Miscellaneous And Off Topic Subjects

[Wild Hoss]

My takeway is that the citizens of DFW have soundly chosen to invest in their city and I'm well-pleased for them and particularly well-pleased it angers Hoss so. Otherwise, windmills continue to be in serious jeopardy around here.

Doesn't anger me...I await the inevitable bankruptcy of the state of Texas with glee.

Recent events point toward falling levels of oxygen in Ohio however...a state in dire need of increased brain function. Unfortunate.

[Hannibal]

Ah, there's the culprit. Well, there is whole universe of thought and science outside the realm of "Super Size Me" Hanni.

I have been following this shit for a long time. Fads and boogeymen come and go. Every one is because "Muh science". It's all the same. Smug food nannies like Jamie Oliver, Michelle Obama, and Morgan Spurlock insist that they have the answer and they are going to teach the unwashed masses of the world how to eat properly, because we haven't actually spent the last 30 years extolling the virtues of grilled chicken and brocooli enough. It's always the same. Really, it is.

Meanwhile...



Don't worry guys -- we finally got the solution this time.

[Wild Hoss]

I have been following this shit for a long time. Fads and boogeymen come and go. Every one is because "Muh science". It's all the same. Smug food nannies like Jamie Oliver, Michelle Obama, and Morgan Spurlock insist that they have the answer and they are going to teach the unwashed masses of the world how to eat properly. It's always the same. Really, it is.

Meanwhile...



Don't worry guys -- we finally got the solution this time.

Seriously...you're going to argue that trying to improve label accuracy and food content is bad?

[Wild Hoss]

BTW, I agree with your point on fads. Sugar, fat, pesticides, transfat...on and on. Different aspects have had their time under the microscope.

That doesn’t make it a bad thing though. Speaks more to how messed up our food is, and the inability of society to focus on more than one problem at a time in a given realm. JMO

[iam416]

I'm all for making food less accessible and more costly. Hopefully we can also curb life expectancy.

[Jeff Buchanan]

Windmills? (talent).

Not sure. Issues about the quality of our food supply is not the same as the issues surrounding Global Warming and I'll agree here, that's somewhat of a Windmill.

The problem with Hanni's argument about taking responsibility for one's food choices is valid to a point. Once a population reaches the stage where (1) there is plenty of food and (2) there is enough money to purchase it, then its about choices.

On the macro level, those of us debating these issues here are in the 1%. We have choices to make. The 99% (1) doesn't have enough food and (2) when food is available, there's no money to buy it.

On the micro level and in our own cities, for those at the bottom of the socioeconomic scale, some might shamefully be included in that 99%, what is easily available to eat is not grilled chicken and broccoli, its not a piece of fruit; for kids on their way to school, it's usually a bag of chips and a Coke from the convenience store down the street assuming they have the money to buy it and assuming they had anything to eat at all...... and, sorry, that's entirely different discussion.

I get your position on most things, Hanni. I agree with you most of the time. But in the big scheme of things, requiring labeling about what goes into the foods we eat is about holding those 10 corporations that control the world's food supply accountable. In the case of the FDA and in this narrow discussion about added sugar in food, it's about what's being made available to eat by those who live in the US. It's about encouraging corporate responsibility. Not a bad thing when done correctly.

[iam416]

Warnings are irrelevant, IMO. Hanni would then argue that if there's any cost then that cost outweighs zero benefit. Eh, whatever.

I have a hard time brooking arguments about low cost food supplies. I can't stand noxious, elitist "farm-to-table" or anti-GMO policy positions that would significantly increase the cost of food in this country and decrease availability. And what's more, these are mostly "progressives" making these arguments that would very directly and very surely negatively impact poor folks.

I guess, on one level, it's cool -- our country is so fucking awesome we're worried about people eating too much and the wrong kinds of foods. It's a tremendous luxury to be able to have this debate. On the other hand, the discussion ought to focus on existing calorie intake vs. the cost/benefit of replacing those calories.

[Wild Hoss]

I have a hard time brooking arguments about low cost food supplies. I can't stand noxious, elitist "farm-to-table" or anti-GMO policy positions that would significantly increase the cost of food in this country and decrease availability. And what's more, these are mostly "progressives" making these arguments that would very directly and very surely negatively impact poor folks.

In my experience its mostly well-to-do, bored, stay at home moms with more time and money than common sense, regardless of political leaning. The same general swath of society that houses the Anti-Vaxer movement.

Look, I am all in favor of getting under corporate America's skirt on the quality of processed food...but this anti-GMO stuff is crap. GMOs are feeding the world, and nobody that's munching on treebark is terribly concerned about .0001 parts per million of pesticide in a potato.

And I say this as an unabashed Chipolte addict....beating entropy to the punch on that. :D

[Hannibal]

Look on the bright side, Talent. Socialism is, at most, maybe two generations away, and Socialism has an excellent track record when it comes to curing obesity (e.g. The Ukraine was completely cured of obesity in the 1930s!).

[iam416]

Word. Seems like they've really got shit under control in Venezuela and, not only that, they're doing an excellent job of reducing health care costs!

[Wild Hoss]

Hysteria is certainly alive and well, in the present. :D

[Hannibal]

You really want to get rid of obesity? Stop fucking subsidizing:

1. Food
2. Single motherhood

Problem solved. Or at least reduced.

[Wild Hoss]

Yeah!

[entropy]

want to change people's weight? Change insurance. Give rewards in terms of lower deductibles for healthy habits like walking. Impact people's wallets and they'll change. Right now, there is no difference in most insurance plans between a person who eats healthier and a person who eats poorly.

[The Oracle]

How do you prove a person's diet or exercise habits when genetics play such an important role?