Page 2 of 5 [ 64 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Gender: Female
Posts: 30,522
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

11 Jan 2013, 2:47 am

ASDsmom wrote:
PM wrote:
GoonSquad wrote:
PM wrote:
Some people are less responsible than others, but it would be wrong to deny them the right to choose, they would learn from their mistakes eventually.


Yes, and some people just don't care about the consequences they set on others.


I don't see how eating food that contains sugar really creates consequences for others....its my own damn business if I have a soda, I don't see how it hurts anyone. Sure healthy eating and drinking should be encouraged but I would not agree with it being mandated, and until better quality healthy food is sold at an affordable price they should not raise taxes on less healthy food since currently it's cheaper.


_________________
Tell me lies tell me sweet little lies, tell me lies.


ASDsmom
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Apr 2011
Gender: Female
Posts: 805

11 Jan 2013, 8:09 pm

Sweetleaf wrote:
ASDsmom wrote:
PM wrote:
GoonSquad wrote:
PM wrote:
Some people are less responsible than others, but it would be wrong to deny them the right to choose, they would learn from their mistakes eventually.


Yes, and some people just don't care about the consequences they set on others.


I don't see how eating food that contains sugar really creates consequences for others....its my own damn business if I have a soda, I don't see how it hurts anyone. Sure healthy eating and drinking should be encouraged but I would not agree with it being mandated, and until better quality healthy food is sold at an affordable price they should not raise taxes on less healthy food since currently it's cheaper.


It is also your right to know the damaging effects sugar has on your body. The govt, media, commercialism doesn't tell you that because they are making money off of you. It's a consequence to us all because most people are oblivious and think it's harmless. It will, and does, negatively affect us in so many different ways. We pay taxes and our money goes towards medical care for, not only ourselves, but of others.



meems
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 1 Dec 2010
Age: 32
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,093

11 Jan 2013, 9:20 pm

ASDsmom wrote:
Sweetleaf wrote:
ASDsmom wrote:
PM wrote:
GoonSquad wrote:
PM wrote:
Some people are less responsible than others, but it would be wrong to deny them the right to choose, they would learn from their mistakes eventually.


Yes, and some people just don't care about the consequences they set on others.


I don't see how eating food that contains sugar really creates consequences for others....its my own damn business if I have a soda, I don't see how it hurts anyone. Sure healthy eating and drinking should be encouraged but I would not agree with it being mandated, and until better quality healthy food is sold at an affordable price they should not raise taxes on less healthy food since currently it's cheaper.


It is also your right to know the damaging effects sugar has on your body. The govt, media, commercialism doesn't tell you that because they are making money off of you. It's a consequence to us all because most people are oblivious and think it's harmless. It will, and does, negatively affect us in so many different ways. We pay taxes and our money goes towards medical care for, not only ourselves, but of others.



I've never seen a research paper from the NIH that suggests sugar is harmless. What is the government supposed to do, force people to read the research which is public and easily accessed? People have to be expected to take on at least some responsibility for their actions, and being willfully ignorant isn't something the governnment can fix anyway.

So how do we force people who are sick and overworked to give up what little bit of life isn't miserable for them? Being poor and desperate isn't going to be much better healthy.

I love where you're coming from on this and I hope you try to convince those around you to educate themselves and make better choices but I don't think our government is there for the purpose of holding our hands through every action. I think there are bigger problems they need to make worse before they can really f**k this one up further.

And big ups to Michelle Obama for taking on the the cause she has, even if her husband kills babies in drone strikes.


_________________
http://www.facebook.com/eidetic.onus
http://eidetic-onus.tumblr.com/
Warning, my tumblr is a man-free zone :)


ASDsmom
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Apr 2011
Gender: Female
Posts: 805

12 Jan 2013, 12:05 am

meems wrote:
I've never seen a research paper from the NIH that suggests sugar is harmless. What is the government supposed to do, force people to read the research which is public and easily accessed? People have to be expected to take on at least some responsibility for their actions, and being willfully ignorant isn't something the governnment can fix anyway.

So how do we force people who are sick and overworked to give up what little bit of life isn't miserable for them? Being poor and desperate isn't going to be much better healthy.

I love where you're coming from on this and I hope you try to convince those around you to educate themselves and make better choices but I don't think our government is there for the purpose of holding our hands through every action. I think there are bigger problems they need to make worse before they can really f**k this one up further.


All I ask is to have the right to shop at a grocery store without worrying about what chemical has been added to my peas.
(I bolded your error because I found it quite ironic.)



BlueAbyss
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 14 Dec 2012
Age: 63
Gender: Female
Posts: 419
Location: California, USA

12 Jan 2013, 12:16 am

I agree that people should educate themselves about nutrition. I don't always make the best choices, but since they're informed choices, I'm sure I don't in the long run do as much harm to myself through my choices as someone who really doesn't bother to know what's in the food they eat.

I was lucky to have a young, idealistic teacher in home economics in high school one year, who rebelled against the standard curriculum, helped us explore natural foods, vegetarianism, lightly steamed instead of boiled to death veggies, whole grain breads, and many other things. She was not hired back the next year - the rest of the staff looked down on her, considered her a hippy. But I learned more from her than from almost any other teacher I ever had, and she instilled in me a lifelong interest in nutrition and questioning where my food comes from.


_________________
Female
INFP


Last edited by BlueAbyss on 12 Jan 2013, 12:19 am, edited 2 times in total.

LKL
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Jul 2007
Age: 43
Gender: Female
Posts: 7,938

12 Jan 2013, 12:17 am

Sweetleaf wrote:
ASDsmom wrote:
PM wrote:
GoonSquad wrote:
PM wrote:
Some people are less responsible than others, but it would be wrong to deny them the right to choose, they would learn from their mistakes eventually.


Yes, and some people just don't care about the consequences they set on others.


I don't see how eating food that contains sugar really creates consequences for others....its my own damn business if I have a soda, I don't see how it hurts anyone. Sure healthy eating and drinking should be encouraged but I would not agree with it being mandated, and until better quality healthy food is sold at an affordable price they should not raise taxes on less healthy food since currently it's cheaper.

Would you agree with getting rid of the corn subsidies that the government pays to farmers - which is money that could be spent on schools, roads, etc - which is largely what allows high fructose corn syrup to be so cheap, and thus in so much?



GoonSquad
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 May 2007
Age: 49
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,959
Location: International House of Paincakes...

12 Jan 2013, 7:31 am

Sweetleaf wrote:
ASDsmom wrote:
PM wrote:
GoonSquad wrote:
PM wrote:
Some people are less responsible than others, but it would be wrong to deny them the right to choose, they would learn from their mistakes eventually.


Yes, and some people just don't care about the consequences they set on others.


I don't see how eating food that contains sugar really creates consequences for others....its my own damn business if I have a soda, I don't see how it hurts anyone. Sure healthy eating and drinking should be encouraged but I would not agree with it being mandated, and until better quality healthy food is sold at an affordable price they should not raise taxes on less healthy food since currently it's cheaper.


Where do you get your healthcare from?

If it is subsidized by the government, and for most people it is, your poor health habits have consequences for all of society. You might not like it, but it is a fact of life.

Quote:
The human damage in this scourge of metabolic syndrome is showing. in 2005, an analysis showed that,despite the increased availability of medical care, this is the first generation of Americans that will die earlier than their forbears.2 This analysis placed the blame squarely on the obesity epidemic. In the U.S., quality-adjusted life years lost to obesity have more than doubled from 1993 to 2008. Emergency rooms are taking care of 40 year-old heart attack victims. Teens with type 2 diabetes were unheard of before. One hundred sixty thousand bariatric surgeries a year in the U.S. alone, at an average cost of $30,000 per surgery. Over 40% of death certificates now list diabetes as the cause of death, up from 13% twenty years ago.

The loss in American productivity due to time off from work is staggering and the waste in medical expenditures ($147 billion a year) is breaking the bank. Guess what? There’s no money to pay for it all. The Health Care Reform Act (HCRA), if it survives intact, is going to put 32 million sick people on the insurance rolls in 2014. The President says we’ll make up for the costs in savings from preventative care. However, it is unlikely to improve our health in any significant way since there are no provisions for the prevention of chronic disease, most notably those that attend obesity. How do you prevent all the ravages of chronic metabolic disease when we bust the scales and the statistics show no sign in improvement? It’s often been said that we wouldn’t need Health Care Reform if we had obesity reform.

http://sciencefriday.com/blogs/01/10/20 ... audience=4


_________________
No man is free who is not master of himself.~Epictetus


BlueAbyss
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 14 Dec 2012
Age: 63
Gender: Female
Posts: 419
Location: California, USA

12 Jan 2013, 10:31 am

GoonSquad wrote:
Where do you get your healthcare from?

If it is subsidized by the government, and for most people it is, your poor health habits have consequences for all of society. You might not like it, but it is a fact of life.


So what are you saying, that you only think health care should be subsidized for people who are skinny, or who never make wrong food choices? Are you not planning to get old eventually, and consequently need a lot more healthcare than you do now? Being healthy and living longer doesn't mean there isn't some point at which one's health deteriorates. Aside from that, a lot of weight problems are psychological, some are caused by side-effects of prescribed drugs, by stress, or by pre-existing health problems. Undiagnosed food allergies can cause food cravings that cause one to be overweight. In fact there are so many reasons one can be overweight that medicine has trouble keeping up with them all, and yet you want to hold each person responsible to remain completely healthy?

By the way, this quote from your linked article:
Quote:
For you 45% of adults who are normal weight, pay attention. You either sneer at or pity the other 55% of your brethren who take up two seats on the bus.
Shows that it's exaggerated in order to make the author's point. Funny how in all the times I've ridden a bus, I've never seen more than half of the people on it take up two seats. In fact, I don't think I've ever seen one person take up two seats, and not more than two or three on a full bus who appeared significantly overweight.

Yes, some people make wrong food choices, but for most of us it doesn't make that much of a difference. We have the bodies we're born with, we're exposed to the stresses of society, time takes its toll. Some have economic difficulties that make the right choices less available. And lest you've forgotten, EVERYONE is going to die at some point, if not by accident then by an illness.

Good luck to you remaining healthy until the day you die. I hope if you do develop some health problem, no one comes along and tells you that it's your own fault. That would be cruel.

P.S. If my post seems harsh, I apologize, but I grew up with an adopted sister who had health problems from the moment she was born, and consequent weight control issues all her life. She paid more attention to eating healthy than anyone I've ever known, and yet she always had weight problems, got bullied for it, and eventually developed diabetes. When I hear anyone mocked or put down for weight issues, having known and loved her, I just get livid. If I had ever heard someone say that they didn't want her health care subsidized because she must have made the wrong food choices, I would have wanted to clobber them. You don't treat people that way!


_________________
Female
INFP


GoonSquad
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 May 2007
Age: 49
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,959
Location: International House of Paincakes...

12 Jan 2013, 12:17 pm

^^^

I don't think your post is harsh. I think it is a silly over reaction.

The only point I was EVER making in this thread is that WE ARE ALL IN THIS TOGETHER AND WE HAVE MUTUAL OBLIGATIONS TO ONE ANOTHER TO BE RESPONSIBLE AND DO THE BEST WE CAN NOT TO SQUANDER COMMON RESOURCES.

That's it.
:D


_________________
No man is free who is not master of himself.~Epictetus


BlueAbyss
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 14 Dec 2012
Age: 63
Gender: Female
Posts: 419
Location: California, USA

12 Jan 2013, 12:57 pm

GoonSquad, I'm sorry if I took your post the wrong way. It is obviously an emotional subject for me. :)


_________________
Female
INFP


GoonSquad
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 May 2007
Age: 49
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,959
Location: International House of Paincakes...

12 Jan 2013, 3:36 pm

BlueAbyss wrote:
GoonSquad, I'm sorry if I took your post the wrong way. It is obviously an emotional subject for me. :)


No problem. It's an emotional issue for a lot of people.

I'm absolutely not about persecuting poor people or people with health issues. It's actually quite the opposite. I think society, especially a society with as much surplus wealth as ours, has an obligation to help those in need.

I guess I get a bit "emotional" when I see people claim they should have the freedom to do anything they choose regardless of the problems they cause for the whole. These people make it harder on everybody. It makes my blood boil to hear them style themselves as champions of personal freedom. They're not. They're just inconsiderate and selfish. And they end up siphoning off resources that should go to those that are truly in need.


_________________
No man is free who is not master of himself.~Epictetus


LKL
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Jul 2007
Age: 43
Gender: Female
Posts: 7,938

13 Jan 2013, 4:33 pm

BlueAbyss, food allergies and things like hypothyroidism account for a tiny, tiny fraction of those who are overweight. Psychological issues might contribute a bit more, but in our current culture are far more likely to be an effect of not getting enough exercise than a cause of weight gain (it can be a self-propagating loop, but the way to break the cycle is to get out for a walk even when you don't want to).

Americans, as a whole, are fatter than we were 60 years ago. Watch a news reel that includes images of crowds on the street from the 50's, and it's startling how thin everyone is.

We have not changed genetically in that time period. Our environment, and especially our food supply, has.



BlueAbyss
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 14 Dec 2012
Age: 63
Gender: Female
Posts: 419
Location: California, USA

13 Jan 2013, 4:39 pm

LKL wrote:
BlueAbyss, food allergies and things like hypothyroidism account for a tiny, tiny fraction of those who are overweight. Psychological issues might contribute a bit more, but in our current culture are far more likely to be an effect of not getting enough exercise than a cause of weight gain (it can be a self-propagating loop, but the way to break the cycle is to get out for a walk even when you don't want to).

Americans, as a whole, are fatter than we were 60 years ago. Watch a news reel that includes images of crowds on the street from the 50's, and it's startling how thin everyone is.

We have not changed genetically in that time period. Our environment, and especially our food supply, has.
I'm certain that most people care more about their weight than you give them credit for. Few people decide defiantly "I'm going to be fat. So what?" There's usually an underlying something going on, even if they're not aware of it themselves.


_________________
Female
INFP


LKL
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Jul 2007
Age: 43
Gender: Female
Posts: 7,938

13 Jan 2013, 5:09 pm

BlueAbyss wrote:
LKL wrote:
BlueAbyss, food allergies and things like hypothyroidism account for a tiny, tiny fraction of those who are overweight. Psychological issues might contribute a bit more, but in our current culture are far more likely to be an effect of not getting enough exercise than a cause of weight gain (it can be a self-propagating loop, but the way to break the cycle is to get out for a walk even when you don't want to).

Americans, as a whole, are fatter than we were 60 years ago. Watch a news reel that includes images of crowds on the street from the 50's, and it's startling how thin everyone is.

We have not changed genetically in that time period. Our environment, and especially our food supply, has.
I'm certain that most people care more about their weight than you give them credit for. Few people decide defiantly "I'm going to be fat. So what?" There's usually an underlying something going on, even if they're not aware of it themselves.

I'm not saying that being fat is a conscious decision, quite the opposite. I'm saying that our current food system sabotages our physiology in a way that makes us prone to fatness, unless we actively take steps to avoid it. Fatness is the default state, whereas 60 years ago thinness ('normal' weight, but thin by modern standards) was.



BlueAbyss
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 14 Dec 2012
Age: 63
Gender: Female
Posts: 419
Location: California, USA

13 Jan 2013, 5:16 pm

LKL wrote:
BlueAbyss wrote:
LKL wrote:
BlueAbyss, food allergies and things like hypothyroidism account for a tiny, tiny fraction of those who are overweight. Psychological issues might contribute a bit more, but in our current culture are far more likely to be an effect of not getting enough exercise than a cause of weight gain (it can be a self-propagating loop, but the way to break the cycle is to get out for a walk even when you don't want to).

Americans, as a whole, are fatter than we were 60 years ago. Watch a news reel that includes images of crowds on the street from the 50's, and it's startling how thin everyone is.

We have not changed genetically in that time period. Our environment, and especially our food supply, has.
I'm certain that most people care more about their weight than you give them credit for. Few people decide defiantly "I'm going to be fat. So what?" There's usually an underlying something going on, even if they're not aware of it themselves.

I'm not saying that being fat is a conscious decision, quite the opposite. I'm saying that our current food system sabotages our physiology in a way that makes us prone to fatness, unless we actively take steps to avoid it. Fatness is the default state, whereas 60 years ago thinness ('normal' weight, but thin by modern standards) was.
I agree the food supply has hidden dangers. But 50 years ago most people in the US, my family included, ate a lot of red meat and starches, and a lot less fresh produce. A lot of the vegetables we ate were canned, and my mom cooked with bacon grease! The knowledge about nutrition just wasn't there. I was a skinny kid. But we didn't have computers, or watch TV during daylight hours. We played outside, sometimes until well after dark. So I can see how in some ways we're better off now, while in other ways worse off.

I do think it's pretty scary that a whole generation are now adults who were given juice boxes with high fructose corn syrup the entire time they were children. I drank a lot of soda as a kid, but nothing like what those kids drank in the form of "healthy" juice. I knew all along that pop wasn't good for me or my teeth. I was never told, drink this, it's good for you.

Today lying in advertising has been taken to new heights.


_________________
Female
INFP


Last edited by BlueAbyss on 13 Jan 2013, 7:50 pm, edited 2 times in total.