US Government & FDA To Dictate What You Can Eat!

[Ali G. 37]

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.

Actually, there are quite a number of chemicals that are banned abroad and still permitted here. For example: rBST, rBGH and artificial growth hormones. Pharmaceutical testing is also conducted for longer periods abroad than it is here.

But hey, who wants safer foods and medications. You must carry a little test kit when you shop or read research papers when you take medication. This explains why anyone I speak with here almost always refers to Texas when it comes to the safety of food and water, quality of life and overall health. Unlike those big-government idiots in CA who force labels on anything hazardous or carcinogenic.

Edited April 21, 2010 by Ali G.

[Mark&Gladys 0]

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.

Paul,

I appreciate your posts and perspective and I can understand your position on health care and govt interference. I agree that less govt intervention is better. However, there are some other factors to consider. On the surface, I don't care how much salt you eat - its none of my business. And you can make a very strong argument that it is your choice and this is a free country etc. But the reality is that if I have to pay for your poor choices when you develop high blood pressure or heart disease, lost productivity etc, then it is not longer simply your choice of freedoms and the govt has an obligation to protect me as well as you. Then regulation becomes appropriate and necessary.

Other issues to consider are that many many people do not have the ability to determine what foods are healthy - what levels of sodium etc. And we are finding that some foods, like HFCS, are insidiously bad while others actually create serious addictions - MSGs. So there is great need for govt oversight and intervention in many areas. Sodium should be regulated, but not eliminated. HFCS and MSGs need to be banned and will be eventually and sugar should also be limited, particularly for children.

One additional point. Foods that have been consumed for generations (meat, fresh fruit, fresh vegetables) are to be much better for you than processed foods. Refined sugars and carbs are the real hazards to humanity with HFCS and MSGs. Salt in moderation for most people is not an issue. Eat wisely, make good food choices and everything in moderation.

[Obama 2012 1,714]

Actually, there are quite a number of chemicals that are banned abroad and still permitted here. For example: rBST, rBGH and artificial growth hormones. Pharmaceutical testing is also conducted for longer periods abroad than it is here.

But hey, who wants safer foods and medications. You must carry a little test kit when you shop or read research papers when you take medication. This explains why anyone I speak with here almost always refers to Texas when it comes to the safety of food and water, quality of life and overall health. Unlike those big-government idiots in CA who force labels on anything hazardous or carcinogenic.

Quite happy with the safety of our food and water here.

You want to see idiotic labelling, look no further than Canada and cigarettes. The legislation there on cigarettes is absurd...

Also you always seem to ignore the fact that I say they do good things. I'm just saying they know how to over-step on things as well.

You seem to have the attitude that all government regulation is good regulation and they never do anything bad... I on the other hand mix the good with the bad.

[Obama 2012 1,714]

Paul,

I appreciate your posts and perspective and I can understand your position on health care and govt interference. I agree that less govt intervention is better. However, there are some other factors to consider. On the surface, I don't care how much salt you eat - its none of my business. And you can make a very strong argument that it is your choice and this is a free country etc. But the reality is that if I have to pay for your poor choices when you develop high blood pressure or heart disease, lost productivity etc, then it is not longer simply your choice of freedoms and the govt has an obligation to protect me as well as you. Then regulation becomes appropriate and necessary.

Other issues to consider are that many many people do not have the ability to determine what foods are healthy - what levels of sodium etc. And we are finding that some foods, like HFCS, are insidiously bad while others actually create serious addictions - MSGs. So there is great need for govt oversight and intervention in many areas. Sodium should be regulated, but not eliminated. HFCS and MSGs need to be banned and will be eventually and sugar should also be limited, particularly for children.

One additional point. Foods that have been consumed for generations (meat, fresh fruit, fresh vegetables) are to be much better for you than processed foods. Refined sugars and carbs are the real hazards to humanity with HFCS and MSGs. Salt in moderation for most people is not an issue. Eat wisely, make good food choices and everything in moderation.

The question that needs to be asked in this scenario is "why" is it like that. In every other instance of an economy, price should go down the more people who buy/use a product/service. Health Care is the complete opposite though.

There are much larger factors than one's life choices. Actually it's almost erroneous to make life choices the object of what the problem is.

Call it a lack of doctors, call it a lack of willingness to use older techology while newer technology prices come down, call it medicare/medicaid not paying out what they should, call it subsidies in certain areas that don't need subsidies, call it the pharmaceutical industry run amok.. There are a variety of factors that actually are the one's causing those with "high risk" situation to cost the system more. The reality is though, these people shuoldn't attribute to any cost factor for everyone else in a negative way. They should ultimately be helping if you look at it in true economic fashion....

[Ali G. 37]

Quite happy with the safety of our food and water here.

You want to see idiotic labelling, look no further than Canada and cigarettes. The legislation there on cigarettes is absurd...

Also you always seem to ignore the fact that I say they do good things. I'm just saying they know how to over-step on things as well.

You seem to have the attitude that all government regulation is good regulation and they never do anything bad... I on the other hand mix the good with the bad.

Ah yeah, almost forget that in the US you simply have to think you have or are the best at something and you automatically are/do. Learned that one from Spook here.

Single cigarette packs now cost over $10 in AUS. The 'government' has not banned them or forced you to stop smoking, they have simply made them expensive. Capitalism 101 actually. There is a guy in China who made burgers out of cardboard and caustic soda. Maybe we should allow companies to sell us this here too.

I understand regulation can be good or bad. As such, you identify and remove the bad policies while implementing the good ones. Something that can only be determined by trial and error. Rather, it's you who seems to think that deregulation or zero government somehow leads to a better outcome; it doesn't and human history is proof of this. Once again, it's why not one civilized and advanced first world country uses or wants to use this model.

Edited April 21, 2010 by Ali G.

[that_girl 9]

Are Herons illegal? Who knew!?!

I know, right?! I see them all over in the Everglades. Going to have to start going vigilante on 'em.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

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.

Paul, lots of things are the result of the work of political activists. It's part of the political system - either you get involved and participate or you don't. There's nothing necessarily sinister about that. It's just the way things are.

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.

So your position is that because the FDA abuses its power that anything it does is therefore abusive?

That's cracked.

[Obama 2012 1,714]

Paul, lots of things are the result of the work of political activists. It's part of the political system - either you get involved and participate or you don't. There's nothing necessarily sinister about that. It's just the way things are.

So your position is that because the FDA abuses its power that anything it does is therefore abusive?

That's cracked.

Sometimes I wonder if people have a brain filter that makes them miss the entirety of the post.....

See where I said: "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."

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Paul, you've taken an outright position on the OP article that the FDA is abusing it's powers because of this regulation of sodium levels - without really explaining how it is actually abusive and how it actually deviates from the FDA's mandate. You then asked a bunch of questions implying (but not proving) that the FDA is corrupt and that because of this, that the sodium regulation amounts to similar corruption.

You need to stop letting your preconceived ideas get in the way of your critical thinking.

[Peikko 1,575]

Does the fda ever abuse its powers? Possibly but this isn't one of those times. Salt is a naturally occurring substance and isn't immediately harmful if ingested in large doses and I quite understand how originally the use of salt was completely unregulated in food processing because salt has always been used as a cheap and effective preservative.

However, it's indisputable that a diet that has long term high ingestion of salt causes heart disease and other serious and expensive to treat diseases and it is indisputable that UNTIL manufacturers manipulated food chemically to induce people to eat more than they would without such manipulation by deliberately producing addictive combinations of fat/salt/sugar to cause inapprorpate consumption this problem simply didn't exist. It is not something that you would, or even could produce at home in your kitchen and create something that was palatable let alone desirable.

Salt used in this way is a toxin and should be regulated. Even the regulation proposed will only make a small dent in the problem if you exist on a diet of restaurant/fast food and pre prepared meals and snacks but at the very least making this change should raise awareness and unless you have some sort of death wish on those who seem ill prepared when it comes to formulating diet and nutrition plans (which let's face it is not exactly an uncommon phenomena) then you would support all measures that improve awareness and assist in lowering salt intake via processed food items.

[Obama 2012 1,714]

Does the fda ever abuse its powers? Possibly but this isn't one of those times. Salt is a naturally occurring substance and isn't immediately harmful if ingested in large doses and I quite understand how originally the use of salt was completely unregulated in food processing because salt has always been used as a cheap and effective preservative.

However, it's indisputable that a diet that has long term high ingestion of salt causes heart disease and other serious and expensive to treat diseases and it is indisputable that UNTIL manufacturers manipulated food chemically to induce people to eat more than they would without such manipulation by deliberately producing addictive combinations of fat/salt/sugar to cause inapprorpate consumption this problem simply didn't exist. It is not something that you would, or even could produce at home in your kitchen and create something that was palatable let alone desirable.

Salt used in this way is a toxin and should be regulated. Even the regulation proposed will only make a small dent in the problem if you exist on a diet of restaurant/fast food and pre prepared meals and snacks but at the very least making this change should raise awareness and unless you have some sort of death wish on those who seem ill prepared when it comes to formulating diet and nutrition plans (which let's face it is not exactly an uncommon phenomena) then you would support all measures that improve awareness and assist in lowering salt intake via processed food items.

The FDA is caving into this group. The FDA doesn't even really believe it's a toxin, but to appease this awareness group, they're going to regulate to whatever means shuts them up. - I personally call that a power abuse if even they don't feel the necessity to regulate it, but they're going to do it anyway because they can, just to make people shut up about it. - That's kind of messed up in itself.

Salt CAN be harmful over time if you're not careful. Granted, just like with anything I know people with high sodium diets who are alive and kicking in their 70's and 80's with no blood pressure/heart problems. It's another one of those things where the 'risks' only effect those of certain genetic makeups and who fall into other factors as well. Sodium doesn't work by itself.

There are options out there, choices, etc. People make their own choices on what to buy and what not to buy. People make choices what restaurants to patron based on what they like/don't like. Raise awareness about possibilities, but if poeple still so choose to partake in that substance, let it be. It's not the government's job to babysit people and play nanny all the time.

If I want my burger at a restaurant to be overly-salted when it's being cooked, I should be able to get that. The government shouldn't tell me that I can't do that because the restaurant isn't allowed to make it that way. That's a load of #######.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Where does it say that the government is going to tell the chef how to prepare your food (unless you consider food hygiene laws regarding the hygenic preparation of meat to be an intrusion)?

The point is surely that salt is oveused in the manufacture of processed foods, and that this is what needs to be regulated. It's not exactly telling restaurants to remove salt shakers from restaurant tables!

[Peikko 1,575]

The FDA is caving into this group. The FDA doesn't even really believe it's a toxin, but to appease this awareness group, they're going to regulate to whatever means shuts them up. - I personally call that a power abuse if even they don't feel the necessity to regulate it, but they're going to do it anyway because they can, just to make people shut up about it. - That's kind of messed up in itself.

Salt CAN be harmful over time if you're not careful. Granted, just like with anything I know people with high sodium diets who are alive and kicking in their 70's and 80's with no blood pressure/heart problems. It's another one of those things where the 'risks' only effect those of certain genetic makeups and who fall into other factors as well. Sodium doesn't work by itself.

There are options out there, choices, etc. People make their own choices on what to buy and what not to buy. People make choices what restaurants to patron based on what they like/don't like. Raise awareness about possibilities, but if poeple still so choose to partake in that substance, let it be. It's not the government's job to babysit people and play nanny all the time.

If I want my burger at a restaurant to be overly-salted when it's being cooked, I should be able to get that. The government shouldn't tell me that I can't do that because the restaurant isn't allowed to make it that way. That's a load of #######.

It's not a load of ####### and it's not being a nanny to require manufacturers to limit the salt content to levels that are below the recommended daily intake and what is more require labeling to accurately indicate exactly what is those levels are in order for people to make informed choices.

[Ali G. 37]

Salt CAN be harmful over time if you're not careful. Granted, just like with anything I know people with high sodium diets who are alive and kicking in their 70's and 80's with no blood pressure/heart problems. It's another one of those things where the 'risks' only effect those of certain genetic makeups and who fall into other factors as well. Sodium doesn't work by itself.

There are options out there, choices, etc. People make their own choices on what to buy and what not to buy. People make choices what restaurants to patron based on what they like/don't like. Raise awareness about possibilities, but if poeple still so choose to partake in that substance, let it be. It's not the government's job to babysit people and play nanny all the time.

If I want my burger at a restaurant to be overly-salted when it's being cooked, I should be able to get that. The government shouldn't tell me that I can't do that because the restaurant isn't allowed to make it that way. That's a load of #######.

So the overwhelming consensus of doctors and scientist is wrong? Next you are going to tell us Texas is the healthiest state in the union.

Actually, people don't have many healthy choices in America. A large majority of the chain restaurants only offer unhealthy food. Not to mention, are not exactly forced to advise me of the sodium content, trans fat etc of their food.

Once again, the government is not forcing you to not eat salt. It's setting the bar higher to ensures food of higher quality is available to all.

Edited April 21, 2010 by Ali G.

[Obama 2012 1,714]

So the overwhelming consensus of doctors and scientist is wrong? Next you are going to tell us Texas is the healthiest state in the union.

One radical group is an overwhelming consensus? Really?

Actually, people don't have many healthy choices in America. A large majority of the chain restaurants only offer unhealthy food. Not to mention, are not exactly forced to advise me of the sodium content, trans fat etc of their food.

Don't eat at those chain restaurants.. It's pretty simple.

Once again, the government is not forcing you to not eat salt. It's setting the bar higher to ensures food of higher quality is available to all.

quality is fine...

It's not a load of ####### and it's not being a nanny to require manufacturers to limit the salt content to levels that are below the recommended daily intake and what is more require labeling to accurately indicate exactly what is those levels are in order for people to make informed choices.

It's actually VERY nanny-state in this case. The whole point and push is because the people don't know what's good for them because the group believes education on salt from them has failed....