- Joined
- 23 Jul 05
- Moves
- 8869
26 Apr 07
Originally posted by Remora91I don't have enough power to such a thing. :'(
He was saying what I was - Europeans are having the same problems, and you should ban fatty foods in your own country first.
But the UK has done one thing which I think is very important, perhaps what is the most important thing...
http://tinyurl.com/2nhjvg
As I mentioned earlier...
26 Apr 07
Originally posted by NordlysThere's too much meddling in the parent-child relationship by the "Big Mommys" of the State already. Absent rather glaring abuse and/or neglect, the government should butt out. Some certain percentage of people, including kids, are going to be overweight. So what? All the government interference and pressuring of parents through coercive laws and practices won't change that.
I wouldn't want the government to monitor what parents feed their children, but I would want them to monitor the children's health. I don't believe it's the parents' right to let a child starve, and I believe that the government should intervene if this is happening. If a child is overweight to a degree which causes serious health problems, I would see that ...[text shortened]... the parents' freedom, but rather as enabling them to be the good parents they want to be.
26 Apr 07
Originally posted by no1marauderParents not feeding their children properly is nothing short of abusive and neglectful. A certain proportion of the overweight will have their conditions worsened due to the aggressive advertising by companies such as McDonalds and Coca Cola. Re. Bad Wolf's post, it's good to see that the UK is limiting this. How's about limiting advertising, especially to children?
There's too much meddling in the parent-child relationship by the "Big Mommys" of the State already. Absent rather glaring abuse and/or neglect, the government should butt out. Some certain percentage of people, including kids, are going to be overweight. So what? All the government interference and pressuring of parents through coercive laws and practices won't change that.
Obesity in general is damaging to a nation's health and economy. I read somewhere that the overall cost in the US is in the region of $100 billion. So even if you don't care about the health crisis and suffering of your fellow man, maybe money will motivate you.
26 Apr 07
Originally posted by mrstabbyNo it won't.
Parents not feeding their children properly is nothing short of abusive and neglectful. A certain proportion of the overweight will have their conditions worsened due to the aggressive advertising by companies such as McDonalds and Coca Cola. Re. Bad Wolf's post, it's good to see that the UK is limiting this. How's about limiting advertising, especially ...[text shortened]... re about the health crisis and suffering of your fellow man, maybe money will motivate you.
The idea that the State can fix every single problem that mankind can come across is laughable. I'm sure you and the other petty dictators believe that most parents do a crappy job in one way or another and that State meddling is the perfect solution. I don't.
Limiting advertising of a certain kind means limiting speech based on its content. That's almost always an idea associated with tyrants.
26 Apr 07
Originally posted by no1marauderYeah, let's pretend the problem's not there and it'll go away.
No it won't.
The idea that the State can fix every single problem that mankind can come across is laughable. I'm sure you and the other petty dictators believe that most parents do a crappy job in one way or another and that State meddling is the perfect solution. I don't.
Limiting advertising of a certain kind means limiting speech based on its content. That's almost always an idea associated with tyrants.
Advertising nowadays is brainwashing. Children are especially vulnerable. Do you think cults should be protected as well if they kill people? Or is the freedom to persuade people to kill themselves something you hold dear?
26 Apr 07
Originally posted by mrstabbyAdvertising is not brainwashing. It's promoting a product. Even when I was little and saw the Barbie commercials, I did not believe the Barbies really talked, walked, etc. Children do not buy their own food, so "brainwashing" should not effect what they are eating, unless the parents are not acting like adults and are letting the child make all the dietary decisions for themself. So the problem here is bad parenting, when parents are letting kids raise themselves.
Yeah, let's pretend the problem's not there and it'll go away.
Advertising nowadays is brainwashing. Children are especially vulnerable. Do you think cults should be protected as well if they kill people? Or is the freedom to persuade people to kill themselves something you hold dear?
Plus, do you think commercials for steamed carrots would really go over well during spongebob episodes? Kids who go to the grocery store with their parents will still see the crapola isle laced in icing as they roll the cart past it. And if the did not beg because it is not on T.V., they will beg now.
26 Apr 07
Interesting topic...
Americans diet, in general, is horrible. The quality of life for the U.S. would increase tremendously if bad foods were eliminated from their plates. Not much to argue about there. The only way that could happen is with a complete ban... and nothing else. Education would have little effect on the society, maybe a bit per person, but not as a whole. Everyone! already knows what is bad for them, but it doesnt change their habits.
I would imagine that the US wont ban bad food, but they may tax it! and tax the hell out of it 🙂 This way they can have a steady income on one more then that people are addicted to... like cigarettes and alcohol. Where I live the city just started taxing people if they want more than 3 pets. You can have 1 dog and 2 cats or 2cats and 1 dog, but not 3 of any...unless you want to pay for it... nice... all because some folks can not help but have 121 cats in an apartment 🙁
Anyway here are the foods that are disease causing:
Fats
Meats
Wheat and grains (and the flours made from them)
any artificial additive or chemical or sweetener
sugar
salt
fruits and vegetable if grown on a large scale ( like the ones you get in the super market )
water -unless it is distilled, and definitely bad if processed by your local water plant
I think thats it, but I could have missed something.
26 Apr 07
Originally posted by lepomisWhat does that leave to eat?
Interesting topic...
Americans diet, in general, is horrible. The quality of life for the U.S. would increase tremendously if bad foods were eliminated from their plates. Not much to argue about there. The only way that could happen is with a complete ban... and nothing else. Education would have little effect on the society, maybe a bit per person, b ...[text shortened]... d if processed by your local water plant
I think thats it, but I could have missed something.
26 Apr 07
Originally posted by lepomisTha's about it becuase you've just named almost the entire food pyramid. Just throw in dairy produsts and you've got'em all covered.
Interesting topic...
Americans diet, in general, is horrible. The quality of life for the U.S. would increase tremendously if bad foods were eliminated from their plates. Not much to argue about there. The only way that could happen is with a complete ban... and nothing else. Education would have little effect on the society, maybe a bit per person, b ...[text shortened]... d if processed by your local water plant
I think thats it, but I could have missed something.
26 Apr 07
Originally posted by Remora91I forgot dairy products 🙂
What does that leave to eat?
You can eat nuts/legumes, vegetables, fruits, and very lean meats only if they were grown and harvested properly. Meaning with out chemicals, antibiotics, growth enhancers and not genetically modified.
26 Apr 07
Originally posted by lepomisIf you can't get the e "properly harvested" foods, is it better to starve to death?
I forgot dairy products 🙂
You can eat nuts/legumes, vegetables, fruits, and very lean meats only if they were grown and harvested properly. Meaning with out chemicals, antibiotics, growth enhancers and not genetically modified.
What about families that can't afford the extra expense? Is death the superior option in that case too?
26 Apr 07
Originally posted by MerkI know I wouldnt starve... I would eat something 🙂 But that doesnt change the facts of what I have said... Your right... If you are poor you can not eat as well...🙁
If you can't get the e "properly harvested" foods, is it better to starve to death?
What about families that can't afford the extra expense? Is death the superior option in that case too?