congrats to NYC

BeerAd

Flaccid Member
Aug 15, 2005
13,322
2
0
39
Largo, Florida
Marklar
₥0
Is FlyNavy still in here crying, hehe jk

I didnt want to read threw the last 5 pages that I missed yesterday...

somone go ahead and sum it up for me, lol this should be interesting
 

wanko80

Erect Member
Jul 31, 2006
2,492
0
41
42
McKinney,TX
Marklar
₥5
I'm saying there is no reason for this product to be in any foods do to the inherent health risks involved
Like cigarettes? It's not logical to say there can only be health risks if it provides a mental stimulant (like cigarettes or alcohol). Either ban all the bad stuff or let people make the choice.

and also the fact that it was pretty much slipped in to many foods for years with no one knowing what it was or how bad it was
I have no research to back this up, but they probably didn't know it was so unhealthy. Much like many of the artificial sweeteners tried in the past, they develop something but don't really know the long term effects of it. Take high fructose corn syrup for example. That stuff is terrible for us, yet it is in so many products it's hard to avoid. Yet I don't see a ban being imposed on it.
 

JAXvillain

Curly_Sue
Oct 13, 2004
68,732
1,999
923
Marklar
₥0
Like cigarettes? It's not logical to say there can only be health risks if it provides a mental stimulant (like cigarettes or alcohol). Either ban all the bad stuff or let people make the choice.


I have no research to back this up, but they probably didn't know it was so unhealthy. Much like many of the artificial sweeteners tried in the past, they develop something but don't really know the long term effects of it. Take high fructose corn syrup for example. That stuff is terrible for us, yet it is in so many products it's hard to avoid. Yet I don't see a ban being imposed on it.

I really don't get why ANYONE is defending this shit? are you all being payed of the by trans fat association of america?? :shady:

when you smoke, you KNOW you are risking your health...this crap has permeated the food market from top to bottom and is a legitimate health concern and if you eat out at a restaurant, you really don't know how badly they are messing with your body...that's not right
 

wanko80

Erect Member
Jul 31, 2006
2,492
0
41
42
McKinney,TX
Marklar
₥5
I really don't get why ANYONE is defending this shit? are you all being payed of the by trans fat association of america??

when you smoke, you KNOW you are risking your health...this crap has permeated the food market from top to bottom and is a legitimate health concern and if you eat out at a restaurant, you really don't know how badly they are messing with your body...that's not right
Bullshit. When I eat out I know it's not good for me. It's just easy.

Maybe that's because I have common sense.

Plus, I don't get how smoking, which harms people not smoking, is still okay when a fat used in the (obviously) unhealthy fast food process is such a big deal.
 

JAXvillain

Curly_Sue
Oct 13, 2004
68,732
1,999
923
Marklar
₥0
Bullshit. When I eat out I know it's not good for me. It's just easy.

Maybe that's because I have common sense.

Plus, I don't get how smoking, which harms people not smoking, is still okay when a fat used in the (obviously) unhealthy fast food process is such a big deal.

you are confusing eating out as being unilaterally fast food and that is NOT the case
 

my little brony

Keep Being A Little Bitch
Oct 15, 2004
34,953
18,766
823
Marklar
₥21,493
when you smoke, you KNOW you are risking your health.

Bullshit. People have been sueing tobacco companies - and winning! - on the basis that no one knew how bad it was for them. :rolleyes: People "know" that smoking is bad for them as much as they "know" that fast food is bad for them. It's their own responsibility to ensure they don't put crap into their bodies. Are you going to champion the removal of nicotine from cigarettes any time soon? It's a completely unnecessary additive and certainly has negative side effects.

People need to make choices. The government does not have the authority to dictate what goes into my body. Period.
 

JAXvillain

Curly_Sue
Oct 13, 2004
68,732
1,999
923
Marklar
₥0
Bullshit. People have been sueing tobacco companies - and winning! - on the basis that no one knew how bad it was for them. :rolleyes: People "know" that smoking is bad for them as much as they "know" that fast food is bad for them. It's their own responsibility to ensure they don't put crap into their bodies. Are you going to champion the removal of nicotine from cigarettes any time soon? It's a completely unnecessary additive and certainly has negative side effects.

People need to make choices. The government does not have the authority to dictate what goes into my body. Period.

fine, let them serve you arsenic for all I care...I don't care to argue this anymore because you people would rather be poisoned by big business than use some common sense in what should not be included in foods

no one eats meals prepared with loving care at home by their mommy for every meal of the day
 

BeerAd

Flaccid Member
Aug 15, 2005
13,322
2
0
39
Largo, Florida
Marklar
₥0
fine, let them serve you arsenic for all I care...I don't care to argue this anymore because you people would rather be poisoned by big business than use some common sense in what should not be included in foods

no one eats meals prepared with loving care at home by their mommy for every meal of the day

I am completely with you on this one WaW. The government wants to ban a pointless harmful product from being in our every day food, that is all. It is not like they are banning cheese burgers themselfs. They are just taking a bad product that is NOT needed and will NOT change the taste of the food out of it. How is that bad?
 

my little brony

Keep Being A Little Bitch
Oct 15, 2004
34,953
18,766
823
Marklar
₥21,493
fine, let them serve you arsenic for all I care...I don't care to argue this anymore because you people would rather be poisoned by big business than use some common sense in what should not be included in foods

no one eats meals prepared with loving care at home by their mommy for every meal of the day

Arsenic would kill you immediately. There is no evidence to prove that trans fats will kill anyone immediately. There is little evidence to show that trans fats are more or less deadly than alcohol or tobacco. Arsenic is a deadly poison that will kill in small amounts.

That being said if a restaurant put arsenic in its' food people wouldn't really eat there, would they? Even without government regulation it would go out of business pretty quickly.

You can't champion the removal of trans fats when you're happily sucking on a cancer stick or chugging a beer. :lol: Just because you enjoy the sensation those two give you doesn't mean they're any less harmful for you than trans fats.

And again, it's your choice to not eat healthy meals you prepare yourself. Your life is busy because you have decided to make it busy. Unless you're military or in prison you have the freedom to prioritize these things and you have chosen to place social interaction above cooking for yourself. You do have the ability to eat a home prepared meal every single day. You choose not to.
 

my little brony

Keep Being A Little Bitch
Oct 15, 2004
34,953
18,766
823
Marklar
₥21,493
I am completely with you on this one WaW. The government wants to ban a pointless harmful product from being in our every day food, that is all. It is not like they are banning cheese burgers themselfs. They are just taking a bad product that is NOT needed and will NOT change the taste of the food out of it. How is that bad?

Because you're allowing them to make decisions for you. You're conceding that you're not intelligent enough to know what you're consuming, that you're not responsible enough to take care of your own body, that you're not man enough to make up your own mind. You're begging for someone else to take care of you. You're taking the easy, lazy way out. You're shirking personal responsibility, you want a nanny to tell what's good and what's bad so that you don't have to live with the consequences of your actions.

You'd be singing a completely different tune if this was something that you enjoyed.
 

APRIL

Feel Free to Pee on Me
Sep 30, 2004
103,360
38,053
1,823
Houston
Marklar
₥59,346
Because you're allowing them to make decisions for you. You're conceding that you're not intelligent enough to know what you're consuming, that you're not responsible enough to take care of your own body, that you're not man enough to make up your own mind. You're begging for someone else to take care of you. You're taking the easy, lazy way out. You're shirking personal responsibility, you want a nanny to tell what's good and what's bad so that you don't have to live with the consequences of your actions.

You'd be singing a completely different tune if this was something that you enjoyed.

I don't find it to be that big of a deal.
 

BeerAd

Flaccid Member
Aug 15, 2005
13,322
2
0
39
Largo, Florida
Marklar
₥0
Because you're allowing them to make decisions for you. You're conceding that you're not intelligent enough to know what you're consuming, that you're not responsible enough to take care of your own body, that you're not man enough to make up your own mind. You're begging for someone else to take care of you. You're taking the easy, lazy way out. You're shirking personal responsibility, you want a nanny to tell what's good and what's bad so that you don't have to live with the consequences of your actions.

You'd be singing a completely different tune if this was something that you enjoyed.

You are the complete government conspiracy guy arent you? Just because I agree with the government that we should ban a bad product means that I am "lazy". So basically all of those "nanny" "lazy" "not man enough" attacks you pointlessly put into your post is because god forbid we agree with the government's decision.
 

JAXvillain

Curly_Sue
Oct 13, 2004
68,732
1,999
923
Marklar
₥0
You are the complete government conspiracy guy arent you? Just because I agree with the government that we should ban a bad product means that I am "lazy". So basically all of those "nanny" "lazy" "not man enough" attacks you pointlessly put into your post is because god forbid we agree with the government's decision.

I think his tinfoil hat is on a bit too snug :fly:
 

JAXvillain

Curly_Sue
Oct 13, 2004
68,732
1,999
923
Marklar
₥0
Arsenic would kill you immediately. There is no evidence to prove that trans fats will kill anyone immediately. There is little evidence to show that trans fats are more or less deadly than alcohol or tobacco. Arsenic is a deadly poison that will kill in small amounts.

That being said if a restaurant put arsenic in its' food people wouldn't really eat there, would they? Even without government regulation it would go out of business pretty quickly.

You can't champion the removal of trans fats when you're happily sucking on a cancer stick or chugging a beer. :lol: Just because you enjoy the sensation those two give you doesn't mean they're any less harmful for you than trans fats.

And again, it's your choice to not eat healthy meals you prepare yourself. Your life is busy because you have decided to make it busy. Unless you're military or in prison you have the freedom to prioritize these things and you have chosen to place social interaction above cooking for yourself. You do have the ability to eat a home prepared meal every single day. You choose not to.


I was being a smartass about the arsenic...you know, sarcasm?? :tard:

and because I like to have a drink and a smoke I immediately forfeit all rights to eating healthy food if I go out to a restaurant? :wtf: so I should just start chugging motor oil now or something because I'm somehow a second class citizen and that's all I deserve to be fed? :tard:
 

my little brony

Keep Being A Little Bitch
Oct 15, 2004
34,953
18,766
823
Marklar
₥21,493
I don't find it to be that big of a deal.
I do. I don't like allowing anyone to make my decisions for me. I see no reason I should not be able to live my life as I see fit as long as I'm not infringing on the rights of others to do the exact same.

+++++++++++++++++++++++

on no, my liberties are being infringed upon! :rolleyes:
I view self-ownership as an essential liberty and this type of action goes directly against that concept, so yes. Someone else is deciding what goes into my body. You'd be singing a completely different tune if this was about tobacco or alcohol.

You are the complete government conspiracy guy arent you? Just because I agree with the government that we should ban a bad product means that I am "lazy". So basically all of those "nanny" "lazy" "not man enough" attacks you pointlessly put into your post is because god forbid we agree with the government's decision.
How does caring about liberty translate to conspirary theories? :thrawn:

Yes, it means that you're lazy. It means that you're unwilling to make your own decisions and care for your own body. You'd rather the government use our tax dollars to handle that for you.

I was being a smartass about the arsenic...you know, sarcasm?? :tard:

and because I like to have a drink and a smoke I immediately forfeit all rights to eating healthy food if I go out to a restaurant? :wtf: so I should just start chugging motor oil now or something because I'm somehow a second class citizen and that's all I deserve to be fed? :tard:

Yeah, I recognized the sarcasm but my point was valid. Obviously allowing a fatal poison into food would not be a good idea but even if there was no government regulation to prevent that do you really believe people would choose to eat there?

You forfiet the high ground if you're going to argue this issue on the premise of health. You can't tell me that we should ban one thing strictly because it's unhealthy yet turn around and do something equally as unhealthy. You don't think our nation's propensity for tobacco and alcohol are an equal if not greater strain on the health care system? But because you enjoy it that makes it ok? Why does your enjoyment override the enjoyment of others? Why is it more important that you feel a buzz than it is for me to get a $1 cheeseburger?
 
Last edited:

JAXvillain

Curly_Sue
Oct 13, 2004
68,732
1,999
923
Marklar
₥0
I do. I don't like allowing anyone to make my decisions for me. I see no reason I should not be able to live my life as I see fit as long as I'm not infringing on the rights of others to do the exact same.

I view self-ownership as an essential liberty and this type of action goes directly against that concept, so yes. Someone else is deciding what goes into my body. You'd be singing a completely different tune if this was about tobacco or alcohol.

How does caring about liberty translate to conspirary theories? :thrawn:

Yes, it means that you're lazy. It means that you're unwilling to make your own decisions and care for your own body. You'd rather the government use our tax dollars to handle that for you.



Yeah, I recognized the sarcasm but my point was valid. Obviously allowing a fatal poison into food would not be a good idea but even if there was no government regulation to prevent that do you really believe people would choose to eat there?

You forfiet the high ground if you're going to argue this issue on the premise of health. You can't tell me that we should ban one thing strictly because it's unhealthy yet turn around and do something equally as unhealthy. You don't think our nation's propensity for tobacco and alcohol are an equal if not greater strain on the health care system? But because you enjoy it that makes it ok? Why does your enjoyment override the enjoyment of others? Why is it more important that you feel a buzz than it is for me to get a $1 cheeseburger?


breathing air is unhealthy in most cities...does that forfeit the high ground too? weak argument dude
 

APRIL

Feel Free to Pee on Me
Sep 30, 2004
103,360
38,053
1,823
Houston
Marklar
₥59,346
I do. I don't like allowing anyone to make my decisions for me. I see no reason I should not be able to live my life as I see fit as long as I'm not infringing on the rights of others to do the exact same.
...and that's fine, but when it comes down to the black and white it's only trans-fat. The gov't has worked almost seamlessly for over 200 years and we are one of the richest economies in the world, how else should they handle it? The gov't isn't out to get us or control us in a harmful way. We are paying them to do the dirty work.
 

my little brony

Keep Being A Little Bitch
Oct 15, 2004
34,953
18,766
823
Marklar
₥21,493
breathing air is unhealthy in most cities...does that forfeit the high ground too? weak argument dude

First of all it's not nearly as unhealthy as smoking and you know it. Secondly, smoking is a choice. Breathing is not. Granted one could choose to live out in the country where the air is cleaner but the different is negligible at best. Taking a deep breath in the heart of NYC is a far cry from sucking on a cigarette or eating a 90% trans fat cheeseburger. The bottom line is that you cannot tell me I can't eat those trans-fat filled food because it's unhealthy when you're doing something even worse and expect to be taken seriously. That's pure hypocrisy.
 

my little brony

Keep Being A Little Bitch
Oct 15, 2004
34,953
18,766
823
Marklar
₥21,493
...and that's fine, but when it comes down to the black and white it's only trans-fat. The gov't has worked almost seamlessly for over 200 years and we are one of the richest economies in the world, how else should they handle it? The gov't isn't out to get us or control us in a harmful way. We are paying them to do the dirty work.

No issue is black and white. No issue is isolated. What happens when it's determined that red meat is too bad for us to consume? Or alcohol?

The government has worked as well as it has for this relatively short period of time because for a while it tried to adhere to the basic principles upon which it was founded. We're not supposed to be paying them to do the dirty work, we're supposed to be paying them to protect our rights. I disagree that making decisions on what we can consume is part of that.