Warning lables on french fries

[PhillyKev 0]

Quote

Out of curiosiyt, does Philadelphia or the State of Pennsylvania put a sales tax on unprepared foods? If not, it may be the explanation for the lack of establishments selling unprepared foods.

No sales tax on groceries. The main zoning problem is that there is a rule regarding square footage of a business and amount of parking required (parking is another of Philly's really bad issues). Because of the cost of land, coupled with restrictions on building parking garages, if supermarkets were to open and put in the required one dimensional parking lots, a head of brocolli would probably cost more than dinner for 4 at McD's.

[billvon 3,076]

>Apples and broccoli are cheap. Apples and broccoli without hormones
> and pesticides are more. That, is what I mean by the unhealthy
> quality of our food being a product of greed.

That's just capitalism. It costs more to grow food organically; those costs are passed onto the people buying the food. And if you wash it there really isn't much difference between eating organic and commercial broccoli, for example. The pesticides that organic famers use (sulfur, Bt toxin, pyrethins) haven't been shown to stick to foods any more or less than commercial pesticides.

If anything, eating commercial vegetables is a lot better (in terms of pesticide exposure) than eating even organic meat. Aminals concentrate toxins in their tissues, and you can't avoid exposure to uranium oxide, mercury, thorium, insecticides, fertilizers etc if you breathe the air in the US and/or eat grass that grows in the air.

[Skyrad 0]

I never cease to be amazed at how big the portion are when I go to America, but I've also noticed that your older generation often seem in alot better shape than the middle aged and young. The WWII generation in the states appear to be in alot better health than their counterparts here in the UK.

When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy.
Lucius Annaeus Seneca

[jakee 1,564]

Quote

15% of kids are overweight in this country

Thats kind of optimistic isn't it?
Last I heard it was over 15% obese and between a third and a half overweight.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[freeflybella 0]

I understand capitalism. Like basic health care, I believe basic healthy food should the most affordable and plentiful option.

Washing food removes external residue. This produce absorbs runoff residue in the water.

Organically 'grown meat' is much less toxic than industrialized meat.

Then there is still the issue of genetically modified food.

It's not about all or nothing. Just because the air is unhealthy doesn't mean you shouldn't do everything possible to be healthy.

I couldn't, in good concsience, "grow" my child on excess fat, processed and refined food, hormones and pesticides. I believe I would be putting him at a severe disadvantage for the rest of his life in many, many ways.

"Grow" your kid on healthy, unpoisoned food (to the best of your ability) - when he has strong bones, a sharp mind, and a mature respect for the occasional indulgeance, he can eat what he wants.

Action expresses priority. - Mahatma Ghandi

[freeflybella 0]

Quote

I never cease to be amazed at how big the portion are when I go to America

You're right. I stand corrected.

It's greed and gluttony.

Stuffing yourself full of crap all your life messes with your bodies ability to tell you when you're full. With an abundance of food in our country - why would we ever gorge ourselves!? Because from a young age, we've been taught food is 'fun' and we have no concept of what food actually does inside of us.

The popularization of fad diets counts on us not having a clue.

Action expresses priority. - Mahatma Ghandi

[kallend 2,107]

Quote

Quote

I never cease to be amazed at how big the portion are when I go to America

You're right. I stand corrected.

It's greed and gluttony.

Stuffing yourself full of crap all your life messes with your bodies ability to tell you when you're full. With an abundance of food in our country - why would we ever gorge ourselves!? Because from a young age, we've been taught food is 'fun' and we have no concept of what food actually does inside of us.

The popularization of fad diets counts on us not having a clue.

I am always amazed when a fat-ass person claims it's their "metabolism" that's to blame, yet you see them stuffing themselves in restaurants.

The portions are too large in the USA, that's for sure, except in certain high class restaurants.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[billvon 3,076]

>I understand capitalism. Like basic health care, I believe basic
>healthy food should the most affordable and plentiful option.

I think that it is right now. Like I said, broccoli is cheap. Most scientists and health specialists do not share your belief that the amount of pesticides/herbicides in vegetables is a measurable threat.

>Washing food removes external residue. This produce absorbs runoff
>residue in the water.

I agree, but I don't agree that Bt toxin, pyrethin, or sulfur are significantly better for you than carbendazim in the amounts they are present inside the produce. A much more significant problem is the side effects these pesticides have on the environment; they kill off bees, worms, nematodes etc that are needed for maintaining soil and plant life. That's why I often buy organic produce.

>Organically 'grown meat' is much less toxic than industrialized meat.

But much more toxic than commercial vegetables. I agree, though, if you're going to eat meat (and can afford it) organic is the way to go.

>Then there is still the issue of genetically modified food.

Yep, and there are pluses and minuses on that as well. Is it worth growing Bt corn if you can use ten thousand less pounds of pesticides? Definitely a tradeoff.

>I couldn't, in good concsience, "grow" my child on excess fat,
> processed and refined food, hormones and pesticides. I believe I
> would be putting him at a severe disadvantage for the rest of his
> life in many, many ways.

That's fine. Although just getting him off the processed foods gets you, in my opinion, 99.99% of the way there.

[freeflybella 0]

Food is not 'happiness' people!

Action expresses priority. - Mahatma Ghandi

[Gawain 0]

They could put the label that a friend of mine back east uses -- Warning: These are little sticks of fat.

So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!

[freeflygoddess 0]

awe but then this all starts to go to... how we in America view fat people.... this whole thread is starting to go there, I can see it...so I will start it, America is really the only place that I know that gives huge portions of food at all restruants, to keep prices higher, and then turns around and bad mouths over weight people and they eat too much and blah blah blah, if you are not an abnormally skinny "model" type you must be unhealthy...Aren't they way more unhealthy by not eating at all? Any ways, I don't agree with stuffing yourself to 300lbs, but I do believe that you have one life to live and you should eat what you want, and do what you feel is best for you, but just make sure you are exersizing enough to make sure that you aren't obeses...or atleast limit yourself on you "junk" intake. Being pregnant right now it is very hard to not eat bad things like chocolate and candy and Taco Bell, cause cravings suck! but I do tend to get other cravings too, like Spinache and fried ocra...mmm ocra...Ok so it is still fried but it is still so yummy.... Even though I crave these things and it drives me crazy till I eat, and useually I start eating it and then get all sick and wont eat it again ever....but I try and limit my self to a healthy diet every day except Fridays, which is the day I leave for myself to eat what I want to...then I have the best of both owrlds, and limiting it to one day, is a lot better than you think.

[freeflybella 0]

Quote

A much more significant problem is the side effects these pesticides have on the environment

Agreed.

Quote

Is it worth growing Bt corn if you can use ten thousand less pounds of pesticides?

I guess the argument comes down to that. Is it worth it? Do we really know the long term effects? Did we know feeding cows other cows would cause BSE? What about DDT? And who's really to say that GM food or pesticides is the only answer? Until the quality of food supply becomes an issue for the masses (ie, people start to take notice), what incentive is there for further reasearch and study? As long as people can get rich growing the biggest and most with no regard to what it's doing to the public - why would they stop? Or investigate alternatives?

It's just so easy to look the other way as long as "you" have money and as long it's convenient for "you".

Action expresses priority. - Mahatma Ghandi

[freeflygoddess 0]

oh my gosh someone else that thinks things out all the way as to what will happen into the future...

I full heartlly think that if you really look at all view points of everything in the end it is all bad at some level... You can't please everyone and no one can predicte the future. It is just like Lasik surgery, yeah it is great right now, but do they really know the long term effects of it? I mean really? Just like breast implants and liposculpture and nose jobs, I mean really how long have they been doing them? Do they really know the full effects? No I doubt it. They couldn't possiablly have had a 16 year old girl with a breast job, later on then at age 95 know what it did to her body, it just hasn't been around that long.

[freeflybella 0]

You're right. We can't predict the future.

And I say, regarding the cosmetic and elective things that you mentioned, you take your chances.

When it comes to our nation's food supply - something every single person must have to survive, I'd prefer to know decisions weren't being made by people who will get rich from them.

Action expresses priority. - Mahatma Ghandi

[billvon 3,076]

>And who's really to say that GM food or pesticides is the only answer?

It's not! No more than organic food is the only answer. Heck, Bt toxin may prove dangerous to people; if that's the case, organic food could be deadly. Or perhaps a much safer pesticide or herbicide will come along that is so cheap commercial farmers will use it, thus solving both problems.

>Until the quality of food supply becomes an issue for the masses (ie,
> people start to take notice), what incentive is there for further
> reasearch and study?

Financial. There's a pretty big market for organic food now, and you can make good money growing it.

>As long as people can get rich growing the biggest and most with no
> regard to what it's doing to the public - why would they stop? Or
> investigate alternatives?

Because some people can get rich by growing organic food. There were 5000 US organic farms in 1997; there were 7800 in 2000. In 2000, there was $4.5 billion worth of organically grown food sold.

>It's just so easy to look the other way as long as "you" have money
> and as long it's convenient for "you".

?? I think you should be able to buy whatever you want. If you want organic, buy it. If not, don't. It's up to you, not me, what you eat.

[TomAiello 26]

Quote

When it comes to our nation's food supply - something every single person must have to survive, I'd prefer to know decisions weren't being made by people who will get rich from them.

I'd prefer that every important decision was made by someone with a large personal financial stake in it. That kind of thing encourages caution and good judgment.

-- Tom Aiello

Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com
SnakeRiverBASE.com

[PhillyKev 0]

Quote

I'd prefer that every important decision was made by someone with a large personal financial stake in it. That kind of thing encourages caution and good judgment.

Worked for Kenneth Lay, Bernie Ebbers, and countless tobacco executives.

[TomAiello 26]

Quote

Quote

I'd prefer that every important decision was made by someone with a large personal financial stake in it. That kind of thing encourages caution and good judgment.

Worked for Kenneth Lay, Bernie Ebbers, and countless tobacco executives.

The other way around seemed to work pretty well for Mao Tse Tung, Joseph Stalin and several other communist leaders.

It did not, however, work so well for the hundreds of thousands of people who starved to death under their rule.

Profit incentives yield efficiency. Not allowing farmers to make a profit is a good way to make people starve.

-- Tom Aiello

Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com
SnakeRiverBASE.com

[freeflybella 0]

No one said anything about not allowing farmers to make a profit.

We're talking about FOOD. And a minimum standard should exist that doesn't harm us. And is not allowed to be ignored due to greed.

Action expresses priority. - Mahatma Ghandi

[PhillyKev 0]

Are you implying Mao, Stalin, and others didn't have peronsal financial stakes in their totalitarian rule?

Quote

Profit incentives yield efficiency.

I agree with that, but they don't necessarily yield good judgment or caution. Some people motivated by profit are cautious with good judgment, some aren't. Same thing with people who act altruistically. There's just no correlation between free enterprise and ethics.

[SkydiveNFlorida 0]

I think it's a good idea, due to the trans-fats in the oil they use to cook those deadly, artery-clogging, cancer-causing rectangles of grease soaked potatoes.

I wouldn't feed them to my kids. I wouldn't feed them to my dog. Cooking fries at your family bar-b-q is likely not going to cause the problems that consuming the fast-food fries causes, btw.

It is my understanding that the amount of trans-fats contained in foods will be a required field on labels by 2006. I think, after that time, there will be absolutely no grounds for any law suits.

Angela.

Quote

Ok they are talking about putting a Suergon's General Warning on French Fries here in Cali, to let people know that it has caused cancer when given in large amounts to rats. They are also thinking about a warning saying they cause obesity and heart problems. So what happens next, hmm...someone sues McDonalds for their child's exccess weight and heart problems, because "they are too young to make that desicion on their own" Thus leading to having to be 18 or over to purchase French Fries...So no more Fries in happy meals, no more fries at the grocery store to make at home...Don't get caught contributing to the delinquicy of minors by having Fries at you family BBQ.... Is that nuts or what?

[freeflygoddess 0]

Quote

I think, after that time, there will be absolutely no grounds for any law suits.

Are you sure? Unless they make it where you have to be 18 or over to buy those products there are still grounds for lawsuites with the labels. I am not sure if they would win, but isn't that why alchol and tabacco have age limits? It isn't because they are addictive and are drungs, it is beause minors can not legal be held accountable for reading contracts or warning labels....edited to add: same thing with financing a car, yeah you can be 16 to drive in most states, but you can not legally sign the paperwork to finance a car until you are 18. You can not legally sign an apartment lease or any contract for that matter....

[Kennedy 0]

Quote

We're talking about FOOD. And a minimum standard should exist that doesn't harm us.

Eggs are good. No, eggs are bad. No, eggs are good. No, eggs are bad. No, we really don't have any freaking idea.

witty subliminal message
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*

[diablopilot 2]

Quote

SURGEON GENERAL'S WARNING: RESEARCH CAUSES CANCER IN RATS.

or...


RATS GET CANCER. DEAL.

----------------------------------------------
You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously.

[billvon 3,076]

>We're talking about FOOD. And a minimum standard should exist
>that doesn't harm us. And is not allowed to be ignored due to greed.

The organization responsible for doing exactly what you describe is the FDA.