Quantcast

The new prohibition

Changleen

Paranoid Member
Jan 9, 2004
14,849
2,810
Pōneke
1: It is WELL known to even the dumbest people that McDonalds is bad for you. There's no research involved. It's very simple. It's fast food, it's NOT good for you. People simply don't CARE about it, that's the problem.

2: So the FDA is supposed to ban things that prevent our food from being spoiled, eaten by bugs, and infected with bacteria. Great, let's ban pasteurization too. Why not just say we're not allowed to eat anything unless we grow it on our own land?

3: Some companies have indeed begun to cut down the amount of trans-fats in their offerings. I'd have rather awarded them instead of taking a shot at the entire restaurant industry.

There's a bottom line here, and that is that people KNOW this crap is bad for them, but they just don't care. How many times have you heard "So? I eat it because I like it" when referring to how bad fast food is? It's a pretty common line of thinking.

As for being manly, it has nothing to do with that. It has to do with this: If I want a goddamned cheeseburger, I want a goddamned cheeseburger. If I choose to go to Burger King with it's trans fats that's MY prerogative. If I choose to go to a high class place and buy a Kobe burger, that's my prerogative as well. DON'T limit my choice because YOU know what's best for ME.

On a side note, I immensely enjoyed my Dunkin Donuts sandwich.
You're being a little extreme - The banning pasteurisation thing especially.

I basically agree with you about freedom of choice, BUT:

Honestly, there is a massive section of the population who have no idea what transfat or HFCS are or what they do. Secondly these ingredients don't add anything, they are just cheaper substitutes. I can see the argument for being allowed to put what you like in your body, but really - if you were trying to ban white bread or something I'd agree. Banning these isn't going to stop people being to buy and enjoy fatty food, or sugary drinks, it just means the quality of the product will be picked up off the floor and be that little bit better for you. Hell the burgers will probably taste better!
 

robdamanii

OMG! <3 Tom Brady!
May 2, 2005
10,677
0
Out of my mind, back in a moment.
You're being a little extreme - The banning pasteurisation thing especially.

I basically agree with you about freedom of choice, BUT:

Honestly, there is a massive section of the population who have no idea what transfat or HFCS are or what they do. Secondly these ingredients don't add anything, they are just cheaper substitutes. I can see the argument for being allowed to put what you like in your body, but really - if you were trying to ban white bread or something I'd agree. Banning these isn't going to stop people being to buy and enjoy fatty food, or sugary drinks, it just means the quality of the product will be picked up off the floor and be that little bit better for you. Hell the burgers will probably taste better!
White bread is almost MORE responsible than trans fats for causing health problems. Nothing like a massive sugar spike and all that unused, processed starch going into your body all at once.

It's mostly not an issue of making food better for you. That I'm all for. But I'm all for voluntary improvement. Banning trans-fats is utterly ridiculous and just opens the door to more "we know what's best for your body" legislation. I'm NOT for that.

For Mike:
As for pesticides, I'm all for eating organic fruit when possible, but I'm not about to tell farmers that "you can't use that pesticide because it's bad for people". That's not my place. If people don't care enough about their health to research what they are eating, then who am I to say "well, you're not responsible enough, so I'm going to outlaw it".

My issue is this is not any damned business of the government. They don't need to step in and do a damn thing. They need to keep their noses out of my choices.
 
White bread is almost MORE responsible than trans fats for causing health problems. Nothing like a massive sugar spike and all that unused, processed starch going into your body all at once.

It's mostly not an issue of making food better for you. That I'm all for. But I'm all for voluntary improvement. Banning trans-fats is utterly ridiculous and just opens the door to more "we know what's best for your body" legislation. I'm NOT for that.

For Mike:
As for pesticides, I'm all for eating organic fruit when possible, but I'm not about to tell farmers that "you can't use that pesticide because it's bad for people". That's not my place. If people don't care enough about their health to research what they are eating, then who am I to say "well, you're not responsible enough, so I'm going to outlaw it".

My issue is this is not any damned business of the government. They don't need to step in and do a damn thing. They need to keep their noses out of my choices.

I do agree with you that it truely is the responsibility of the individual to dictate their own life choices, maybe thats not a big deal for you me and probably most people on ridemonkey as by default were all pretty active healthy, educated people, being bikers and what not. However i'm not totally convinced that the majority of this country has the capacity to make the right choices, just take a look at how freaken fat so many people are. I also think it does become the responsibility and the business of the government when something like obesity becomes so wide spread and a strain on society, the costs are passed along to everyone in the system.
 

crackhead

Chimp
Feb 2, 2005
35
0
why do you have a problem with the FDA baning trans fat? They are baning a deadly CHEMICAL.
It is kind of like baning lead paint in kids toys. Do you think parents check every toy their child plays with? Or better yet grandparents that can't read the fine print about the parduct containing lead.
Baning transfats is a no brainer. Now the FDA needs to get some balls and stop bending over for big bussiness and totaly ban Transfat.
 

robdamanii

OMG! <3 Tom Brady!
May 2, 2005
10,677
0
Out of my mind, back in a moment.
why do you have a problem with the FDA baning trans fat? They are baning a deadly CHEMICAL.
It is kind of like baning lead paint in kids toys. Do you think parents check every toy their child plays with? Or better yet grandparents that can't read the fine print about the parduct containing lead.
Baning transfats is a no brainer. Now the FDA needs to get some balls and stop bending over for big bussiness and totaly ban Transfat.
Why don't you get the FDA to get their heads out of their asses and start doing some long term testings on medications first.

Trans-fats are NOT the reason this country is dying of obesity related disease. It's a poor diet in general (granted, trans fats don't help any) that's killing the country, and banning one thing won't stop the epidemic.

Stop banning things, start educating people.
 

Toshi

butthole powerwashing evangelist
Oct 23, 2001
40,031
8,942
educating people about trans fats would only work if people:

a) were literate
b) listened
c) made rational decisions when purchasing products, as in looking at labels and doing simple arithmetic.

i don't think those three conditions hold for the vast majority of americans, so banning these fats is ultimately more effective.