Page 12 of 19 FirstFirst ... 21011121314 ... LastLast
Results 111 to 120 of 188

Thread: FDA Proposes Trans Fat Ban.....

  1. #111
    Guru
    soot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Last Seen
    04-25-17 @ 03:28 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    4,308

    Re: FDA Proposes Trans Fat Ban.....

    Quote Originally Posted by Henrin View Post
    So you think the necessary and proper clause is a catch all clause?
    I've already addressed that.

    Again, go back and read my comments.
    “Now it is not good for the Christian’s health to hustle the Aryan brown,
    For the Christian riles, and the Aryan smiles and he weareth the Christian down;
    And the end of the fight is a tombstone white with the name of the late deceased,
    And the epitaph drear: “A Fool lies here who tried to hustle the East.”

  2. #112
    Sage
    Visbek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 05:28 PM
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    10,020

    Re: FDA Proposes Trans Fat Ban.....

    Quote Originally Posted by GottaGo View Post
    By requiring the removal of X from food, it is effectively telling people what they can or can't eat. What is to stop them from doing so with anything else they deem 'unhealthy'?
    Legal challenges, executive oversight, public protest.

    I might add, this is not a particularly new thing. Nor, really, is it a bad thing, as heart disease is the #1 killer in the US. Nor would it be awful to ban, for example, types of food coloring that are carcinogenic.

  3. #113
    Sage
    Mach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Texas
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:25 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    11,519

    Re: FDA Proposes Trans Fat Ban.....

    Quote Originally Posted by Kal'Stang View Post
    Several years ago those "experts" agreed that whole milk was bad for you.
    In reality though, EVERYTHING is bad for you if you have it in excess. Its all about having things in moderation.
    Boiling that argument down it looks like this:

    Science is not infallible
    Therefore we should ignore science

    As to milk, whole milk has downsides, all food does, but no one was seriously trying to ban whole milk, so why are you comparing the two? The idea that because someone somewhere argued that the extraordinary amount of saturated fat in whole milk may not be good to drink regularly as an adult, is a far cry from banning trans fat because with regards to health it has only negative health effects.

  4. #114
    Sage
    Visbek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 05:28 PM
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    10,020

    Re: FDA Proposes Trans Fat Ban.....

    Quote Originally Posted by Kal'Stang View Post
    Several years ago those "experts" agreed that whole milk was bad for you. A few years after they said that they turned around and said whole milk was essential to a healthy diet.
    No one has ever said you must have whole milk, or any kind of milk -- except the dairy lobby.

    Milk does offer health benefits; and whole milk in conjunction with an exercise regime helps build muscle mass. It's still high in fat, though.


    [qutoe]At another point in time they said that eggs were also bad for you. Awhile after they they started saying that it was good for you due to the high protein in it.[/quote]
    Incorrect. The earlier belief was based on the high cholesterol content of eggs. However, we've known for a little while that eating foods high in cholesterol does not, apparently, raise your cholesterol levels; it appears that your body has a "set point" for cholesterol.

    No one has even remotely considered banning whole milk or eggs.


    All this reminds me of that commercial where it talks about "High fructose corn syrup" and how people thought it was bad for you...and then the commercial saying that it actually wasn't.
    At this time, no one knows if HFCS is or is not harmful. We do know that it is cheaper than standard sugar (which means it's used more broadly and abundantly). Neither are healthy, as all they do is provide empty calories. (The only exception I know of is that older people lose their sense of taste, but respond to sweet; adding sugar to a dish can make the food more palatable, especially for someone suffering from dementia.)


    Ironically experts had at one time said that it was bad for you also. And now.... They can't make up their minds worth crap.
    Research started showing the risks of trans fats around 20 years ago. The most persuasive evidence is from the Nurse's Health Study I, which started tracking diet in 1980 and has 120,000 participants.


    In reality though, EVERYTHING is bad for you if you have it in excess. Its all about having things in moderation.
    There is no safe amount of trans fats, and no health benefits to adding trans fats to food.

  5. #115
    Sage
    Mach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Texas
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:25 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    11,519

    Re: FDA Proposes Trans Fat Ban.....

    Are the effects permanent/cumulative?
    I ate me some serious trans fat growing up, people just didn't know any better.

  6. #116
    Sage

    Scrabaholic's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Ontario, Canada
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    11,579

    Re: FDA Proposes Trans Fat Ban.....

    Quote Originally Posted by soot View Post
    General welfare dude.

    Trans fats add nothing good to food and they detract from the general welfare.

    Too bad, but it's Constitutional.
    What about junk food with no nutritional value? Sorry, but it's not the function of govt. to say what we can or cannot put in our food. We have people here in Canada wanting the govt to ban trans fats, too. They can get bent, it's supposed to be a FREE country.

  7. #117
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Last Seen
    07-19-17 @ 03:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    60,458

    Re: FDA Proposes Trans Fat Ban.....

    Quote Originally Posted by soot View Post
    I've already addressed that.

    Again, go back and read my comments.
    Yes you did, but you related it back to the general welfare clause. That doesn't make any sense.

  8. #118
    Guru
    soot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Last Seen
    04-25-17 @ 03:28 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    4,308

    Re: FDA Proposes Trans Fat Ban.....

    Quote Originally Posted by Scrabaholic View Post
    Sorry, but it's not the function of govt...
    Sorry, but apparently it is.

    You can argue all day long that it shouldn't be, but here in America, at least, it's going to happen so it is a function of government.

    Too bad, so sad.

    That actually goes for everyone else I've been arguing with in this thread.

    I don't really know why I'm even wasting my time.

    I'm not going to see this your way, you "patriots" aren't going to see it my way.

    You don't think the government should do this?

    You don't think it's Constitutional?

    Whatever.

    Call your Congressman, file a lawsuit, start a God damn revolution over trans fats for all I care.

    This is pretty much a done deal.

    My side wins, your side loses.

    Don't like it?

    Hoist the Gadsden flag and start slitting throats, or something.
    “Now it is not good for the Christian’s health to hustle the Aryan brown,
    For the Christian riles, and the Aryan smiles and he weareth the Christian down;
    And the end of the fight is a tombstone white with the name of the late deceased,
    And the epitaph drear: “A Fool lies here who tried to hustle the East.”

  9. #119
    Quantum sufficit

    Threegoofs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    The birthplace of Italian Beef
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:17 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    26,659

    Re: FDA Proposes Trans Fat Ban.....

    Quote Originally Posted by Scrabaholic View Post
    What about junk food with no nutritional value? Sorry, but it's not the function of govt. to say what we can or cannot put in our food. We have people here in Canada wanting the govt to ban trans fats, too. They can get bent, it's supposed to be a FREE country.
    Seriously?

    You think we should have no guidelines on what is generally regarded as safe as additives in food?

    You're cool with melamine being fed to you and your perky little dog? Renal failure takes a while to develop, but think of the money you'll save! You're OK with no legal limits on arsenic? How about letting cows graze in pastures that have been contaminated with Benzene? How about fish caught around the Fukushima plant? It might be really cheap, although I'm guessing you probably are against mandatory company disclosure too, so you'll never know.

    In your post, I can think of no better example of Libertarianism/Conservatism combined with no actual consideration for the outcomes of a rigid ideology.

  10. #120
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Last Seen
    09-24-17 @ 04:38 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    29,261

    Re: FDA Proposes Trans Fat Ban.....

    Is Crisco still going be legal?

Page 12 of 19 FirstFirst ... 21011121314 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •