On Food Purveyors

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
21

I fully agree people need to take responsibility for their actions and quit blaming other people.

That all being said, it does feel a bit morally wrong that companies spend millions of dollars on figuring out how to use chemicals and processes to alter a food to maximize the raw, primal reaction your body has for food.

For example, I’m not a big fast food fan. I’m almost always disappointed when I finish my big mac b/c it didn’t taste as good as my brain said it had, it didn’t really satisfy me, and it certainly doesn’t measure up the burgers I make at home.

I know ALL of this, yet, every time I pass a McDonald’s, I’m like “hmm chicken nuggets and spicy mustard sound pretty damn good right now.”

It’s a bit effed up.

22

[quote]ZJStrope wrote:
I know ALL of this, yet, every time I pass a McDonald’s, I’m like “hmm chicken nuggets and spicy mustard sound pretty damn good right now.”

It’s a bit effed up.[/quote]

I wish you all the best in your efforts to curb this unhealthy travesty. This is why I refuse to even stop at McDonald’s for a McPee - toxic environment. Oh, but the frappes…

23

[quote]JR249 wrote:

[quote]ZJStrope wrote:
I know ALL of this, yet, every time I pass a McDonald’s, I’m like “hmm chicken nuggets and spicy mustard sound pretty damn good right now.”

It’s a bit effed up.[/quote]

I wish you all the best in your efforts to curb this unhealthy travesty. This is why I refuse to even stop at McDonald’s for a McPee - toxic environment. Oh, but the frappes…[/quote]

LoL. I have certainly curbed it. Can’t remember the last time I had any traditional fast food…even Subway has been out of my diet for a couple of years.

But the Pavlovian response is still present.

24

[quote]cwill1973 wrote:

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:

[quote]cwill1973 wrote:
What is disgraceful in giving people what they want? What is disgraceful is too many people are so self centered that their every waking moment is spent finding ways to immediately satisfy their every desire.[/quote]

What is disgraceful is that companies spend money to try and get people to eat more and more of their processed garbage so that they can make more money all the while helping to make people unhealthy. I suppose you are cool with this because it is the “free market”.[/quote]

I am cool with this because I believe in personal responsibility. No one is being forced to eat unhealthy food. If people acted in a responsible manner when it came to their health it would be unprofitable to make the unhealthy slop irresponsible people love to gorge themselves on.
[/quote]

What about the responsibility of the corporation? When they spend millions of dollars in R&D to help get people addicted. But it is easier for you to blame the consumer and give the companies a free pass. This way you don’t have to challenge your belief system.

25

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:

[quote]cwill1973 wrote:
What is disgraceful in giving people what they want? What is disgraceful is too many people are so self centered that their every waking moment is spent finding ways to immediately satisfy their every desire.[/quote]

What is disgraceful is that companies spend money to try and get people to eat more and more of their processed garbage so that they can make more money all the while helping to make people unhealthy. I suppose you are cool with this because it is the “free market”.[/quote]

It’s entirely the fault of the consumers who have no self discipline or personal responsibility. Just look at Japan - they have the lowest obesity rate in the first world. It’s because they are a self disciplined people.
[/quote]

This idiotic post doesn’t even deserve a response. So I’ll just let your stupidity speak for itself.

26

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
Lol, it must be the evil food companies. It can’t people the choices people make, can’t be. [/quote]

Mega-retarded post.

27

[quote]UtahLama wrote:
It’s always the company’s problem, not the consumer, is that it?..it’s their job to sell burgers, it’s that fat ass, lard buckets job to say NO.

[/quote]

Can you comprehend this article?

28

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:

[quote]cwill1973 wrote:
What is disgraceful in giving people what they want? What is disgraceful is too many people are so self centered that their every waking moment is spent finding ways to immediately satisfy their every desire.[/quote]

What is disgraceful is that companies spend money to try and get people to eat more and more of their processed garbage so that they can make more money all the while helping to make people unhealthy. I suppose you are cool with this because it is the “free market”.[/quote]

It’s entirely the fault of the consumers who have no self discipline or personal responsibility. Just look at Japan - they have the lowest obesity rate in the first world. It’s because they are a self disciplined people.
[/quote]

This idiotic post doesn’t even deserve a response. So I’ll just let your stupidity speak for itself.
[/quote]

It’s idiotic to say that people are responsible for what they decide to eat?

29

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]kamui wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
Lol, it must be the evil food companies. It can’t people the choices people make, can’t be. [/quote]

False dichotomy.
Don’t you know that companies are people too. They, too, make choices. [/quote]

False dichotomy. Companies aren’t force feeding people like a foie gras goose. Consumers are voluntarily engorging themselves.[/quote]

-When a product is scientifically designed to maximize its effect on food addicts, it’s no longer “food purveying”, it’s drug dealing.

-these companies doesn’t only produce food. They, not consummers, use ressources. They, not consummers, destroy biotopes. They, not consummers, pollutes environments.
All of which comes with a public cost.

In other words, we are all paying for their sacred, absolute right to deliberately produce shit.

-Greed and Gluttony are on the same list.
But it’s easier to control the greed of a few companies than the gluttony of millions of people.

30

[quote]kamui wrote:

-When a product is scientifically designed to maximize its effect on food addicts, it’s no longer “food purveying”, it’s drug dealing.

[/quote]

That’s the accusation. Has it been substantiated? No. No studies with reproducible results. No peer review of said studies. Merely outlandish claims about snickers bars being more addictive than cocaine.

Firstly, that’s not relevant to the subject. Secondly, companies operate within the law - Environmental regulations set by the people’s representatives, out of control bureaucracies and eco-fascists.

We are the sole drivers of their production. If we didn’t voluntarily purchase their goods they would produce nothing.

Liberty is not easy and it comes with a price. I don’t want some bureaucrat, politician or politician’s wife telling me what to eat. If Joe Shmoe chooses to transform himself into a pile of lard that’s his problem not mine. Let him pay for his own healthcare too.

31

[quote]
That’s the accusation. Has it been substantiated? No. No studies with reproducible results. No peer review of said studies. Merely outlandish claims about snickers bars being more addictive than cocaine.[/quote]

Maybe.
But my point is not that they are guilty.
It is that they may be.
A possibility you exclude by principle since, no matter what they do and how they do it, it’s the consumer’s fault.

[quote]
Firstly, that’s not relevant to the subject. Secondly, companies operate within the law - Environmental regulations set by the people’s representatives, out of control bureaucracies and eco-fascists. [/quote]

Maybe.
But i never said they didn’t operate within the law.
What i said simply suggest that some change in law may be required to reduce the public cost of shit production.

Me neither.
But at some point, someone will have to pay.
Joe Shmoe will be insolvent before you and me.
So you and me will have to pay to protect the right of the agro-industrial complex to freely produce their shit.

32

[quote]kamui wrote:

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]kamui wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
Lol, it must be the evil food companies. It can’t people the choices people make, can’t be. [/quote]

False dichotomy.
Don’t you know that companies are people too. They, too, make choices. [/quote]

False dichotomy. Companies aren’t force feeding people like a foie gras goose. Consumers are voluntarily engorging themselves.[/quote]

-When a product is scientifically designed to maximize its effect on food addicts, it’s no longer “food purveying”, it’s drug dealing.

-these companies doesn’t only produce food. They, not consummers, use ressources. They, not consummers, destroy biotopes. They, not consummers, pollutes environments.
All of which comes with a public cost.

In other words, we are all paying for their sacred, absolute right to deliberately produce shit.

-Greed and Gluttony are on the same list.
But it’s easier to control the greed of a few companies than the gluttony of millions of people.

[/quote]

The irony is , sugar is the most widely abused drug and yes people could exercise their will power if they understood that (1)sugar was a drug (2)food processors put sugar in everything(3) it would help to understand the way a body processes simple carbs

The is the epitome of the CJS not understanding the intent of the Original Post or just wanting to argue

Damn Zep, fucking liberal :slight_smile:

33

If certain companies are indeed adding chemical components with addictive properties into food, why hasn’t the FDA discovered this? Isn’t that their job? Why isn’t the government protecting us?

34

sugar is a drug just not recognized as such but it fits every criteria

35

[quote]pittbulll wrote:
sugar is a drug just not recognized as such but it fits every criteria [/quote]

Coming from an admitted pot head, who is subject to binge eating following a bong hit, this is rich with comedic irony.

I suppose these are salads you are gorging on when you get the munchies, right ?

36

[quote]MaximusB wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:
sugar is a drug just not recognized as such but it fits every criteria [/quote]

Coming from an admitted pot head, who is subject to binge eating following a bong hit, this is rich with comedic irony.

I suppose these are salads you are gorging on when you get the munchies, right ?[/quote]

My weight is good 6’1" 215 35 in waist . I don’t smoke that much and I don’t eat salads I avoid sugar and flour, get my carbs from fruit and vegetables .

My worst habit is the Micro Brew down the street :slight_smile: 4 Peaks , yummy

37

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/05/23/us-marijuana-diabetes-idUSBRE94M14C20130523

38

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:

[quote]cwill1973 wrote:
What is disgraceful in giving people what they want? What is disgraceful is too many people are so self centered that their every waking moment is spent finding ways to immediately satisfy their every desire.[/quote]

What is disgraceful is that companies spend money to try and get people to eat more and more of their processed garbage so that they can make more money all the while helping to make people unhealthy. I suppose you are cool with this because it is the “free market”.[/quote]

It’s entirely the fault of the consumers who have no self discipline or personal responsibility. Just look at Japan - they have the lowest obesity rate in the first world. It’s because they are a self disciplined people.
[/quote]

This idiotic post doesn’t even deserve a response. So I’ll just let your stupidity speak for itself.
[/quote]

It’s idiotic to say that people are responsible for what they decide to eat?
[/quote]

It is idiotic to blame the consumer entirely and pretend that corporations who manipulate ingredients to spur food addiction are not culpable. All of course done for profit so it has to be good right?

39

[quote]cwill1973 wrote:
If certain companies are indeed adding chemical components with addictive properties into food, why hasn’t the FDA discovered this? Isn’t that their job? Why isn’t the government protecting us?[/quote]

So what? The FDA is merely a front organization that protects markets for big corporations. Besides there are studies done in other countries. The facts are the facts and evidence is evidence no matter who discovers them.

40

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:

[quote]cwill1973 wrote:
What is disgraceful in giving people what they want? What is disgraceful is too many people are so self centered that their every waking moment is spent finding ways to immediately satisfy their every desire.[/quote]

What is disgraceful is that companies spend money to try and get people to eat more and more of their processed garbage so that they can make more money all the while helping to make people unhealthy. I suppose you are cool with this because it is the “free market”.[/quote]

It’s entirely the fault of the consumers who have no self discipline or personal responsibility. Just look at Japan - they have the lowest obesity rate in the first world. It’s because they are a self disciplined people.
[/quote]
What happened to the Japanese self-discipline when it comes to smoking? Estimates are that 1/3 - 1/2 of the population smoke.