Wow, Liver…you make it sound appealing to die from alcoholism. I’m sure if wife and kids were involved, they are dancing around. Not to mention having to put up with that all those years.
Maybe not so much diet police as caretakers, trying to get a population not to kill itself off or allow corporate interests to kill us off for a buck or two. That’s what smoking is, just you paying for the privilege of killing yourself to enrich someone else who has convinced you smoking is cool and fun. Again, I am sure your loved ones will thank you for it.
As the ancient Greeks observed, “everything in moderation”. I think it is appropriate for the government to try to eliminate things that clearly are unhealthy. One can be perfectly happy without trans fats or tons of sugar. The reason why most of it is there in the first place is to increase profits from food sales, not because it is healthy.
I didn’t think I was making alcoholism sound appealing. “… and died young, a shell of his former self.” Yes, there was a wife, and an ex-wife. No kids, thankfully. The ex was an “ex” largely because of the drinking. No one was celebrating when he died. The house was lost, foreclosed because his income was taken out of the equation.Government has stepped in before to prevent us consuming a product that was bad for us. It was called Prohibition. They are doing the same thing now with marijuana. In both cases, with disastrous results. Enforcing food safety by ensuring sterile manufacturing facilities and keeping poisons out of the process and the finished product is appropriate regulation. Trying to dissuade people from consuming things that are bad for us by making us aware of how these substances are harmful is fine. Making them illegal is overreach. It succeeds only in creating a black market, and providing an incentive to make outrageous sums of $$ by breaking the law and providing that which is banned.Tobacco is a legal product. Consuming it should not subject those who do so to some sort of societal sanction, criminal or otherwise. Making it illegal will only drive it underground. Better to publicize its deleterious effects and let the public decide for itself. Of course we can all “be perfectly happy without trans fats or tons of sugar.” That’s not the point. We can be perfectly happy without a great many things that may kill us; alcohol, rock climbing, skiing, contact sports, etc. That doesn’t mean banning them is good public policy. We tried it. The results speak for themselves.
americans…we do love food. the more unhealthy it is, we love it. they bundle a few healthy food items with a whole lot of unhealthy stuff. Ever notice that unhealthy sugary cereal always say part of a complete breakfast, but when will any of us eat a whole bowl of sugary cereal, 2 eggs, 2 toast, oj, milk, grapefruit, a stack of pancakes, sausage, bacon, muffins, and a steak at one sitting. And, if we eat all of this unhealthy foods, do we even offset it by doing strenuous physical activity? nope, we sit in cubicles, press x to run, and crush candies. even one of our major holidays is a time to be a glutton. trans fat elimination is just a tiny step to be healthy. the rest is what people have been saying for decades. limit salt and sugar(there is a lot of those in everything), limit fat, eat healthy, exercise, get enough sleep
“An exaggeration since they want us both addicted and paying them money.”. Properly seasoned, packaged, and advertised, many would learn to love it. I jest. But look at the products such as tobacco and excessively salty and sweet things that people crave, some with hardly any natural ingredients, indeed invoke their human rights to consume. Think most of what we buy does not have small, FDA allowed doses of contaminants and poisons.? Don’t mind me, I only live here. As always, thanks for your comment.
It’s good to remember that requiring the labeling of ingredients etc. in food, is one of them business stranglin’ regulations that Republicans/Fox “news” viewers really, really want eliminated.
Looking a my dad’s old formulas from long ago, he was a master baker, and they called for lard in almost all cases. When margarine was introduced, you had to mix the food coloring into the packets. My brother loved to mix it up, my dad HATED margarine and refused to use it. Lard or butter was his choice, because even in the 1950’s when they were touting “miracle margarine”, he said it was “fake” and dangerous. Interesting to reflect on that today.
Synthetic oils in engines may be good, in human bodies, not so much… Of course when you look at all the other synthetic additives, you have to ask if STP really worked, or just made Granatelli rich.
I would like to point out an apparent paradox from a previous posting, which noted that it can be government’s responsibility to protect us from poisons, but also stated that making harmful chemicals illegal is over-reach. I will state, as a healthcare practitioner, that trans fats are poisons, as are high fructose corn syrup and aspartame, to name just a couple.
If another country did to our food supply what we have allowed to have happened, we would consider it an act of terrorism.
One out of every three children under the age of 8 is projected to be diabetic by age 21. If you think that health care costs a lot now, you ain’t seen nothing yet. And almost all of that is dietary.
Should adults be allowed to choose their poisons? Absolutely. Just don’t ask me to help pay your medical bills from your acting irresponsibly. And those arguments leave out children, and foods made to target children are the most heinous of all. Ever read the ingredients of the “juice boxes” that are marketed for children? 1/2 of one percent fruit juice. The rest: sugar and water. Read ingredients of cereal made to target kids: sugar, sucrose, dextrose, maltodextrose, corn syrup, corn syrup solids, high fructose corn syrup….each of these is SUGAR.
If there was an upside to trans fats, that might be different. The only upside is convenience and cost to the manufacturer; as far as the consumer is concerned, it’s all downside. I applaud the feds for protecting us from those who are willing to jeopardize our health to make a quick buck.
Alexander the Good Enough almost 9 years ago
I dunno. Something’s gonna get you sooner or later. And I don’t mind enjoying things more until then, even if it’s a little bit sooner.
Darsan54 Premium Member almost 9 years ago
Wow, Liver…you make it sound appealing to die from alcoholism. I’m sure if wife and kids were involved, they are dancing around. Not to mention having to put up with that all those years.
Maybe not so much diet police as caretakers, trying to get a population not to kill itself off or allow corporate interests to kill us off for a buck or two. That’s what smoking is, just you paying for the privilege of killing yourself to enrich someone else who has convinced you smoking is cool and fun. Again, I am sure your loved ones will thank you for it.
Theodore E. Lind Premium Member almost 9 years ago
As the ancient Greeks observed, “everything in moderation”. I think it is appropriate for the government to try to eliminate things that clearly are unhealthy. One can be perfectly happy without trans fats or tons of sugar. The reason why most of it is there in the first place is to increase profits from food sales, not because it is healthy.
emptc12 almost 9 years ago
Sometimes the government has to step in, otherwise before you know it we’ll be eating Sh*t’n’Cyanide on a Stick. If we aren’t already. (-
Liverlips McCracken Premium Member almost 9 years ago
I didn’t think I was making alcoholism sound appealing. “… and died young, a shell of his former self.” Yes, there was a wife, and an ex-wife. No kids, thankfully. The ex was an “ex” largely because of the drinking. No one was celebrating when he died. The house was lost, foreclosed because his income was taken out of the equation.Government has stepped in before to prevent us consuming a product that was bad for us. It was called Prohibition. They are doing the same thing now with marijuana. In both cases, with disastrous results. Enforcing food safety by ensuring sterile manufacturing facilities and keeping poisons out of the process and the finished product is appropriate regulation. Trying to dissuade people from consuming things that are bad for us by making us aware of how these substances are harmful is fine. Making them illegal is overreach. It succeeds only in creating a black market, and providing an incentive to make outrageous sums of $$ by breaking the law and providing that which is banned.Tobacco is a legal product. Consuming it should not subject those who do so to some sort of societal sanction, criminal or otherwise. Making it illegal will only drive it underground. Better to publicize its deleterious effects and let the public decide for itself. Of course we can all “be perfectly happy without trans fats or tons of sugar.” That’s not the point. We can be perfectly happy without a great many things that may kill us; alcohol, rock climbing, skiing, contact sports, etc. That doesn’t mean banning them is good public policy. We tried it. The results speak for themselves.
vwdualnomand almost 9 years ago
americans…we do love food. the more unhealthy it is, we love it. they bundle a few healthy food items with a whole lot of unhealthy stuff. Ever notice that unhealthy sugary cereal always say part of a complete breakfast, but when will any of us eat a whole bowl of sugary cereal, 2 eggs, 2 toast, oj, milk, grapefruit, a stack of pancakes, sausage, bacon, muffins, and a steak at one sitting. And, if we eat all of this unhealthy foods, do we even offset it by doing strenuous physical activity? nope, we sit in cubicles, press x to run, and crush candies. even one of our major holidays is a time to be a glutton. trans fat elimination is just a tiny step to be healthy. the rest is what people have been saying for decades. limit salt and sugar(there is a lot of those in everything), limit fat, eat healthy, exercise, get enough sleep
Mickey and Delia almost 9 years ago
If transfats make flaked crusts last longer, why wouldn’t they do that for human flakes?.(I’m not sure what a transfat is, but I’m sure I want some.)
pam Miner almost 9 years ago
The little remark at the bottom seems to carry the real message.Those at the very top don’t see us near the bottom as having value.
emptc12 almost 9 years ago
“An exaggeration since they want us both addicted and paying them money.”. Properly seasoned, packaged, and advertised, many would learn to love it. I jest. But look at the products such as tobacco and excessively salty and sweet things that people crave, some with hardly any natural ingredients, indeed invoke their human rights to consume. Think most of what we buy does not have small, FDA allowed doses of contaminants and poisons.? Don’t mind me, I only live here. As always, thanks for your comment.
braindead Premium Member almost 9 years ago
It’s good to remember that requiring the labeling of ingredients etc. in food, is one of them business stranglin’ regulations that Republicans/Fox “news” viewers really, really want eliminated.
Dtroutma almost 9 years ago
Looking a my dad’s old formulas from long ago, he was a master baker, and they called for lard in almost all cases. When margarine was introduced, you had to mix the food coloring into the packets. My brother loved to mix it up, my dad HATED margarine and refused to use it. Lard or butter was his choice, because even in the 1950’s when they were touting “miracle margarine”, he said it was “fake” and dangerous. Interesting to reflect on that today.
Synthetic oils in engines may be good, in human bodies, not so much… Of course when you look at all the other synthetic additives, you have to ask if STP really worked, or just made Granatelli rich.
markjoseph125 almost 9 years ago
I’m impressed!
I Play One On TV almost 9 years ago
I would like to point out an apparent paradox from a previous posting, which noted that it can be government’s responsibility to protect us from poisons, but also stated that making harmful chemicals illegal is over-reach. I will state, as a healthcare practitioner, that trans fats are poisons, as are high fructose corn syrup and aspartame, to name just a couple.
If another country did to our food supply what we have allowed to have happened, we would consider it an act of terrorism.
One out of every three children under the age of 8 is projected to be diabetic by age 21. If you think that health care costs a lot now, you ain’t seen nothing yet. And almost all of that is dietary.
Should adults be allowed to choose their poisons? Absolutely. Just don’t ask me to help pay your medical bills from your acting irresponsibly. And those arguments leave out children, and foods made to target children are the most heinous of all. Ever read the ingredients of the “juice boxes” that are marketed for children? 1/2 of one percent fruit juice. The rest: sugar and water. Read ingredients of cereal made to target kids: sugar, sucrose, dextrose, maltodextrose, corn syrup, corn syrup solids, high fructose corn syrup….each of these is SUGAR.
If there was an upside to trans fats, that might be different. The only upside is convenience and cost to the manufacturer; as far as the consumer is concerned, it’s all downside. I applaud the feds for protecting us from those who are willing to jeopardize our health to make a quick buck.