enter the fray: our reader discussion forum
The Fray Browse by Tags
Sign in
  
Advanced
All Tags » food » food legislation

  • Re: it was YOU that FRAMED the issue

    Yeech: full of typos, that last. And not clear at all. Anyway: I'm guessing we've wrung this one dry.
    Posted to Human Nature by catweaver on August 4, 2008

  • Re: can we NOT treat you in the ER?

    I hear you about the ER. But I think the issue revolves, in this case, around what sorts of things constitute paternal laws (or nanny state regulation) and what sorts of things need to be regulated for the general good. We have all sorts of laws that restrict marketing. Labeling laws are a good example. We should be allowed to know what we ...
    Posted to Human Nature by catweaver on August 4, 2008

  • Re: Choose Real Food

    It's flat out dense to keep framing the issue as a matter of anyone's saying you have ''no choice'' -- some people are concerned that the choices be between a real food and a real food and NOT a slow poison and a fat pill. No one's taking choice away: they are regulating and zoning the marketing of edible items.
    Posted to Human Nature by catweaver on August 4, 2008

  • Re: Choose Real Food

    For more on high fructose corn syrup, check out my article on DietMachine at http://dietmachine.blogspot.com/2007/11/a-sugar-by-any-other-name-would-taste.html Some ''foods'' folks are not legitimate ''choices''. They are being sold to you as choices and they are accepted as ''food'' because they don't kill you outright. But neither does ...
    Posted to Human Nature by catweaver on August 4, 2008

  • Choose Real Food

    I think it's about time we started ''treating French fries like cigarettes or liquor'' since that's exactly what they are in substance. They are not food since they give very little in the way of nutrition. They are more harmful than helpful. And they cause health problems. They are, in brief, not food. We regulate substances which are ...
    Posted to Human Nature by catweaver on August 4, 2008