[quote]CrewPierce wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
What the hell is wrong with Subway?
What is wrong with this website? Whole wheat bread, a pile of veggies and turkey or roast beef is a great choice for fast food. Why would anyone complain?
Hmmm I kinda agree here.
I get the ham and turkey, double the meat, 6inch sub on wheat. Add in a ton of veggies and vinegar (not oil!) and you have a pretty good lunch there. Although it is high in sodium.[/quote]
…and the bread is made with enriched flour.
I wonder when the last time any of you guys stepped inside of a public school was with all of this whining about subway being pushed. if you knew what really went out, I think you would be a lot happier that things like eating at subway are being encouraged. When I was in high school, ketchup and counted as a vegetable, pepperoni pizza counted as protein and vegetables, and french fries were an acceptable starch. The school lunch program would push pizza, french fries, and ketchup as a “nutritionally balanced meal”. Tell me subway isnt a large step in the right direction coming from that. This is what happens when you place your child’s nutrition and education about what is good for them in the hands of the lowest bidder.
School should feed kids the same stuff we got as kids. It never hurt us. The difference is that we PLAYED.
Food isn’t the problem. Activity is.
[quote]Dweezil wrote:
Padilla7921 wrote:
It was Shugs.
And anyway, I think Subway is a good alternative and definitely a better option than a Whopper
No, not really. A Whopper Jr. is one of the more innocuous items on any fast food menu. Registered & Protected by MarkMonitor
Makavali wrote:
A better idea is to not publicly fund medical expenses bought on by obesity.
Good luck with that.
OctoberGirl wrote:
yes yes yes… we can make healthier choices, but it’s like Subway and Starbucks are converting the world.
Oh, come on. I’m sure you can’t survive without your nonfat milk grande sugar-free vanilla half-caf caramel macchiato.[/quote]
DWEEZIL!!!
where the Hell have you been?!!!
actually it’s a vente breve no-foam latte with 2 extra shots, . . . really
Zap is right that is can be a healthy alternative. And maybe I am not giving children enough credit, because I am assuming they are going to associate all of Subway with being healthy. I just wasn’t seeing little Bobby going in and asking for a whole wheat 6-inch sub with turkey, lots of veggies please, no oil please, just some really tart vinegar. No cookies but how about those apple slices or even better, a side of veggies to go as I want to walk home and get in some NEPA.
I dunno, just don’t see children doing that.
Padilla, I see the corporations are driving the nation. Industry always has. It seemed before the food industries were smaller, food was healthier and there really wasn’t the onslaught of fast food.
Fulmen I agree with you about moving and the Wii doesn’t count.
Speaking of…
Has anyone tried “The Subway Feast”? I might get it today after astronomy final.
[quote]Aleksandr wrote:
OctoberGirl wrote:
But the shame of Subway is that schools and health agencies are advocating for Subway.
We have El Pollo Loco here in San Diego. Now, sure it isn’t great, but it sure isn’t bad. Take the skin off of it and you really don’t have much to worry about. Even their beans are good.
But how did Subway get all these folks to peddle them?
Kids are learning a 12 inch sandwich is a healthy meal.
I dunno
If they were lifting heavy weights, and playing lots of active games/sports, it wouldn’t be a bad snack. I think the food isn’t nearly as big a problem as the lazy lifestyle. What do you think?[/quote]
You are spot on. When I was a kid, we didn’t watch what we ate and drank so much. But, we used to ride our bikes to 7-11 for Slurpees or Big Gulps and we ran around like maniacs every day after school and during the summer - even when it was 100 degrees. We just really enjoyed getting out and playing. Only one kid had a video game system (original Atari) and the games were really limited. As a parent, I realize that it’s different now. You can’t just let 6 year-olds run free in the neighborhoods any more. It’s sad, really, because having that freedom at such a young age allowed us to develop moral courage and expand our physical limits.
But, it’s more the laziness than the diets, although the combination of the two exascerbates the problem.
DB
[quote]OctoberGirl wrote:
Padilla, I see the corporations are driving the nation. Industry always has. It seemed before the food industries were smaller, food was healthier and there really wasn’t the onslaught of fast food.[/quote]
You’re exactly right. Once food became a huge money-making industry, the quality went down. It’s a natural occurrence: when mass producing large quantities of something, overall quality is expected to go down, as the rate of “defects” (in this case, healthiness) goes down.
The companies don’t care about quality, they care about the bottom line. They want money, plain and simple. The higher the quality of food, the more it costs, which means the less they earn (in a nutshell). It’s a horrible system and quite frankly, it needs to stop. I’d rather pay “top dollar” for quality food than pay a buck or two for something that’s going to aid in the end of me.
And about the Wii: I’ve broken a sweat playing that damn boxing game with my little cousins, but I wouldn’t constitute it as “exercise.” It’s merely exertion of energy, which should be done away from a TV screen.
[quote]LankyMofo wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
What the hell is wrong with Subway?
What is wrong with this website? Whole wheat bread, a pile of veggies and turkey or roast beef is a great choice for fast food. Why would anyone complain?
While I mostly agree with this statement, I think you missed the point of the thread. The government is pushing Subway onto kids as being healthy, as opposed to pushing kids to prepare their own, healthier meals. There are things you can get at Subway that rival the other fast food places, and kids will believe it is healthy because it is Subway, which is not necessarily the case.
That being said, I like Subway. Foot long grilled chicken with a couple toppings and I’m good to go.[/quote]
I basically agree, but it’s the parents that need to be educated. Last time I checked children don’t usually prepare their own meals.
You know what would be cool though? To get in on the cash thats being made from these fast food junkies.
Its a double standard really. The healthy food people are right of course, but what if the fast food people started to attack everyone else for not making their customers the most delicious products possible at insanely low prices. It boils down to youve got to give the people what they WANT and will PAY for.
And Wimpy these parents know exactly what their feeding their kids, they just dont give a shit. Its sad bro.
[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
What the government should do is stop subsidizing corn and then HFCS will not be so cheap and will not be used in everything.[/quote]
If only. And we really should return to the gold standard and stop handing out credit right and left.
Government subsidies are like unions – they had their place years ago to protect something that needed it at the time, but that time has long passed and now they serve to do more harm than good.
But shouldn’t this be in Politics?
[quote]dollarbill44 wrote:
Aleksandr wrote:
OctoberGirl wrote:
You can’t just let 6 year-olds run free in the neighborhoods any more. It’s sad, really, because having that freedom at such a young age allowed us to develop moral courage and expand our physical limits.
DB[/quote]
Is that really true, though, or has the media simply put a scare into us that’s not rational? I mean, what’s lurking out there that our kids can’t do what we did? We didn’t have warnings on our swings, rode bikes without helmets, lived with lead paint, and drank from the garden hose and we turned out just fine. Why do we assume our kids can’t?
I don’t necessarily disagree – I’m not saying we should or shouldn’t, but what’s made the world so different than it was 30 years ago besides more information about how aberrant some of our behavior is. But hasn’t it always been? Aren’t we just more aware of it? My group of friends and I discuss this often and we’re still no closer to an answer about why we’re so much more protective than previous generations were. I think we do our kids a disservice for exactly the reasons you lament – they need to discover the world for themselves and we keep them from it in a way.
Anyway, just curious about others’ thoughts. We can take it offline if this is just a hijack.
[quote]sdspeedracer wrote:
dollarbill44 wrote:
Aleksandr wrote:
OctoberGirl wrote:
You can’t just let 6 year-olds run free in the neighborhoods any more. It’s sad, really, because having that freedom at such a young age allowed us to develop moral courage and expand our physical limits.
DB
Is that really true, though, or has the media simply put a scare into us that’s not rational? I mean, what’s lurking out there that our kids can’t do what we did? We didn’t have warnings on our swings, rode bikes without helmets, lived with lead paint, and drank from the garden hose and we turned out just fine. Why do we assume our kids can’t?
I don’t necessarily disagree – I’m not saying we should or shouldn’t, but what’s made the world so different than it was 30 years ago besides more information about how aberrant some of our behavior is. But hasn’t it always been? Aren’t we just more aware of it? My group of friends and I discuss this often and we’re still no closer to an answer about why we’re so much more protective than previous generations were. I think we do our kids a disservice for exactly the reasons you lament – they need to discover the world for themselves and we keep them from it in a way.
Anyway, just curious about others’ thoughts. We can take it offline if this is just a hijack.[/quote]
I grew up believing that if I got hurt, it was my fault. My kids are going to be raised the same way. I didn’t get a helmet riding a bike. We had see-saws that would flip us off if we pushed hard enough. We had dirt mounds that begged to be ramped. We had tress to climb.
I blame absolutely everything on bad parenting. The fatasses. The accidents. The stupid ass behavior.
[quote]Fulmen wrote:
sdspeedracer wrote:
dollarbill44 wrote:
Aleksandr wrote:
OctoberGirl wrote:
You can’t just let 6 year-olds run free in the neighborhoods any more. It’s sad, really, because having that freedom at such a young age allowed us to develop moral courage and expand our physical limits.
DB
Is that really true, though, or has the media simply put a scare into us that’s not rational? I mean, what’s lurking out there that our kids can’t do what we did? We didn’t have warnings on our swings, rode bikes without helmets, lived with lead paint, and drank from the garden hose and we turned out just fine. Why do we assume our kids can’t?
I don’t necessarily disagree – I’m not saying we should or shouldn’t, but what’s made the world so different than it was 30 years ago besides more information about how aberrant some of our behavior is. But hasn’t it always been? Aren’t we just more aware of it? My group of friends and I discuss this often and we’re still no closer to an answer about why we’re so much more protective than previous generations were. I think we do our kids a disservice for exactly the reasons you lament – they need to discover the world for themselves and we keep them from it in a way.
Anyway, just curious about others’ thoughts. We can take it offline if this is just a hijack.
I grew up believing that if I got hurt, it was my fault. My kids are going to be raised the same way. I didn’t get a helmet riding a bike. We had see-saws that would flip us off if we pushed hard enough. We had dirt mounds that begged to be ramped. We had tress to climb.
I blame absolutely everything on bad parenting. The fatasses. The accidents. The stupid ass behavior.
[/quote]
Too many cars on the road to let kids play in the street and ride bikes the way we used to. I used to ride my bike everywhere growing up. I tried to ride my dads bike to the the same store I used to go all the time and I was afraid to ride along the road. It is a different world.
[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
Fulmen wrote:
sdspeedracer wrote:
dollarbill44 wrote:
Aleksandr wrote:
OctoberGirl wrote:
You can’t just let 6 year-olds run free in the neighborhoods any more. It’s sad, really, because having that freedom at such a young age allowed us to develop moral courage and expand our physical limits.
DB
Is that really true, though, or has the media simply put a scare into us that’s not rational? I mean, what’s lurking out there that our kids can’t do what we did? We didn’t have warnings on our swings, rode bikes without helmets, lived with lead paint, and drank from the garden hose and we turned out just fine. Why do we assume our kids can’t?
I don’t necessarily disagree – I’m not saying we should or shouldn’t, but what’s made the world so different than it was 30 years ago besides more information about how aberrant some of our behavior is. But hasn’t it always been? Aren’t we just more aware of it? My group of friends and I discuss this often and we’re still no closer to an answer about why we’re so much more protective than previous generations were. I think we do our kids a disservice for exactly the reasons you lament – they need to discover the world for themselves and we keep them from it in a way.
Anyway, just curious about others’ thoughts. We can take it offline if this is just a hijack.
I grew up believing that if I got hurt, it was my fault. My kids are going to be raised the same way. I didn’t get a helmet riding a bike. We had see-saws that would flip us off if we pushed hard enough. We had dirt mounds that begged to be ramped. We had tress to climb.
I blame absolutely everything on bad parenting. The fatasses. The accidents. The stupid ass behavior.
Too many cars on the road to let kids play in the street and ride bikes the way we used to. I used to ride my bike everywhere growing up. I tried to ride my dads bike to the the same store I used to go all the time and I was afraid to ride along the road. It is a different world.[/quote]
True, for most people. However, it’s not in my town (very rural; hell, I live beside two cotton fields). I should’ve said “In my town” before “I blame…”.
Sorry Zap.
[quote]js385787 wrote:
Here’s the problem with those of you thinking a fat tax is a good idea. They might be good if everyone was wealthy, but most people (as a percentage) who are obese are of a lower socioeconomic status and cannot afford to eat healthy. They are obese b/c they buy junk food, b/c it is cheap food, and also happens to be calorie dense, which is why they become fat. Think about it, box of kd for dollar something and 2L soda for just over a dollar versus some lean meet, veggies, and whatever else. The basic food commodities cost a lot. Milk where I live is 7.11 per gallon, regular ground beef is 9/kg, if you want skinless bnonless chicken it is 20/kg, a 3lb bag of apples is $5 usually.
If the government does anything, it ought to be subsidizing healthy foods, not putting another tax on junk food. All that is going to do induce undue hardship on those who are already poor. [/quote]
where the hell do you go food shopping, rodeo drive? it’s very easy to find skinless boneless chicken for less than $5/kg, and ive never seen milk, ground beef or apples cost that much before. im not calling you a liar, but seriously, where do you buy your food?
This whole “everything at Subway is healthy” notion reminds me of the currently running ads for low fat Philly cream cheese. They go on and on about how healthy it is. Like Shugs says, shit is shit. Even if it’s 50% less shit, the 50% still in the box is 100% shit.
[quote]sumgai wrote:
This whole “everything at Subway is healthy” notion reminds me of the currently running ads for low fat Philly cream cheese. They go on and on about how healthy it is. Like Shugs says, shit is shit. Even if it’s 50% less shit, the 50% still in the box is 100% shit.[/quote]
cream cheese is where cheesecake comes from, so you can just stfu about that!
On free cone day, I think I’m going to get ice cream with cheesecake chunks in it. MMMMMMMMmmmm!
[quote]Fulmen wrote:
sdspeedracer wrote:
dollarbill44 wrote:
Aleksandr wrote:
OctoberGirl wrote:
You can’t just let 6 year-olds run free in the neighborhoods any more. It’s sad, really, because having that freedom at such a young age allowed us to develop moral courage and expand our physical limits.
DB
Is that really true, though, or has the media simply put a scare into us that’s not rational? I mean, what’s lurking out there that our kids can’t do what we did? We didn’t have warnings on our swings, rode bikes without helmets, lived with lead paint, and drank from the garden hose and we turned out just fine. Why do we assume our kids can’t?
I don’t necessarily disagree – I’m not saying we should or shouldn’t, but what’s made the world so different than it was 30 years ago besides more information about how aberrant some of our behavior is. But hasn’t it always been? Aren’t we just more aware of it? My group of friends and I discuss this often and we’re still no closer to an answer about why we’re so much more protective than previous generations were. I think we do our kids a disservice for exactly the reasons you lament – they need to discover the world for themselves and we keep them from it in a way.
Anyway, just curious about others’ thoughts. We can take it offline if this is just a hijack.
I grew up believing that if I got hurt, it was my fault. My kids are going to be raised the same way. I didn’t get a helmet riding a bike. We had see-saws that would flip us off if we pushed hard enough. We had dirt mounds that begged to be ramped. We had tress to climb. [/quote]
It is illegal in most jurisdictions for kids under 13 to not wear helmets on bikes. In my town, it also applies to scooters and skateboards.
[quote]
I blame absolutely everything on bad parenting. The fatasses. The accidents. The stupid ass behavior. [/quote]
Everything is crystal clear until you have kids of your own.
DB
[quote]dollarbill44 wrote:
Fulmen wrote:
sdspeedracer wrote:
dollarbill44 wrote:
Aleksandr wrote:
OctoberGirl wrote:
You can’t just let 6 year-olds run free in the neighborhoods any more. It’s sad, really, because having that freedom at such a young age allowed us to develop moral courage and expand our physical limits.
DB
Is that really true, though, or has the media simply put a scare into us that’s not rational? I mean, what’s lurking out there that our kids can’t do what we did? We didn’t have warnings on our swings, rode bikes without helmets, lived with lead paint, and drank from the garden hose and we turned out just fine. Why do we assume our kids can’t?
I don’t necessarily disagree – I’m not saying we should or shouldn’t, but what’s made the world so different than it was 30 years ago besides more information about how aberrant some of our behavior is. But hasn’t it always been? Aren’t we just more aware of it? My group of friends and I discuss this often and we’re still no closer to an answer about why we’re so much more protective than previous generations were. I think we do our kids a disservice for exactly the reasons you lament – they need to discover the world for themselves and we keep them from it in a way.
Anyway, just curious about others’ thoughts. We can take it offline if this is just a hijack.
I grew up believing that if I got hurt, it was my fault. My kids are going to be raised the same way. I didn’t get a helmet riding a bike. We had see-saws that would flip us off if we pushed hard enough. We had dirt mounds that begged to be ramped. We had tress to climb.
It is illegal in most jurisdictions for kids under 13 to not wear helmets on bikes. In my town, it also applies to scooters and skateboards.
I blame absolutely everything on bad parenting. The fatasses. The accidents. The stupid ass behavior.
Everything is crystal clear until you have kids of your own.
DB
[/quote]
I know this is going to be like poking a stick into a hornets nest but here goes: I don’t really think we as parents are that much more “scared” or “over-protective” of our kids. But kids don’t spend a lot of time roaming the neighborhoods, riding their bikes around etc because they are in day care or some other form of after school supervision. The moms all work now.
When I was a kid all the moms were at home. The moms all knew each other. You got home from school around 2 or 3 in the afternoon and you had a few hours to kill. You ran around the neighborhood. Today, the parents retrieve their children from after school care at 5 or 6 or later. There really isn’t a lot of time left. Kids do most of their “playing” at the after school program. That’s just how things are.