Obamacare will be the excuse to regulate your diet.

[dorminWS]

http://genfringe.com/2013/11/donut-regu ... ous-syria/

Be sure and watch the video.

[snatale42]

Eh, I'm definitely anti Obamacare, we already know that Michelle is BS crazy with the "healthy" kick. BUT I can't really be against the trans fat thing, there's no advantage of them, there not naturally occurring, it's like arguing to keep cigarettes unhealthy if they had the ability to make them safer. In my home state of MA they banned them back in I think 2007 and it made no difference at all. With that said, if the gov't every actually try to ban certain FOODS, then we're gonna have a problem cuz I'm a fat guy and like my food!

[dorminWS]

I don't care about trans fats, either. What matters to me is that they are deciding what I can eat. What is the difference between them saying "no trans fat" and them saying "no bacon", or "no scotch", or "no beer"? It's always the stuff you care little or nothing about that they start with and set their precedent. Then they expand it to what you do care about. It's like the girl said on the video: You should be free to make your own choices and live with the consequences. But if the government is paying for health care, that's their excuse to meddle in what you eat, what you do and don't do by way of recreation, and eventually to regulate every miniscule detail of your life. Remember this is the same outfit that couldn't get a web site up and running.

[SHMIV]

I actually DO care about the transfat thing. I have noticed that since companies have started changing recipes over the transfat thing, my junk food has started to taste different. And the taste has not improved. I have been deprived of Moon Pies, and I am unhappy about it. I never ate Moon Pies because I was on a health food kick. I ate them because I wanted a treat, health consequences be damned.

I'm similarly unhappy about not being allowed to smoke in Waffle House. I have a variety of flavors of heart attack to be served to me there, but I can't smoke there? 99% of the folks that I see there are putting cigs out as the enter, or lighting them when they leave.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

[dorminWS]

With apologies to Pastor Martin Niemöller:

First they came for the tobacco,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a smoker.

Then they came for the Big Gulps,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a Big Gulp drinker.

Then they came for the trans fat,
and I didn't speak out because I didn’t care about trans fat.

Then they came for MY damn beer, bacon and twinkies,
and there was no one left to speak for me.
Because the bastards had incrementally seized total control of the American diet.

[Swampman]

I couldn't have cared less about trans fats . . .

Now, however, it's a different story.

[Remek]

There's nothing wrong with trans-fats. The problem, for those worried about health is the quantities, combinations of foods, and regularity at which we eat them.

I cannot abide by anyone saying what we should eat. I enjoy fairly healthy foods in general, but I will admit, I also have some dishes I love and appear to be specifically calculated to cause a heart attack after one bite. No way can the government can tell me what I should eat. Personal responsibility means personal consequences.

I'd hate to see the law suits if they do regulate our foods and people die!

[ShotgunBlast]

What's interesting is that manufacturers were already getting away from trans fats due to their customer's changing dietary needs. This is just more pointless government intervention.

If you are prohibited from making bad decisions, can you really say you're free?

[Remek]

^^^well said. If you cannot choose but from that another considers "good" choices, you are NOT free

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

[Reverenddel]

It's the slippery slope, People!

When you have the government telling you what you CAN, and CANNOT eat, drink, own, and say... they start to tell you what to THINK!

F'ck...That... Bluntly.

[GeneFrenkle]

One of the gov't arguments during the VA suit against ACA was their assertion about regulating decision processes...

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

[TomVA]

Back in the 1970s our government, armed with nutrition facts and knowing what was best for us, launched a war on fat in our diets. Simple logic - fat makes you fat, clogs arteries, and causes heart attacks. They created charts breaking foods into categories and told us how many servings of each we should have each day. Specifically we were told to eat lots of grains, breads, fruits, and pasta, all foods loaded with sugars and starches, and to reduce fats, oils, and red meats. All food packages were required to add labels advising us of the fat and cholesterol content, and the food industry jumped on the anti-fat bandwagon with low fat, heart healthy foods. And it worked - over the years they succeeded in changing the eating habits of America so we could all be healthy.

So here we are, 40 years later and what are the results? Strange - deaths from heart disease have not gone down, Americans are fatter than ever, and diabetes is running at epidemic rates. Could it be they got it wrong? And if so, at what cost to our citizens?

Here is an interesting article titled "What if It's All Been a Big Fat Lie?" with more details on this great experiment gone wrong with our health:

Http://www.nytimes.com/2002/07/07/magaz ... all&src=pm

Ten years ago, after years of avoiding fats I decided to turn the Food Pyramid upside down and went on a low carb diet. I tripled my meat, fat, and cholesterol intake, and eliminated virtually all sugar, grains, fruits, starchy vegetables, and pastas. After a year of such reckless eating, I not only was still alive, but my total cholesterol level was unchanged, my good cholesterol was up over 50%, and my triglycerides were down 75%. Oh, and I lost 43 pounds without ever being hungry. In fact, I'm still alive!

Based on current science it would appear the government is on the right path in wanting to protect us from the dangers of trans fats. But then the same could have been said 40 years ago when they attacked saturated fats, and in doing so increased the trans fats in our food. I suppose one could argue that protecting our citizens from such dangers is part of the role of government, but for goodness sakes, be damn sure you got it right!

TomVA

[alexr]

....
I suppose one could argue that protecting our citizens from such dangers is part of the role of government, but for goodness sakes, be damn sure you got it right!

TomVA

How about this instead:
I suppose one could argue that INFORMING our citizens about such dangers is part of the role of government, but for goodness sakes, QUIT TRYING TO TELL THEM WHAT TO DO AND LET THEM MAKE THIER OWN DECISIONS!!!

[Remek]

Its true that the science is not perfected, and theres no reason to believe theyre right this time.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

[Kreutz]

eliminated virtually all sugar, grains, fruits, starchy vegetables, and pastas.

How did you survive (psychologically and emotionally?) without these things?

Are you a sorcerer?

[Remek]

^^ now thats worthy of an answer!

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

[TomVA]

eliminated virtually all sugar, grains, fruits, starchy vegetables, and pastas.

How did you survive (psychologically and emotionally?) without these things?

Are you a sorcerer?

For me it was easy - I got to eat all the meat, nuts, eggs, sausage, cheese, and wine I wanted, along with many non-starchy vegetables such as mushrooms, eggplant, asparagus, cauliflower, and broccoli. I could live without bread, pasta, fruit, rice, potatoes etc. For the most part they are just fillers without much compelling taste of their own. And my weight was falling off so fast it was scary. I went from chubby to skinny in seven months. Not everyone can hack it, however. My wife, for example, grew up in Ireland - just try to take away her bread and potatoes! Fortunately she is already slim.

TomVA