in that bacteria infested jungle gym out back to either burn off the calories or puke out the shit.

As the entire staff looks at me weird for just laughing at my computer. Good one!

Jeanwah

farfromglorified wrote:

Why is it "sickening"? Would it be ok if more people starved to death??? Would you be glad to see a statistic that showed that there were more people starving than people obese???

I'm saying that because it's sick that gluttony has consumed the masses, the world over. NOT because there should be more people starving. Really, you would think someone would think that?

Abookamongstthemany

Cosmo wrote:

...
The thing is... we all sort of know this already.
Like we already know that snack foods, like potato chips, are loaded with crap we probably shouldn't be putting into our bodies... but, the crap tastes good. In small doses, we can probably take it. But, when the whole damn bag is dragged out to the couch for the 'Deal or No Deal' marathon... then, it's a problem.
And fast food still works... as long as it isn't ingested in large amounts, followed by hours upon hours of physical inactivity. A kid can get obese on a homecooked meal if he eats 3 portions and sits around like Jabba the Hut.
Diet and exercise... feed the kid, don't stuff him and make sure he's out there doing kid stuff... like playing tag or hide and seek or anything that requires him to run around a bit.

I guess it may drive it home to the parent a bit more if it's in their face everytime they grab this stuff off the shelf, at least for some it might. And then no one can whine and say it was anybody else's fault but their own. They had all the information they needed and made their choice. Now you can fully blame yourself.

farfromglorified

Abookamongstthemany wrote:

Because I view it as wrong to knowingly distribute harmful items into the public and not give a fair warning.

But it isn't "harmful" by default. If you eat at McDonalds every few months, it isn't going to harm you. If you stop at Ben & Jerry's a couple times a summer, it isn't going to harm you. A Snickers bar is not a bomb for Christ sake.

Regardless, food labelling has been going on for quite some time now. It isn't ending this "epidemic". Why? Because the public doesn't care. Shockingly, they weren't so stupid to think that a McDonald's triple cheeseburger was healthy before you made McDonald's slap a label on it.

surferdude

Abookamongstthemany wrote:

Because I view it as wrong to knowingly distribute harmful items into the public and not give a fair warning.

I'm confused. I see your latest post but no warning label to go with it. Will a warning label be added as part of your signature in the near future?

Milhouse VanHouten

surferdude wrote:

But it goes back to the parents letting their kids develop a taste for that crap so they then buy it when it's available. It doesn't bother me that my son's school has pop machines, I trust my son that he will not act like a retard and start buying it everyday. He's been raised to be health and diet aware.

Personally I'd like to see them get rid of the drugs in schools then worry about the pop machines. At least the schools are getting something out of the pop and theres not too much peer pressure to do pop nor too much stupid and risky behavior occurring after pop usage. Perspective, it's a neat thing.

So because parents allow their kids to eat fast food and junk food, it's somehow acceptable for a school board to make unhealthy foods available to the kids at school?

What does illegal drug use have to with schools allowing soft drink companies to sell their products inside school cafeterias?

farfromglorified

Jeanwah wrote:

I'm saying that because it's sick that gluttony has consumed the masses, the world over. NOT because there should be more people starving. Really, you would think someone would think that?

Around here, it wouldn't surprise me sometimes. Thanks for clarifying. It is sick that gluttony has consumed the masses. But I think anyone has the right to be a glutton if they choose to be. I just have no interest in shouldering the consequences of their choice.

Cosmo

Abookamongstthemany wrote:

I guess it may drive it home to the parent a bit more if it's in their face everytime they grab this stuff off the shelf, at least for some it might. And then no one can whine and say it was anybody else's fault but their own. They had all the information they needed and made their choice. Now you can fully blame yourself.

...
Even if it's out there... how many parents even read these labels? I think parents should already know this... they call it 'Junk Food' for a reason. I think people want to blame someone else for their failures... my kids are obese because of McDonalds, not because I use McDonalds 5 times a week for dinner because I'm too "busy" watching t.v. to cook for them.
And I know it is tough on parents... but, they should have taken that into consideration before bring the kid into the world. If you're too damn busy to cook for yourself... how in the hell are you gonna cook for your kid?
Parents rely on prepared, nukable pre-packaged foods to do some of the work... as well as the fast food joints. But, it is still their responsibility as to the portions allowed and the activities of their kids.

Abookamongstthemany

farfromglorified wrote:

But it isn't "harmful" by default. If you eat at McDonalds every few months, it isn't going to harm you. If you stop at Ben & Jerry's a couple times a summer, it isn't going to harm you. A Snickers bar is not a bomb for Christ sake.

Regardless, food labelling has been going on for quite some time now. It isn't ending this "epidemic". Why? Because the public doesn't care. Shockingly, they weren't so stupid to think that a McDonald's triple cheeseburger was healthy before you made McDonald's slap a label on it.

The labeling on food now isn't the same as the labeling on cigarettes. It would be more effective to list the side effects on the product. I'm sure these kids don't want to be fat and stricken with diabetes. They just aren't thinking about the consequences as much when they grab for the Oreos. Next thing you know, you'll complain about 'wet floor' warnings. I guess people should check ahead with the store to see when their mopping schedule will take place. Warning are there to help. There is nothing wrong, imo, with trying to protect the population from possibly harmful overconsumption. It's not against the law to drink Windex, most people know it's not a good idea to drink it but they still put a warning on the label for safety.

And I don't think anyone will read these warning labels and think they'll get sick after the first serving...no one thinks they'll get cancer from smoking one cigarette either. But at least you have been properly warned.

Abookamongstthemany

Cosmo wrote:

...
Even if it's out there... how many parents even read these labels? I think parents should already know this... they call it 'Junk Food' for a reason. I think people want to blame someone else for their failures... my kids are obese because of McDonalds, not because I use McDonalds 5 times a week for dinner because I'm too "busy" watching t.v. to cook for them.
And I know it is tough on parents... but, they should have taken that into consideration before bring the kid into the world. If you're too damn busy to cook for yourself... how in the hell are you gonna cook for your kid?
Parents rely on prepared, nukable pre-packaged foods to do some of the work... as well as the fast food joints. But, it is still their responsibility as to the portions allowed and the activities of their kids.

Well these labels will be the perfect disclaimer for that kind of mentality. They can say...'We told you. It's right there on the label!'

surferdude

Milhouse VanHouten wrote:

So because parents allow their kids to eat fast food and junk food, it's somehow acceptable for a school board to make unhealthy foods available to the kids at school?

What does illegal drug use have to with schools allowing soft drink companies to sell their products inside school cafeterias?

Considering that schools are supposed to help make kids ready for the world and to think critically I wouldn't think that making soda pop available to be that bad a thing. Kids could be taught the danger of over consumption in about 15 minutes. Pop, like nearly all food, is not bad for you in moderation. I have much more of an issue with foods with high fat content. pop basically only has empty calories which you can provide the solution of more activity. It's not nearly that easy to counteract the affects of high in fat foods. But then again I don't really care that much I feed my kid healthy and he cares about his body.

The reason I bring drugs into the question is because the same group of people I see ranting about pop being sold in schools turn a blind eye to drugs and half of them are fighting for legalization of drugs. Drugs good, pop bad. Great message. Stop trying to get schools to focus on every small little issue in the world. The same group of parents fighting about pop in school, also spend school board time fighting for and against the book "I Have Two Mommys". Can we let schools get back to just trying to teach kids the three Rs and how to think critically. Once that's done you don't have to worry about all this little bullshit stuff.

It's pretty simple if you don't want your kid to drink pop don't let them grow up developping a taste for the stuff. Teach them the dangers of over-indulgence. But please don't teach your kids the only way to apply any modicum of discipline in life is to basically outlaw things. I was hoping that puritanical attitude was long gone by the 21st century.

Abookamongstthemany

surferdude wrote:

I'm confused. I see your latest post but no warning label to go with it. Will a warning label be added as part of your signature in the near future?

No, but I should advertise for the wonderful enlightenment you shall receive upon reading it.