Clementine
Platinum Member
- Dec 18, 2011
- 12,919
- 4,826
- 350
It seems that the point of this documentary is to point the finger at junk food companies and the claim is that they are responsible for people being overweight and that it's not fair to hold the individuals responsible. I really thought it was widely known that junk food just isn't healthy and that eating too much food is not a good idea. Grocery stores carry just about everything, from cookies to spinach. When you have children, and especially when you take them shopping with you, avoiding certain aisles is always a good move. No need to go down the candy aisle. While junk food abounds, there is also a produce section, fresh lean meats, fish and even diet meals and sugar-free items. It is a matter of personal choice. We can stop ourselves from gaining too much weight unless there is some condition that actually puts weight on no matter what.
I think people know better. I believe people develop bad habits and they are hard to break. Children especially don't want to eat carrots after they get a taste for candy, but that is on the parents. It's not ignorance so much as a lack of willpower. And the liberals in this documentary don't want people blaming obesity on lack of willpower or lack of exercise. But people know that what they are eating is bad for them and they keep doing it. I am interested to know what government intends to do to help them. If they really don't believe that people can help themselves, then clearing the store shelves of all junk food would seem to be their preferred method, but then they would no longer have nasty junk food companies to blame and if the problem was still there, then what? I would rather parents take that stand and clear the junk from their own kitchens. After all, the kids will eat those apples when they get hungry enough. Unfortunately, that hasn't happened so some nanny government supporters would like to take on the role of head of the household, all the while blaming companies for the problem with poor eating habits.
Michelle Obama's new lunch program isn't real popular with a lot of people. Of course, that is because some items are boring to people and the portions are skimpy. All that will happen is that students will eat twice as much when they get home and the school lunch won't help in the fight against obesity. Only parents who pass good habits onto their children will make a difference. I am guessing that some in government believe that it's necessary to change people by force, after junk food companies are either sued or taxed to death to pay for new programs. Have no fear, they don't want to ban sugar or junk food. Got to have those bad people around to take the blame when people find themselves supersized. They just want to make sure that the companies pay big bucks to atone for the fact that they exist in the first place and because they cajoled people into eating too much sugar and fat. And if you want to buy sugar, that's great, but it'll cost you. You can just never have enough taxes in liberal utopias.
Sugar Is Evil and Other Silly Claims in the Obesity Wars
I think people know better. I believe people develop bad habits and they are hard to break. Children especially don't want to eat carrots after they get a taste for candy, but that is on the parents. It's not ignorance so much as a lack of willpower. And the liberals in this documentary don't want people blaming obesity on lack of willpower or lack of exercise. But people know that what they are eating is bad for them and they keep doing it. I am interested to know what government intends to do to help them. If they really don't believe that people can help themselves, then clearing the store shelves of all junk food would seem to be their preferred method, but then they would no longer have nasty junk food companies to blame and if the problem was still there, then what? I would rather parents take that stand and clear the junk from their own kitchens. After all, the kids will eat those apples when they get hungry enough. Unfortunately, that hasn't happened so some nanny government supporters would like to take on the role of head of the household, all the while blaming companies for the problem with poor eating habits.
Michelle Obama's new lunch program isn't real popular with a lot of people. Of course, that is because some items are boring to people and the portions are skimpy. All that will happen is that students will eat twice as much when they get home and the school lunch won't help in the fight against obesity. Only parents who pass good habits onto their children will make a difference. I am guessing that some in government believe that it's necessary to change people by force, after junk food companies are either sued or taxed to death to pay for new programs. Have no fear, they don't want to ban sugar or junk food. Got to have those bad people around to take the blame when people find themselves supersized. They just want to make sure that the companies pay big bucks to atone for the fact that they exist in the first place and because they cajoled people into eating too much sugar and fat. And if you want to buy sugar, that's great, but it'll cost you. You can just never have enough taxes in liberal utopias.
Sugar Is Evil and Other Silly Claims in the Obesity Wars