[Canadian_Mind]

fifeboy fifeboy:

redhatmamma redhatmamma:

Why should the government have to take care of our salt intake, what happened to personal responsibility and thinking for ourselves. We don't need a committee to tell us how much to eat or drink.

I agree. Let's get rid of: traffic laws, airline safety rules, food safety laws (opps, sorry) and all the other standards set by gov. regs.

There is a difference between the government protecting a person from themselves, and protecting them from others.

Example, traffic laws protect you from other people running a red light and t-boning you & killing you.

Food safety laws prevent them from putting to much salt into a given piece of processed food.

The difference is, you can't control the decisions of your fellow motorist, but the government can regulate it, and people will follow those regulations 95% of the time. The other 5% of the time, it is up to you to protect yourself using defensive driving. On the other side of the equation, 95% of the time you could easily choose foods that do't have to much salt, fat, cholesterol, etc (pick your poison). Only 5% of a time is there no choice for a consumer where government regulations may be necessary.

Understand the difference?

[fifeboy]

Canadian_Mind Canadian_Mind:

There is a difference between the government protecting a person from themselves, and protecting them from others.

Yep! I think we went through this in the bike and earbuds thread.

Canadian_Mind Canadian_Mind:

Example, traffic laws protect you from other people running a red light and t-boning you & killing you.

Food safety laws prevent them from putting to much salt into a given piece of processed food.

But there is no reason for a company to be allowed to sell just anything it wants. If Governments hadn't put pressure on then there wouldn't even be content labels on our food. Then nobody except a biochemist would know what was in the food they eat.

Canadian_Mind Canadian_Mind:

The difference is, you can't control the decisions of your fellow motorist, but the government can regulate it, and people will follow those regulations 95% of the time. The other 5% of the time, it is up to you to protect yourself using defensive driving. On the other side of the equation, 95% of the time you could easily choose foods that do't have to much salt, fat, cholesterol, etc (pick your poison). Only 5% of a time is there no choice for a consumer where government regulations may be necessary.

Understand the difference?

Like I said, when I was growing up there were no content labels at all. So, yes, I understand the difference, but it isn't relevant to the discussion. The government is involved in food safety because it is needed.

[redhatmamma]

We can't think for ourselves on salt intake, we don't need a gov't committee on this type of regulation. We know the deal, we can read for ourselves, we don't have to buy the stuff if we don't want it. There is such a thing as over regulation and too much gov't interference.

[redhatmamma]

We can't think for ourselves on salt intake? we don't need a gov't committee on this type of regulation. We know the deal, we can read for ourselves, we don't have to buy the stuff if we don't want it. There is such a thing as over regulation and too much gov't interference.

[bootlegga]

fifeboy fifeboy:

Steven Harper's new O Canada.

O Canada, we stand on guard for thee.
O Canada, we stand on guard for industry.

Come on, that's not true!

Just because they want to give away $60 billion in corporate taxes in the next 6 years and plan to sell Crown assets during a recession doesn't make them any worse than those diabolical Liberals!

[Public_Domain]

[DrCaleb]

redhatmamma redhatmamma:

We can't think for ourselves on salt intake? we don't need a gov't committee on this type of regulation. We know the deal, we can read for ourselves, we don't have to buy the stuff if we don't want it. There is such a thing as over regulation and too much gov't interference.

We can't think for ourselves if we don't know all the information. An A&W chubby chicken kids meal wouldn't be a second thought for most parents. But if it actually were labeled, it would show it has twice the daily recommended limit of salt. The highest in Canada.

The same goes for Corn Syrup, Fructose, Glucose - all these things get added to food because the food companies know it leads to more customers. It doesn't matter that the customers die inside 40 years, because the death wasn't sudden it can't be attributed to the food directly. Big Tobacco taught them that lesson.

Go to a school, look at all the fat kids, and witness for yourself the effects of industry self regulation.

[fifeboy]

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

redhatmamma redhatmamma:

We can't think for ourselves on salt intake? we don't need a gov't committee on this type of regulation. We know the deal, we can read for ourselves, we don't have to buy the stuff if we don't want it. There is such a thing as over regulation and too much gov't interference.

We can't think for ourselves if we don't know all the information. An A&W chubby chicken kids meal wouldn't be a second thought for most parents. But if it actually were labeled, it would show it has twice the daily recommended limit of salt. The highest in Canada.

The same goes for Corn Syrup, Fructose, Glucose - all these things get added to food because the food companies know it leads to more customers. It doesn't matter that the customers die inside 40 years, because the death wasn't sudden it can't be attributed to the food directly. Big Tobacco taught them that lesson.

Go to a school, look at all the fat kids, and witness for yourself the effects of industry self regulation.

Thanks for that. You said it better than I could.

[SprCForr]

Gah, we'd all still be driving Edsels and Corvairs, smoking unfiltered Marlboro, and living our happy lives in our comfy homes in Love Canal.

[Thanos]

Those would be the prescription-strength Malrboros your doctor gave to you, of course. As per a conversation from Libertarian-Economics Wonderland:

'Hey, doctor, I think I puked up part of my lung the other day.'

'Hmmmm, sound like you might not be getting enough tar. Try these for a week and then come back.'

[BartSimpson]

PublicAnimalNo9 PublicAnimalNo9:

General Foods got pinched about the amount of sugar in many of their cereals.

Yeah, here's one I noticed at Costco whilst shopping one day:

Kelloggs 'Sugar Frosted Flakes' has 12 grams of sugar per serving.

Kashi 'Go Lean Crunch' also has 12 grams of sugar per serving!

Go Lean????

Myself, I generally eat oatmeal for cereal and I toss in frozen or dried cranberries for taste. Packaged cereals just have way too much sugar for me - especially the allegedly healthy cereals.

[BartSimpson]

Canadian_Mind Canadian_Mind:

Example, traffic laws protect you from other people running a red light and t-boning you & killing you.

No, they don't.

Decent people who would feel bad if they senselessly killed someone by running a traffic light or stop sign is what generally protects other people at an intersection. Traffic laws don't protect anyone from harm, they just are a good tool for punishing the people who commit harm.

[BartSimpson]

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

The same goes for Corn Syrup, Fructose, Glucose - all these things get added to food because the food companies know it leads to more customers.

I hate to admit this but here goes...

Back in the mid-eighties I did a run as a district manager for a Japanese restaurant firm and one of our Burger King acquisitions was in a low income black neighborhood. I noticed that the locals loved the strawberry milkshakes at a nearby McDonald's but that they didn't buy the BK strawberry milkshakes in the same proportion.

After some research (spying) I found that the McDonald's was upping the strawberry syrup ratio in their shakes. I did the same and made the shakes at the BK sweeter than those at the McDonald's.

In about three months that one factor grew business over 200% at that one location.

I implemented the change in every other BK we had in black neighborhoods. In other neighborhoods the customers would complain if the shakes were too sweet.

I made some outrageous bonuses on that act and had no idea at the time what I was doing to contribute to obesity and diabetes in those areas.

My point is that while I'm all for freedom to eat what you want, I also think that the nutrition disclosures the law requires anymore are a good idea. Not that low income black folks will act on that information, but at least it will be there so the companies and the lawyers who sue them will be aware of it.

[Unsound]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

My point is that while I'm all for freedom to eat what you want, I also think that the nutrition disclosures the law requires anymore are a good idea. Not that low income black folks will act on that information, but at least it will be there so the companies and the lawyers who sue them will be aware of it.

Agreed. People also need to be taught how to read and interpret the labels. And I would really like to see some kind of standardization and realism in the labels. For example give me the information for either a typical serving size or for the whole package if it's something that's likely to be eaten all at once. I hate reading a label that gives me the nutritional info for 100g of the product that comes in a 235g package. As someone said, doing math in the store aisle might be possible, but isn't it a good idea to try to make it easier for people to eat better?

[ShepherdsDog]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

Canadian_Mind Canadian_Mind:

Example, traffic laws protect you from other people running a red light and t-boning you & killing you.

No, they don't.

Decent people who would feel bad if they senselessly killed someone by running a traffic light or stop sign is what generally protects other people at an intersection. Traffic laws don't protect anyone from harm, they just are a good tool for punishing the people who commit harm.

You've never driven in Asia have you, and more specifically the Chinese parts? These fucks will run you down without batting an eye. I notice that the first thing many of them do when in an accident is check their car for damage and then look at who they've mown down....... because da led right dey wun, jus too inconweenient.