US Government & FDA To Dictate What You Can Eat!

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

Not confusing anything.

This isn't about benefitting the people, this is about benefitting the government in health care costs. I mean they have to pay for this bullshit somehow, and what better way than to start regulating/controlling activities even more.

Had this health care bill not passed, this wouldn't be taking place. I can almost assuredly guarantee you that. You're going to see more and more ####### like this all because now, all of a sudden, they are worried about 'costs' eventhough they've had the power to do things for a very long time.

You mean they are actually going to do their job and properly regulate the safety of our food? Wow the healthcare bill just received another positive!

[Obama 2012 1,714]

You mean they are actually going to do their job and properly regulate the safety of our food? Wow the healthcare bill just received another positive!

At this point with the baby boomers about to break the bank, the appropriate thing to do would be to make sure the food poisons all the old people....

[Obama 2012 1,714]

you know, it's also amusing when more Government power is talked about on Hitler's birthday....

[Ali G. 37]

Paul, like anyone who is thinks solely along ideological lines, you conveniently pick points that endorse your point of views but ignore others that do not. People have come a long way from the days when autocracy and aristocrats ruled countries and kingdoms for their own self gain.

Libertarians are a perfect example of those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it.

[Ali G. 37]

I've said it before and I'll say it again. There's 'good' regulation and there's 'bad' regulation.

The whole premise here is based on costs of health care. You're going to see a whole lot more of ####### like this in the 'name' of health care. It reminds me of the story out of the UK awhile back where a guy was told if he wanted surgery or wanted additional medical care, he would have to quit smoking. Otherwise they wouldn't treat him.... It's type like that. I can just see it now one day where you're told if you don't eat less salt, we're going to refuse to treat you because you cost too much. Screw that type of mentality.

Excluding Mark, who by his own admission has no life and posts rubbish on here like a teenager, how can anyone else be that ignorant? I guess i can safely say that in your opinion everyone who is poor here, is so because they want to be; something stated by of another libertarian before.

Talk about double-speak. On one hand you are saying 'why should I pay for the choices of fat bastards', then on the other you are saying 'how dare a government suggest people stop smoking otherwise they will not receive priority treatment'. You follow an idealism that excluding Mark, probably no other foreigner from a first world country supports. Foreigners that not only live longer, but are wealthier and have a much better quality of life. However, I am sure you don't care what anyone from abroad thinks. Considering the aforementioned points, is the equivalent of saying who cares what warren Buffet says about investing, he's an idiot and you know better.

Edited April 21, 2010 by Ali G.

[Obama 2012 1,714]

Excluding Mark, who by his own admission has no life and posts rubbish on here like a teenager, how can anyone else be that ignorant? I guess i can safely say that in your opinion everyone who is poor here, is so because they want to be; something stated by of another libertarian before.

Talk about double-speak. On one hand you are saying 'why should I pay for the choices of fat bastards', then on the other you are saying 'how dare a government suggest people stop smoking otherwise they will not receive priority treatment'. You follow an idealism that excluding Mark, probably no other foreigner from a first world country supports. Foreigners that not only live longer, but are wealthier and have a much better quality of life. However, I am sure you don't care what anyone from abroad thinks. Considering the aforementioned points, is the equivalent of saying who cares what warren Buffet says about investing, he's an idiot and you know better.

Stop saying that. That is such a subjective term and about perception more than anything. The quality of life here is quite excellent actually, despite what you may think. Just because "everyone" doesn't have the same quality of life, doesn't mean the quality of life sucks. America has NEVER been about overall quality. America has been about opportunity. Now if you want to argue about how corporatism has caused less individual growth opportunity, I'd be more than happy to give you some points there. I'll also give right in and point out how government fucks over small businesses because of the way tax brackets are handled, etc.... There's tons of things we can go into along those lines.

LIMITED Government is what I believe in. Regulate, but don't over-regulate. Protect the people, but don't be their babysitters. Educate the people, but don't spoon feed them, etc.

[Ali G. 37]

Stop saying that. That is such a subjective term and about perception more than anything. The quality of life here is quite excellent actually, despite what you may think. Just because "everyone" doesn't have the same quality of life, doesn't mean the quality of life sucks. America has NEVER been about overall quality. America has been about opportunity. Now if you want to argue about how corporatism has caused less individual growth opportunity, I'd be more than happy to give you some points there. I'll also give right in and point out how government fucks over small businesses because of the way tax brackets are handled, etc.... There's tons of things we can go into along those lines.

What America has been is what so many - well those with a clue - are trying to change. You seem to be just like every other dreamer who has bought the BS that 'if you wanted to, you could become mega rich'. Sorry but the reality is that you can't. Hence, why the top 1% control the majority of Americas wealth. I deal with people here that are extremely wealthy and can say they actually joke on the little guy (the peasant) who believes that with hard work, they too can become as wealthy as them. It's why the also jokingly say they never want the US to become a Canada, Australia or Europe; where opportunity and wealth actually is spread.

Paul, if you did offer this uber quality of life or actually lead in any field pertaining to life, you would be recognized for it. After all, it says a lot that you assume a house only worth $140k in Texas is a good thing. Sh-t man, I can find you a house for $10K in Detroit. Is that good too? If the country did offer this awesome quality of life that you say it does, then why is it that excluding Mark, few from the first world are running to migrate here? VJ alone illustrates the large number of posters are from second and third world countries. Excluding Mark, most of us here from the first world are here because of our spouse period.

LIMITED Government is what I believe in. Regulate, but don't over-regulate. Protect the people, but don't be their babysitters. Educate the people, but don't spoon feed them, etc.

The reality you are missing is that the total opposite is delivering the goods in other countries. Whereas, libertarianism is what is failing; thus, its extensive use in unregulated minimal government third world countries.

Edited April 21, 2010 by Ali G.

[Obama 2012 1,714]

What America has been is what so many - well those with a clue - are trying to change. You seem to be just like every other dreamer who has bought the BS that 'if you wanted to, you could become mega rich'. Sorry but the reality is that you can't. Hence, why the top 1% control the majority of Americas wealth. I deal with people here that are extremely wealthy and can say they actually joke on the little guy (the peasant) who believes that with hard work, they too can become as wealthy as them. It's why the also jokingly say they never want the US to become a Canada, Australia or Europe; where opportunity and wealth actually is spread.

Paul, if you did offer this uber quality of life or actually lead in any field pertaining to life, you would be recognized for it. After all, it says a lot that you assume a house only worth $140k in Texas is a good thing. Sh-t man, I can find you a house for $10K in Detroit. Is that good too? If the country did offer this awesome quality of life that you say it does, then why is it that excluding Mark, few from the first world are running to migrate here? VJ alone illustrates the large number of posters are from second and third world countries. Excluding Mark, most of us here from the first world are here because of our spouse period.

The reality you are missing is that the total opposite is delivering the goods in other countries. Whereas, libertarianism is what is failing; thus, its extensive use in unregulated minimal government third world countries.

You didn't read my last post did you on the arguments about corporatism and government ignorance?.... I see you didn't.

LOL, that's not an assumption my friend on a $140k house in Texas being a good thing, when you can buy the EXACT same house (hell, maybe even smaller) in California, Minnesota, New York for instance for a much higher premium, and THEN on top of that the 'cost of living' is much higher. And what do you get out of that that we don't have here? NOTHING.

[Ali G. 37]

You didn't read my last post did you on the arguments about corporatism and government ignorance?.... I see you didn't.

LOL, that's not an assumption my friend on a $140k house in Texas being a good thing, when you can buy the EXACT same house (hell, maybe even smaller) in California, Minnesota, New York for instance for a much higher premium, and THEN on top of that the 'cost of living' is much higher. And what do you get out of that that we don't have here? NOTHING.

I read it and read it well. You seem to be forgetting why houses down there are so cheap. Anyway, it's not the point.

Paul, I have lived under both types of systems and approaches now. That is, the republic style of government you condone; where the government makes a hell of a lot of decisions for the safety and to promote a high quality of life for the community. I have also (obviously) lived under the US system; where thanks to people like yourself, the government does diddly-squat. The clear winner speaks for itself and that is not just my own opinion. It's the consensus of the internaitonal community. Not one first world country condones the libertarian approach - none, zilch, nada. As such, every other first world country would praises this latest recommendation to reduce sodium. Third world countries with libertarian ideals in practice, obviously wouldn't care to implement the same.

PS I remember seeing a photo of a new housing estate in some Texas community once and it was freaky. Street after street of cloned cookie-cutter homes.

Edited April 21, 2010 by Ali G.

[Obama 2012 1,714]

Here... The LA Times breaks it down better..

Full Article here: http://www.latimes.com/news/nation-and-world/la-na-fda-salt-20100421,0,5219936.story

Excerpts:

"Nothing is off the table," said FDA spokeswoman Meghan Scott. "Everyone's in agreement that something needs to be done….We just don't know what it's going to look like."

Really? Nothing is off the table? So you have limitless power that you may so choose to use????

The institute declared that expeditious "regulatory action is necessary" because efforts to educate the public about the perils of excessive dietary salt and voluntary sodium-cutting efforts by industry have failed, although the institute called for such regulations to take effect gradually.

So the people are "too stupid" and we know what's best, so we are going to FORCE THEM to eat better.

The FDA's decision to press food makers to reduce salt caps a 30-year campaign by the Center for Science in the Public Interest. The center sued the FDA in 2005 to try to force the agency to reclassify salt as a food additive subject to regulation.

Salt currently is categorized as a substance "generally recognized as safe," hence not regulated in food products.

Center director Michael Jacobson urged the FDA to adopt mandatory limits on salt swiftly, and then phase them in slowly. A gradual phase-in is considered crucial so that consumers do not notice a taste difference in foods with diminished amounts of salt.

So ACTIVIST fucks are the ones who brought this ####### to light. That's just great. No, it wasn't anything legitimate. Well, I mean it's legitimate by the standards of someone getting paid off better now I suppose, but oh no, now we're going to listen to the activists because they say that this is critical? Get real already.

Luckily the FDA isn't doing anything just yet, but they're sure as hell trying to get it into people's head that they are going to do something. And that no matter what they do, they can do whatever the hell they want because they have limitless power to do so.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

There is zero difference between this regulation of dietary sodium in processed foods and that of any other potentially harmful substances in our food supply. For example, there is a naturally occurring toxin present in a common mould that affects nearly all cereal crops, spices, peanuts, even milk from animals fed with contaminated feed can contain it. When absorbed by the body in sufficient quantity it can cause liver cirrhosis and is also one of the most carcinogenic substances there is. Not surprisingly there are strict limits on how much of this substance is allowed into the human food chain.

High levels of aflatoxin cause cancer. High levels of salt cause heart disease and stroke. Trying to make out that the regulation of one substance by the FDA is somehow insidious "big government interference" belies the fact, that this kind of regulation is EXACTLY the FDA's mandate and is something it (and similar agencies in other countries) have been doing for decades.

Edited April 21, 2010 by Its a MADHOUSE

[Peikko 1,575]

There is zero difference between this regulation of dietary sodium in processed foods and that of any other potentially harmful substances in our food supply. For example, there is a naturally occurring toxin present in a common mould that affects nearly all cereal crops, spices, peanuts, even milk from animals fed with contaminated feed can contain it. When absorbed by the body in sufficient quantity it can cause liver cirrhosis and is also one of the most carcinogenic substances there is. Not surprisingly there are strict limits on how much of this substance is allowed into the human food chain.

High levels of aflatoxin cause cancer. High levels of salt cause heart disease and stroke. Trying to make out that the regulation of one substance by the FDA is somehow insidious "big government interference" belies the fact, that this kind of regulation is EXACTLY the FDA's mandate and is something it (and similar agencies in other countries) have been doing for decades.

The fda using their special powers for good purpose? Don't make us tin foil hat wearers laugh, the fda have absolute power and aren't afraid to abuse it - they are the incarnation of evil socio facist big government

[Obama 2012 1,714]

There is zero difference between this regulation of dietary sodium in processed foods and that of any other potentially harmful substances in our food supply. For example, there is a naturally occurring toxin present in a common mould that affects nearly all cereal crops, spices, peanuts, even milk from animals fed with contaminated feed can contain it. When absorbed by the body in sufficient quantity it can cause liver cirrhosis and is also one of the most carcinogenic substances there is. Not surprisingly there are strict limits on how much of this substance is allowed into the human food chain.

High levels of aflatoxin cause cancer. High levels of salt cause heart disease and stroke. Trying to make out that the regulation of one substance by the FDA is somehow insidious "big government interference" belies the fact, that this kind of regulation is EXACTLY the FDA's mandate and is something it (and similar agencies in other countries) have been doing for decades.

Actually there is because of the classification of sodium by the FDA and the reason why they don't already regulate it.

If you look at the LA Times article above, apparently all of this is because of some activist group pushing for salt regualtion.

[Obama 2012 1,714]

The fda using their special powers for good purpose? Don't make us tin foil hat wearers laugh, the fda have absolute power and aren't afraid to abuse it - they are the incarnation of evil socio facist big government

You don't think the FDA abuses its powers?

Ask any cheese monger how much the FDA abuses its power.

Ask anyone who truly appreciates/understand Chinese culinary arts or other Asian culinary arts how much the FDA abuses its power.

Ask those who have benefitted from experimental drugs that by some chance causes problems in less than 5% of the people who take it, then the FDA bans it because of those problems. They'll tell you the FDA is full of ####### too.

They have a history of damned ignorance when it comes to food and drug restrictions.

That's not to say they don't do some good out there as well, but I'm saying it's not always good. You get a mixture of both.

[Mark&Gladys 0]

Absolutely.

Are Herons illegal? Who knew!?!