Another Bunch of A$$hatsFollow

Full Story





So if you don’t like your food prepared this way Why eat there.

Because some people are busybodies.

Then there are those that want to eat things that should be bad for them, but have them be good for them.

Also: according to Alton Brown, properly fried food should keep the water inside the food at the boiling point causing the internal pressure to keep the oil and fat on the outside. So maybe if KFC just re-invented the way they fry, there would be less of a problem. Unless the skin manages to absorb that much oil.

I was under the impression that the high fat content comes from fat soaking the meat, not the skin.

I heard something else in the news this morning about requiring prepackaged foods to drop their sodium by 50%. I'm all for it. Anything to help with this damned bloat.

People are pathetic.

Aside from the obvious fact that I was joking, why can't it be both? I would understand if taking away sodium and fat shrank your pee-pee or gave you cancer, but it might actually make you healthier. I suppose that would hurt.

I realized you were too, but couldn't come up with a funny enough response, so I decided to ***** instead. I suppose I should have said "maybe its not the sodium". I guess Sodium regulation puts me on edge since my blood pressure is higher than it should be for my age.

I agree that it should be both mainly because I don't always read labels, and some stuff has more sodium than you would give it credit for. I also realize that if I just blame it on people being pathetic I look like Neph. Regulating your obvious intake is very easy, don't put salt on things. Beyond that it becomes a little harder. It may say that the Diet Coke has 150mg of sodium, but after all, thats only 10% of your daily intake... right?

That's a pretty one-dimensional way to look at it. A child who is fed by parents who can better afford low-priced, higher-fat foods with more additives doesn't have the intellect or reasoning yet to plan a healthy meal, not to mention parents aren't with them 24/7 when they pile on the hash browns and ketchup at school. Of course teaching people to eat right is important, but so is making sure that there are healthy food choices available at all price points. I fail to see where offering both can do anything other than help combat the problem. In the meantime, if you want the higher-fat, higher-sodium product, go for it.

but to that I say its up to the parents to instill healthy eating habits in their children. Kids may not be able to read and understand the contents in their foods, but parents can and its their job. I agree with KJ here. If the contents are on the package, you as an adult, make the choice of what you put into your body. There are plenty of choices, both good and bad, to eat. Each individual should be able to make their choices. And whether you have more money to spend on higer quality food is untrue. There is plenty of very healthy food out there for you, and it can usually be cheaper than McDonalds if you shop smart

edited this because it was towards Fles last post and KJ types too damn fast

Edited, Jun 13th 2006 at 12:30pm EST by DSD

Response to The Glorious Atomicflea Sniping Sweetpea:

I think that's because of trends. The cost of those items that are healthier should in theroy be cheaper, just because you can throw sh[red][/red]it on the plants to fertilize them. There is less in the end product, so in theory, there is less cost to produce them, whatever them is, be it fruit, vegetables, meats, etc.

Where we run into the problem, is the fad diets that make everyone stupid with their money. Because the people that live here are so poorly educated about the actual issues including health, they tend to go for the quick, easy food and diet, rather than actually see what it is they're injesting. I'm guilty of this too, but I try to compensate for it, except this damn soda habit, that's a tough bugger to get rid of. Back to my example, the Atkins diet that everyone bit into. I was reading a story locally where people were willing to pay almost double the price in '04 for Atkins related items (not Atkins branded items), than the year before, because of the fad diet craze. Americans have gotten lazy, and have really picked up the "I want it, and I WANT IT NOW!!!" mentality that has doomed us to be fat, lazy, and stupid. We're more worried about who's on American Idol, than what we're putting into our bodies.

Were we to have better education from the begining for people, I think the overall health of the U.S. would be better. Look at Japan for instance. Most of the population is healthy. They eat a diet that consists primarily untainted fish and rices, mixed with non-cemical laden chicken and other foods. Few problems with heart diesese, cancers (that I know of), and other high risk killers in the U.S. If we were to match the same health values in our foods, stop wasting so much on "education" dollars per student in the classroom ('cause it's not doing any good, test scores keep dropping), and put some of those dollers in to food and health education for those kids from day one, they'd be better off. Take the fast food out of the schools, and put the focus back on to fruits and vegetables.

It may have to come down to governmental education, but it's be sad that people are so lazy that they'd rather reach for Pop-tarts than make a sandwich. The sandwich is much more healthy, takes minimum effort, and about the same amount of time. I suppose we need to start teaching common sense in school again, and get the damn activists out of education. Start teaching things that really matter again, math, history, health (not sex ed.), english, economics, etc.

This thread is making me pukey.

Ugh.

I guess it is...bleh...

Sounds terrible!

Any excuse to eat ice cream. Yay!

No, they are cheap but ultimately not good for a regular inclusion to a diet. Those 2 products are expections to the rule of being cheaper.

I never claimed contrary. The key to a decent diet is moderation. The problems arise when the majority of your food intake consists of Big Macs, hot dogs, Mac & Cheese, General Tso's chicken, or those ****** salsbury steaks that guy on TV always wants to come over your house to eat. As long as it isn't a habit, take-out, pre-packaged, or dining out isn't that bad for you.

The only involvement the lazy fatasses have is that they are the target of both parties. Food corps want them to be lazy and fat and buy their ****. Hippy tree-hugging activists want to make them stop being lazy fatasses, but realize that they are too stupid and fat and lazy to do it themselves, so they want to fix it for them, however; since they can't effect them individually they attack the companies that make the food.

My major arguement is that I don't think you should force a company to change a product if that product isn't a danger in and of itself. It sets a **** precedent if you allow a group like this to decide what a food corp can sell based on what they think people should or shouldnt' eat. It also degrades those people who knowingly purchase these products being fully informed of their content based on product preference.

I haven't read any article concerning the sodium level reduction and I didn't see any link. From what I could gather based on what you wrote, I assume they want to reduce all products by 50%. That is a limit in options. If they force companies to increase product options I can't see how that won't hurt the company.

In general, people don't care. How many fat fu[Azure][/Azure]cks at a grocery store do you see buying fat free anything? Care to take a guess as to how many people who make pre-packaged food a regular part of their diet will choose a reduced sodium product?