Support NeoGAF

[Tobor]

your completely missing the point. the problem is government regulation of day-to-day things, like transfat, salt intake, etc. it's such a slippery slope.

what makes it different from cigarettes, booze, red meat?

edit: and i'm someone who completely supports government healthcare. this is a side effect, unfortunately, but it started long before the healthcare bill was signed.

Yeah, God forbid government regulates cigarettes and booze. :lol

 

[Ri'Orius]

Oh I know. I just think it's incredibly hypocritical of supporters of this to ignore that obvious fact. This isn't about public health at the end of the day. This is about enacting an agenda in a political way to appease various interest groups.

Er, really? I'd say it's about improving public health in a political way.

Even when it comes to public health, compromises must be made or the proposal will never make it into operation. Exempting pickles is simply a compromise.

 

[JoeBoy101]

Yeah, God forbid government regulates Internet. :lol

Hey, excessive amounts could be unhealthy.

 

[Gaborn]

Er, really? I'd say it's about improving public health in a political way.

Even when it comes to public health, compromises must be made or the proposal will never make it into operation. Exempting pickles is simply a compromise.

Nope, it's political favoritism to appease people that aren't as rabidly pro-regulation. Education and at worst better labeling of food products would have a similar effect, but people are so intent on imposing their regulated vision of what people "should" eat that they're willing to exclude "naturally" salty foods as if "natural" salt (as opposed to "unnatural salt" I suppose?) makes it healthier.

 

[Future]

People act like they have just been alerted that an FDA exists. They already regulate shit sold in stores if it's deemed harmful. High sodium meals are harmful, so they are just doin what they are supposed to do. How is this idea worse than any current regulations.... Or are you all saying that there should be no regulations and we should hit up wikipedia every time we buy a new food

 

[Agent Ghost]

pls explain how salt is poison and what makes it different from sugar, fat, etc

I use the word poison loosely, unless I'm talking about white sugar that is a literal poison.

What do you mean? I'm not saying that fat and sugar shouldn't be regulated too. In fact I feel they should, especially white sugar. White sugar has zero nutritional value and is the single reason why we have a diabetes epidemic among other problems. I would argue that sugar is worst than smoking. But that's another argument.

Anything that is consumed in excess can be detrimental to your health. My argument is that we're not getting much choice when junk food is artificially cheaper when these mega corps spend billions to push the idea that tax payers should pay for their cost of operation. No one should be more pissed about that than a libertarian. That's why I think it's amusing to see some of the arguments here.

I live in a small town and when I look for a restaurant I would expect to pay double for proper food as opposed to junk food. It's not because the good stuff is more expensive, it's because tax payers are paying for half of a Big Mac.

Anyways salt is bad for us in the amounts many of us consume it. When you understand the economic pressures, and 5 minutes of looking up "negative effects of sodium". Why even ask that? The effects of a high salt diet is pretty well known. I don't know what you're trying to prove.

 

[Tobor]

Nope, it's political favoritism to appease people that aren't as rabidly pro-regulation. Education and at worst better labeling of food products would have a similar effect, but people are so intent on imposing their regulated vision of what people "should" eat that they're willing to exclude "naturally" salty foods as if "natural" salt (as opposed to "unnatural salt" I suppose?) makes it healthier.

Ridiculous. This is about heavily processed foods sold dirt cheap to poor people. Education is not going to get it done. Beyond that, it's well within the FDA's mandate and jurisdiction. They're not being granted some sweeping new power here, they're doing their jobs.

 

[JoeBoy101]

People act like they have just been alerted that an FDA exists. They already regulate shit sold in stores if it's deemed harmful. High sodium meals are harmful, so they are just doin what they are supposed to do. How is this idea worse than any current regulations.... Or are you all saying that there should be no regulations and we should hit up wikipedia every time we buy a new food

Erroneous.

Excessive salt intake could possibly be harmful. One meal does not do that. It requires a lifestyle of excessive salt intake. And I like how you act like there aren't these handy nutritional labels on the food that you buy.

 

[nyong]

I'm not surprised. Love it or hate it, this is the way our country is heading. I friggin' hate the new cell-phone laws in Oregon. What's especially maddening is that it became law AFTER studies came out showing no decrease in the accident rates.

The one thing I can get behind is clearly showing calories on fast-food menus. Mostly because this isn't really an anti-choice move.

EDIT: I fully expect a complete ban on smoking in the future as well. Which has essentially already begun with the recent ban on particular smokes. And yes, this is connected to healthcare (IMO)...

 

[karasu]

Good job government. This shit sneaks up on people big time.

 

[Gaborn]

Ridiculous. This is about heavily processed foods sold dirt cheap to poor people. Education is not going to get it done. Beyond that, it's well within the FDA's mandate and jurisdiction. They're not being granted some sweeping new power here, they're doing their jobs.

Except where pickles are concerned apparently. Because it's OK to have extremely salty pickles but somehow a "processed food" which may or may not have more salt than a dill pickle is worse. You do know that by DEFINITION all pickles are processed food, right?

 

[KiNeSiS]

This is good news!
This action should severely reduce high blood pressure across the board.

You idiots don't realize the harmful shit allowed into foods.
This is a step in the right direction, corporations care about merely cutting costs (fillers,sodium,HFCS etc.)
The FDA has been a joke.
I'm glad to see them getting serious.

It's not about the government telling you what to eat, It's about regulating the garbage we are forcefed.

Healthy wheat bread often has HFCS, & massive amounts of sodium are in everything....
Maybe boxed meals will get a little bit healthier.

2nd world developing countries have better food than us with less presservatives & sodium, for example

US Foods < The Republic Of Dominica

No suprise that their people outlive the American people.
The health care crisis has a lot to do with these unregulated poisons in our food.

Be my guest kill yourselves with salt & processed food.

 

[speculawyer]

It's the principle of the thing more than that actual thing itself. One of those things that is scary about public subsidized healthcare as well. They will start regulating what we eat, or denying coverage because we ate something unhealthy or took a risk that was ill-advised.

They already regulate what you eat. Go read Upton Sinclair's The Jungle to see why.


This is really not about controlling YOU. It is about determining whether some mega-corporation can put an unhealthy about of salt in a mass produced product to reduce its costs and improve sales by X%.

This really depends on the levels. If it is an unhealthy amount of salt, I don't see why it is that much different than controlling the amount of rat feces, hair, and other things that are limited in your food as well.


I appreciate that people get concerned about such actions and watch them. But this one certainly doesn't bother me. This is not some government tyranny.

 

[EvilMario]

I vote to limit the number of McDonalds restaurants within five square miles to ONE. Not only would it limit the temptation these adults apparently can't control, but it would help to improve cityscapes as well, and limit the amount of litter.

Spoiler

wahaha, this will never happen. It's a shame.

 

[kame-sennin]

anyone who's OK with the government restricting what you eat is a fucking fool and can't be reasoned with, i'm sorry

Good point. If chlorine makes hamburgers juicier, whose to say McDonalds shouldn't be allowed to add it?

 

[pedrothelion]

I have a feeling that if there was a state who derived a large portion of it's economy from the production of salt, and said state had early an caucus which was key to gaining the presidential nomination of your party we wouldn't be having this conversation.

This is what makes this so annoying to me. It's not really the fact salt could be regulated. It's that corn syrup is much more of a problem and the only reason it isn't regulated is purely political

 

[numble]

Nope, it's political favoritism to appease people that aren't as rabidly pro-regulation. Education and at worst better labeling of food products would have a similar effect, but people are so intent on imposing their regulated vision of what people "should" eat that they're willing to exclude "naturally" salty foods as if "natural" salt (as opposed to "unnatural salt" I suppose?) makes it healthier.

It's politics. Congress initially banned English literacy requirements for voters for citizens from Puerto Rico before they banned literacy requirements for all. SCOTUS banned segregation in law schools, and then segregation in graduate schools, before they banned segregation in all education. They banned laws against contraceptives for married couples before they banned laws against contraceptives in general and laws against abortion in general. States like Vermont will allow Civil Unions before allowing Same Sex Marriage, etc. Outright ban on homosexuals, to DADT, to allowance of homosexuals.

 

[Tobor]

Except where pickles are concerned apparently. Because it's OK to have extremely salty pickles but somehow a "processed food" which may or may not have more salt than a dill pickle is worse. You do know that by DEFINITION all pickles are processed food, right?

I can't believe you're being this dense. This is about potato chips, French fries and tv dinners. Mass consumption products. If people start eating pickles in similar amounts to potato chips, I'm sure the FDA will revise the policy. It's a 10 year program that will be tweaked over time. Why the fuck are you so hung up on pickles?

 

[astroturfing]

surely this a good thing.. dont they already regulate lots of other stuff that is harmful or even poisonous in large amounts? if you just let corporations run loose with food products, they WILL put harmful shit in it and not tell you. it has happened a million times. thats why regulation exists and is a necessicity, and i hope they go much further than this too.

 

[Vague]

This move has nothing to do with salt being unhealthy or not (it's not). This is purely because the corn industry is so large and when you remove fat and or salt from food it is universally replaced with HFCS because it is a cheap alternative. Enjoy your increasing bloat of HFCS in a world already infested with it.

Edit: Sodium intake doesn't cause hypertension or high blood pressure, sorry that you're misinformed: http://www.nasw.org/awards/1999/99Taubesarticle1.htm

 

[JoeBoy101]

They already regulate what you eat. Go read Upton Sinclair's The Jungle to see why.


This is really not about controlling YOU. It is about determining whether some mega-corporation can put an unhealthy about of salt in a mass produced product to reduce its costs and improve sales by X%.

This really depends on the levels. If it is an unhealthy amount of salt, I don't see why it is that much different than controlling the amount of rat feces, hair, and other things that are limited in your food as well.


I appreciate that people get concerned about such actions and watch them. But this one certainly doesn't bother me. This is not some government tyranny.

Again, no ONE meal is going to be unhealthy. Or TWO meals. OR a week of eating high sodium meals. Its a lifestyle of excessive salt consumption that could be unhealthy. The corporation should have to change its products because some individuals make the conscious decision to not eat in moderation or moderate the amount of sodium they consume every day?

 

[nyong]

You idiots don't realize the harmful shit allowed into foods.

It's not about the government telling you what to eat, It's about regulating the garbage we are forcefed.

Healthy wheat bread often has HFCS, & massive amounts of sodium are in everything....
Maybe boxed meals will get a little bit healthier.

Oh, the sweet irony.

"HFCS, & massive amounts of sodium" are clearly stated on food labels. I can honestly say that I have never been "force-fed" such things, as I avoid them like the plague. Which is easily done if you just take two seconds to read what you're purchasing.

I would still like to go buy an HFCS-filled Coke if I want it (Olympic athletes love it: the HFCS may turn to glyocen faster than sugar), or a sodium-filled burger if I feel like it. I don't want to live in a fucking nanny state where Uncle Sam tells me what I can and cannot eat and drink "for my own good"...

 

[mAcOdIn]

But why should it be up to the government to restrict that? Like Bertram said, educated and inform, but don't make the decision for them. I mean, almost all fast food joints provide healthy (low sodium, low fat or both) options on their menu. Sometimes in the form of salads, sometimes in different versions of the same food. There are people here retorting, just grab a salt shaker. Why can't they just find a low-sodium alternative? Are you saying there are no other options at lunch? That the government has regulate it and expand its reach further?

And your right, its not just lunch. But if someone chooses to ignore the nutritional label, that's they're decision. If a consumer does not like products that have high sodium content, what's stopping them from getting lower sodium content items?

Because you can educate and inform someone to the extreme and they can't avoid it. I personally don't give a shit, I eat, I smoke, I drink soda, how much sodium is in my food is the least of my day to day worries, however, I'd love for someone to tell me how I could eat healthy working around 12 hours a day with 5 or 6 hours of school without relying on processed foods. It'd be virtually impossible..

And again, I think saying get a salad instead of a burger is kinda missing the point. The burger should not be as unhealthy as possible from the start, but there is a point where a burger's a fucking burger and you can only make it "so healthy." A person can't sustain themselves on salad for 3 meals a day for any real period of time, nor should someone have to because that's the only thing they make that's not unhealthy.

But it is a tricky balancing act, because some things just aren't healthy from the start, if people expect McDonalds to actually come up with a healthy way to make a Big Mac I have news for them, it can't happen. But again, all I'm saying is it should start out as healthy as it can be. Can, is the important word here. We shouldn't ban sodium, nor should we get dismayed at the existence of high sodium foods, but if a food can be made without it, again, I ask why the fuck not?

It's really funny, because as someone said earlier, the only reason anyone'd even know the difference is because they've been upping the amount in your food over the years, had you never had the high sodium version, or the HFCS Coca Cola nobody'd be bitching to them to raise the salt or to switch to HFCS, but now that they have added it, "Oh shit, leave it in!" It's amusing. Soda being exempt, fast and processed foods are unfortunately becoming a fact of life for many, if we actually wanted to ensure that everyone is able to eat properly without regulating processed or prepared meals via the government we have to ensure they have the time and the money to cook 3 times a day, or 2 with a meal bagged. That'd require the essential socialization of the school system so people didn't have to work while going to school, tighter regulations on the lengths people can work each day, ensuring that both part timers and full timers get full time for lunch if they want to prepare something, yadda, yadda. I know everyone says everyone has a choice but they really don't. If you didn't go to school and worked only 8 or 9 hours a day, hell you can make it 10 hours really, then yeah, I'd be asking why not cook your damn 3 meals yourself, but that's about the only time it works.

 

[Tobor]

Again, no ONE meal is going to be unhealthy. Its a lifestyle of excessive salt consumption that could be unhealthy. The corporation should have to change its products because some individuals make the conscious decision to not eat in moderation or moderate the amount of sodium they consume every day?

YES! That's the FDA's job. It's always been the FDA's job. Jesus.

And yes, the FDA is failing us in HCFL. I 100% agree on that argument.

 

[Vyer]

I've got no problem with it. Either the government agencies or the corporate entity creating the product....someone is controlling how much of these ingredients is going in the food they shove out. Neither is particularly more favorable than the other.

It's up to the person to decide how much of something they consume. That doesn't change.

 

[SouthernDragon]

LOLWUT?!? Really? You want the government to start telling you what you can and cannot eat?

So this is what the current argument boils down to.

Come on, guys, don't take things to extremes.

You can eat everything you currently eat; the difference is it'll be healthier. It's not a limitation on your rights and your freedom, although we can view it through that prism.

So they are limiting your right to high sodium content in your pre-prepared foods. We can also say that they are protecting your right to a long, healthy, and productive life. The limitation of high sodium content in your food can be seen any number of ways, and I can't really see a substantive argument against it. The FDA is doing its job of regulating food to ensure that it doesn't cause excessive harm to the population. Sodium in present in almost every type of food, in excessive quantities. While eating something once a day that has a bit too much sodium won't hurt you, finding excessive sodium in everything you eat where ever you go adds up.

Yes, low sodium versions of products are available, but they generally sell poorly and are phased out or produced in very limited quantities to limit losses.

It's a shitty measure in philosophy. The government should be forcing better informing and education of customers, not actually regulating content.

They tried this. It failed.

It's the principle of the thing more than that actual thing itself. One of those things that is scary about public subsidized healthcare as well. They will start regulating what we eat, or denying coverage because we ate something unhealthy or took a risk that was ill-advised.

Insurance companies already do this. I'd rather have the government do it, because they at least pretend to be subservient to the people. Insurance companies are there for maximizing profit.

I do agree that HFCS should also be restricted, and the subsidy taken away.

 

[nyong]

Again, no ONE meal is going to be unhealthy. Its a lifestyle of excessive salt consumption that could be unhealthy. The corporation should have to change its products because some individuals make the conscious decision to not eat in moderation or moderate the amount of sodium they consume every day?

Yeah, meat sanitation and clearly-visible sodium quantities are two completely different things.

 

[Future]

Erroneous.

Excessive salt intake could possibly be harmful. One meal does not do that. It requires a lifestyle of excessive salt intake. And I like how you act like there aren't these handy nutritional labels on the food that you buy.

And how do you suppose you achieve this lifestyle of excessive sodium intake. Excessive sodium foods. And since when does Nutrition Data Facts alone serve as a basis for regulation. If we think that way, then are you saying that there should be no regulations on anything...afterall, any adverse ingredients or risks can just be stuck on the back of the package.

Again, we are bitching before even finding out WHAT a high sodium food will be deemed to be. I just love how people are upset before finding this out, as if the concept of the FDA regulating something that is potentially harmful is out of this world.

 

[Siebzehn50]

Except where pickles are concerned apparently. Because it's OK to have extremely salty pickles but somehow a "processed food" which may or may not have more salt than a dill pickle is worse. You do know that by DEFINITION all pickles are processed food, right?

Hey, come on. Pickles are delicious, they can have all of the salt that they want.

 

[JoeBoy101]

My point still holds. Excessive sodium in any meal is NOT unhealthy. Its a lifestyle of excessive sodium intake that you're taking issue with. How is that any one food companies/restaurant's fault? It isn't, its the fault of the person choosing not to balance how much they eat and what.

 

[BattleMonkey]

Citizen, your chicken is too salty. How do you plead?

 

[Shanadeus]

I'm not surprised. Love it or hate it, this is the way our country is heading. I friggin' hate the new cell-phone laws in Oregon. What's especially maddening is that it became law AFTER studies came out showing no decrease in the accident rates.

The one thing I can get behind is clearly showing calories on fast-food menus. Mostly because this isn't really an anti-choice move.

EDIT: I fully expect a complete ban on smoking in the future as well. Which has essentially already begun with the recent ban on particular smokes. And yes, this is connected to healthcare (IMO)...

Lol, it's anti-choice for the corporations to force them to show calories clearly - if you are okay with restricting their choice already then you shouldn't have any objections with forcing corporations to make healthier foods.

What really are you losing as a consumer?
Your choice isn't affected.

 

[JoeBoy101]

And how do you suppose you achieve this lifestyle of excessive sodium intake. Excessive sodium foods. And since when does Nutrition Data Facts alone serve as a basis for regulation. If we think that way, then are you saying that there should be no regulations on anything...afterall, any adverse ingredients or risks can just be stuck on the back of the package.

Again, we are bitching before even finding out WHAT a high sodium food will be deemed to be. I just love how people are upset before finding this out, as if the concept of the FDA regulating something that is potentially harmful is out of this world.

Umm, salt is essential for human beings, physically. So, by its definition, its not an adverse ingredient or risk. And even very high sodium content in a single meal is not a risk, so that point holds nothing. The FDA regulates against harmful and poisonous ingredients in food. Having them make the step to regulating how HEALTHY food is a monumentally bad idea. Because guess what, some day, those standards your telling people to wait for, are not going to make you happy either, as in, being too restrictive.

 

[nyong]

Lol, it's anti-choice for the corporations to force them to show calories clearly - if you are okay with restricting their choice already then you shouldn't have any objections with forcing corporations to make healthier foods.

No, actually, it's not. The only thing billboard calories are doing is changing the location of nutritional information. They can still make and sell whatever dishes they want.

As a consumer I lose the ability (choice) to purchase my favorite foods. Sodium makes food taste better--this is pretty much explicitly stated in the article when it talks about the failure of "low sodium" foods in the marketplace. I want the option to buy and eat these foods in moderation. I know, for instance, that a Whopper is horrible for me, but I love the things. If/when I get a craving for one, the government is essentially telling me that I cannot have one, because it's bad for people who are unable to moderate their own intake.

 

[EmCeeGramr]

oh no, now low-income people won't poison themselves (as much) eating the cheap processed food that is heavily marketed towards them and is readily available

is this the beginning of the united soviet states



also some thread derailing shit about pickles and pro-pickle bias

 

[radioheadrule83]

I'm frankly amazed there were no limits in the US before now.

I'm betting that Government taking hold of the reigns on healthcare is probably why they want to tackle this... allowing the food industries to cut corners by seasoning and preserving their shitty food with lots of salt must be bad for the nations' health, I don't care what any of the salt-loving "freedom"-loving loonies in here say. You want more salt on your shit? Put it on yourself.

And I'm betting most people don't read nutritional information. Most wouldn't suspect the amount of salt that commonly goes into pre-packed sandwiches for example.. and kids certainly aren't scrutinising their foodstuffs' ingredients. I'd of thought less fat, wheezing, heart disease timebombs was a good thing!

Salt is good, but as it does for many things in life - "everything in moderation" applies. The food industries don't give people a chance to have salt in moderation... its the magic ingredient that makes their shit taste better and last longer. A limit is a good thing imo.

 

[Like the hat?]

I can't believe you're being this dense. This is about potato chips, French fries and tv dinners. Mass consumption products. If people start eating pickles in similar amounts to potato chips, I'm sure the FDA will revise the policy. It's a 10 year program that will be tweaked over time. Why the fuck are you so hung up on pickles?

I'd rather have a good pickle than a bag of chips. Fuck pickles are good.

 

[Future]

Umm, salt is essential for human beings, physically. So, by its definition, its not an adverse ingredient or risk. And even very high sodium content in a single meal is not a risk, so that point holds nothing. The FDA regulates against harmful and poisonous ingredients in food. Having them make the step to regulating how HEALTHY food is a monumentally bad idea. Because guess what, some day, those standards your telling people to wait for, are not going to make you happy either, as in, being too restrictive.

Haha geez man. We'll just be agreeing to disagree because we obviously wont see eye to eye on fundamental points. Who the fuck is saying salt alone is an adverse ingredient or risk. Just saying that shows me you arent interested in having any debate and are just being a dick.

Obviously high sodium intake is the risk, and that is exactly what will potentially be regulated. Of course you arent gonna die after eating one high sodium meal. The point is that NO ONE eats one meal a day. That high sodium meal is putting you on the path of killing yourself in the long run. And unfortunately, people dont get that.

To pull from wikipedia:

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or USFDA) is an agency of the United States Department of Health and Human Services, one of the United States federal executive departments, responsible for protecting and promoting public health through the regulation and supervision of food safety, tobacco products...

. This is what they are supposed to do.

 

[markatisu]

No, actually, it's not. The only thing billboard calories are doing is changing the location of nutritional information. They can still make and sell whatever dishes they want.

As a consumer I lose the ability (choice) to purchase my favorite foods. Sodium makes food taste better--this is pretty much explicitly stated in the article when it talks about the failure of "low sodium" foods in the marketplace. I want the option to buy and eat these foods in moderation. I know, for instance, that a Whopper is horrible for me, but I love the things. If/when I get a craving for one, the government is essentially telling me that I cannot have one, because it's bad for people who are unable to moderate their own intake.

Your example is flawed, the govt would not ban the whopper or take it away. It would merely require less sodium be used. Which when shopping at Burger King is not a problem since they throw in extra salt packets

 

[KiNeSiS]

Oh, the sweet irony.

"HFCS, & massive amounts of sodium" are clearly stated on food labels. I can honestly say that I have never been "force-fed" such things, as I avoid them like the plague. Which is easily done if you just take two seconds to read what you're purchasing.

I would still like to go buy an HFCS-filled Coke if I want it (Olympic athletes love it: the HFCS may turn to glyocen faster than sugar), or a sodium-filled burger if I feel like it. I don't want to live in a fucking nanny state where Uncle Sam tells me what I can and cannot eat and drink "for my own good"...

Ironic Indeed....

I don't doubt you watch your diet, nevertheless wouldn't you prefer real sugar in your carbonated beverages?
This is a step forward, Simple arithmetic shows that there is an over abundance of sodium in most foods. ( add up those labels)

Some people cannot afford the luxury of good foods believe it or not.
Some folks eat out of cans & boxes, who does this sodium kill.
It's simple, low income families just trying to scratch & survive....

My friend, you seem very passionate about salt, & salty things....
Well, I have a tube that can provide obscene amounts of sodium not to mention your daily doseage of vitamin C, Calcium, Protein,&, Zinc.
I'll leave it on the table for you, just don't bite it.....

 

[daw840]

surely this a good thing.. dont they already regulate lots of other stuff that is harmful or even poisonous in large amounts? if you just let corporations run loose with food products, they WILL put harmful shit in it and not tell you. it has happened a million times. thats why regulation exists and is a necessicity, and i hope they go much further than this too.

But that's the deal. They are REQUIRED to tell you what is in the food you are eating. If you eat it, then it's your own damn fault. No one is force-feeding you anything.

 

[CharlieDigital]

I seriously wonder what the discussion was like when the FDA put controls on mercury in dental amalgam or when the government banned leaded gasoline.

Oh, and how about that time when the government banned asbestos; just the government interfering with the free market again.

Or that time when the Consumer Product Safety Commission banned lead based paints. Once again, government interfering with the free market!

 

[EmCeeGramr]

But that's the deal. They are REQUIRED to tell you what is in the food you are eating. If you eat it, then it's your own damn fault. No one is force-feeding you anything.

Problem: for a large amount of Americans, that food is what's most readily available, cheapest, and easiest for them.

Most people don't have the time and money to just go grocery shopping for organic foods every week and then cook them every night, especially for a family.

 

[KiNeSiS]

I seriously wonder what the discussion was like when the FDA put controls on mercury in dental amalgam or when the government banned leaded gasoline.

Oh, and how about that time when the government banned asbestos; just the government interfering with the free market again.

Or that time when the Consumer Product Safety Commission banned lead based paints. Once again, government interfering with the free market!

+ 999999999999999999999999999999999- Billion respect points,
Awesome Post!

 

[daw840]

I seriously wonder what the discussion was like when the FDA put controls on mercury in dental amalgam or when the government banned leaded gasoline.

Oh, and how about that time when the government banned asbestos; just the government interfering with the free market again.

Or that time when the Consumer Product Safety Commission banned lead based paints. Once again, government interfering with the free market!

None of those things is even remotely like salt. Not even close. :lol

 

[nyong]

Your example is flawed, the govt would not ban the whopper or take it away. It would merely require less sodium be used. Which when shopping at Burger King is not a problem since they throw in extra salt packets

If they tell BK that they can no longer use mayonnaise or lettuce, is it still a Whopper? A Whopper is a range of different ingredients combined in certain amounts to give it a distinct taste. The Whopper sans salt is no longer a Whopper, because it will no longer taste like a Whopper.

 

[taylor910]

This way they can put more HFCS in everything.

I know its 4 pages later, but first post mutha fucking nailed it.

 

[JoeBoy101]

+ 999999999999999999999999999999999- Billion respect points,
Awesome Post!

Yes because Salt = Asbestos, Mercury, and other items that can kill in minute amounts. Brilliant.

 

[EmCeeGramr]

MY WHOPPER FREEDOM

 

[nyong]

I seriously wonder what the discussion was like when the FDA put controls on mercury in dental amalgam or when the government banned leaded gasoline.

Oh, and how about that time when the government banned asbestos; just the government interfering with the free market again.

Or that time when the Consumer Product Safety Commission banned lead based paints. Once again, government interfering with the free market!

Mercury and lead are inherently harmful substances: sodium is vital to the survival of mankind. Like almost anything, sodium is harmful when taken in too large an amount over a length of time. Sort of like saturated fat and sugar. Restrictions on sodium are essentially a restriction on junk foods. What's the nutritional value of Sour Patch Kids or Bacon? There is little logical reason to allow these and not a sodium-filled burger.

Anyone who compares this to The Jungle or mercury-poisoning clearly doesn't get it.