Post Reply
Page 2 of 31  •  Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 31 Next
Switch to Forum Live View Pure White and Deadly
3 years ago  ::  Feb 02, 2012 - 12:13PM #11
TemplarS
Posts: 6,856

Again, I come back to what was said on the "bacon" thread, or probably half a dozen others: moderation.


If you like a coke with lunch, or a cupcake for a snack every now and again, not much harm.


If you down 10 cokes and six twinkies every day, that's not good. 


Two points:


1. Adults are deemed to be responsible, not so children.  It would be nice to think that parents could keep on top of everything their kids eat and drink, but that's not practical.  I think the idea of restricting sales for kids under 17 is absurd.  But limiting the availability of this stuff in schools would certainly make sense.


2. While it is true that adults ought to be responsible for their own actions, it is also true that obesity-related and diabetes-related health care costs impact everyone, to the extent they drive up health insurance premiums.  So (as with tobacco) it is not true that the effects are limited to the consumers of these products. So, reasonable measures to deal with this might be appropriate:  higher premiums for obese people (my insurance charges more for smokers) - though this is problematic since not all obesity might be related to this- or perhaps a surtax on these products, as with tobacco.  It is questionable whether  these would impact people's behavior, but they would provide funds to offset some of the cost of their health problems.

Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Feb 02, 2012 - 12:47PM #12
arielg
Posts: 9,116

Some people have discovered certain things and they point them out.  Nobody is forcing anybody to believe or do anything.


Those who get frantic  about  having  their mindless eating habits  questioned, are free to keep doing it. Go on sleeping.


See? No problemo.

Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Feb 02, 2012 - 4:42PM #13
Roodog
Posts: 10,168

Feb 1, 2012 -- 6:19PM, solfeggio wrote:


A team of researchers at the University of California-San Francisco are recommending that sugar, like alcohol and tobacco, should be a controlled product. 

www.vancouversun.com/health/Sugar+should...


The researchers say that sugar consumption is responsible for the global obesity pandemic, and it contributes to 35 million deaths worldwide annually from non-communicable diseases and major killers such as diabetes, heart disease, and cancer.   

Sugar, the researchers argue, is not just empty calories, but is a substance that changes a person's metabolism, raises blood pressure, and causes damage to the liver.  It's basically a toxic substance.

The researchers recommend finding ways to make sugar consumption less convenient, and giving people more food choices that are not so heavily laden with sugar.  


Their report will be published in the February 2 issue of Nature.   





Caffiene, mixed with sugar, is my drug of choice.
I would be grateful if you would not meddle.

For those who have faith, no explanation is neccessary.
For those who have no faith, no explanation is possible.

St. Thomas Aquinas

If one turns his ear from hearing the Law, even his prayer is an abomination. Proverbs 28:9
Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Feb 02, 2012 - 4:52PM #14
farragut
Posts: 4,034

"Those who get frantic  about  having  their mindless eating habits  questioned"


This is the kind of fanatic hyperbole that destroys dialogue.

Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Feb 02, 2012 - 5:12PM #15
Ironhold
Posts: 11,546

Feb 2, 2012 -- 12:13PM, TemplarS wrote:


Again, I come back to what was said on the "bacon" thread, or probably half a dozen others: moderation.


If you like a coke with lunch, or a cupcake for a snack every now and again, not much harm.


If you down 10 cokes and six twinkies every day, that's not good.




A few years ago, comedian Denis Leary released a book entitled "Why We Suck". Half the book was autobiography, while the other half was him comparing his life experiences to what was going on when the book was written.


As part of it, he mentions the "popcorn lung" situation. Apparently, the workers at a company that made microwave popcorn started developing the same type of lung cancer due to the fumes from one of the chemicals used in the flavoring. This led to a class-action lawsuit and the artificial butter flavoring being changed up.


Thing is, someone who wasn't a worker sought to join the lawsuit on the basis that he, too, had "popcorn lung".


How'd he get it?


According to his own testimony, he so desired microwave popcorn that he'd heat up at least two bags a day, and as soon as he got them out of the microwave he'd open them up and breathe the smell in as deeply as possible.


Guess who Denis didn't have sympathy for.

Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Feb 02, 2012 - 6:17PM #16
IreneAdler
Posts: 2,849

Solf- Just a suggestion:


If you are sincere in your cause to educate folks on nutrition, why not offer to edit or contribute to the health and wellbeing newsletter B-Net sends out? It’s called Your Health and Happiness. The newsletter is one that folks sign up for, so you’d have an audience more inclined to be interested in learning about nutrition.


 


Irene.

Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Feb 02, 2012 - 8:48PM #17
Abner1
Posts: 6,403

Farragut wrote:


> This is the kind of fanatic hyperbole that destroys dialogue.


You're assuming that they are interested in dialogue.  From observation, I'd have to say that isn't the case.  It appears they are far more interested in browbeating, jeremiads, and expressing moral superiority.

Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Feb 02, 2012 - 9:13PM #18
Father_Oblivion
Posts: 11,894

Feb 2, 2012 -- 12:47PM, arielg wrote:


Some people have discovered certain things and they point them out.  Nobody is forcing anybody to believe or do anything.


Those who get frantic  about  having  their mindless eating habits  questioned, are free to keep doing it. Go on sleeping.


See? No problemo.




Maybe you missed the first sentence in the OP:



A team of researchers at the University of California-San Francisco are recommending that sugar, like alcohol and tobacco, should be a controlled product.  




That phrase is typically used with such substances as heroine and cocaine, so your statement "Nobody is forcing anybody to believe or do anything" is not in evidence. Further, it specifically mentions alcohol and tobacco, both of which have tight restrictions on their sale and purchase (and are also the source of a great deal of tax revenues at the State level because of those restrictions). Granted, the widespad use of sugars in so so many processed foods is something to be opposed to, yet this does not seem to be the intelligent way to go about accomplishing that goal.

The important thing to remember about American history is that it is fictional, a charcoal-sketched simplicity for the children or the easily bored. For the most part it is uninspected, unimagined, unthought, a representative of the thing and not the thing itself. It is a fine fiction...
Neil Gaiman
'American Gods'

‎"Ignorance of ignorance, then, is that self-satisfied state of unawareness in which man, knowing nothing outside the limited area of his physical senses, bumptiously declares there is nothing more to know! He who knows no life save the physical is merely ignorant; but he who declares physical life to be all-important and elevates it to the position of supreme reality--such a one is ignorant of his own ignorance."
- Manly Palmer Hall
Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Feb 03, 2012 - 5:09AM #19
arielg
Posts: 9,116

Feb 2, 2012 -- 4:52PM, farragut wrote:


"Those who get frantic  about  having  their mindless eating habits  questioned"


This is the kind of fanatic hyperbole that destroys dialogue.




 Fanatic hyperbole my foot.   Most people's eating habits are mindless and based on  habits.  Simple fact.  Those who get upset about hearing it are the ones who need to hear it the most.


Very few people have actually looked at and experimented with what they eat and do it consciously because they have found it to be  best for them.  

Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Feb 03, 2012 - 9:44AM #20
Father_Oblivion
Posts: 11,894

Feb 3, 2012 -- 5:09AM, arielg wrote:


Feb 2, 2012 -- 4:52PM, farragut wrote:


"Those who get frantic  about  having  their mindless eating habits  questioned"


This is the kind of fanatic hyperbole that destroys dialogue.




 Fanatic hyperbole my foot.   Most people's eating habits are mindless and based on  habits.  Simple fact.  Those who get upset about hearing it are the ones who need to hear it the most.


Very few people have actually looked at and experimented with what they eat and do it consciously because they have found it to be  best for them.  




Most are too poor to make the decisions they want to make, that doesn't make them mindless.

The important thing to remember about American history is that it is fictional, a charcoal-sketched simplicity for the children or the easily bored. For the most part it is uninspected, unimagined, unthought, a representative of the thing and not the thing itself. It is a fine fiction...
Neil Gaiman
'American Gods'

‎"Ignorance of ignorance, then, is that self-satisfied state of unawareness in which man, knowing nothing outside the limited area of his physical senses, bumptiously declares there is nothing more to know! He who knows no life save the physical is merely ignorant; but he who declares physical life to be all-important and elevates it to the position of supreme reality--such a one is ignorant of his own ignorance."
- Manly Palmer Hall
Quick Reply
Cancel
Page 2 of 31  •  Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 31 Next
 
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing
    Advertisement

    Beliefnet On Facebook