View Full Version : US Government will NOW dictate your food intake.
Team Sergeant
04-20-2010, 10:17
Socialized medicine now the government will dictate what you eat. No more "informed" intelligent decisions, you will eat less salt.
I think it's time to say NO to socialized government. I will eat all the salt I wish, anytime I wish and the first government "regulator" that attempts to stop me better have his/her will in order.
I've had enough of the current administration telling me how to live or what I will or will not eat.
Team Sergeant
U.S. Plans Drive to Limit Salt in Foods
Tuesday, April 20, 2010
U.S. regulators are planning a push to gradually cut the amount of salt Americans consume, saying less sodium would reduce deaths from hypertension and heart disease, The Washington Post reported on Tuesday.
The effort would eventually lead to the first legal limits on the amount of salt allowed in processed foods, the newspaper reported. The plan is to be launched this year but officials have not set salt limits.
The government plans to work with the food industry and health experts to reduce sodium gradually over a period of years to ratchet down sodium consumption, the newspaper said, citing U.S. Food and Drug Administration sources.
U.S. researchers said in a recent study that working with the food industry to cut salt intake by nearly 10 percent could prevent hundreds of thousands of heart attacks and strokes over several decades and save the U.S. government $32 billion in healthcare costs.
Eating too much salt is a major cause of high blood pressure, which the Institute of Medicine, one of the National Academies of Sciences, last week declared a "neglected disease" that costs the U.S. health system $73 billion a year.
The FDA, which regulates most processed foods, and the U.S. Agriculture Department, which oversees meat and poultry, will work together on the effort to reduce Americans' sodium consumption.
Manufacturers can now use as much salt as they like in products but they are required to report the amount on nutrition labels.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,591285,00.html
DJ Urbanovsky
04-20-2010, 10:25
I agree.
Many processed foods aren't that healthy for you anyway, but that's more because of what they put in or take out, not because they've got too much salt.
Because of this, what, now I'm going to need to get a CCSSL? Carrying a Concealed Salt Shaker License?
Team Sergeant
04-20-2010, 10:31
This isn't about salt, or food, it's about allowing the US Government to dictate what you will do as a "free" person.
This will not stop at salt.
This is a path to socialism, the government making decisions for you, because you're too stupid to limit your own food intake.
This needs to stop here and now.
At first i thought..."well, the cost of healthcare [private] will go down if people are living healthier, whether mandated by gov't or not", then I was hit in the head with a reality sledgehammer: They will find something else to keep the costs up.
I am not for socialized healthcare. But at the same time, i do believe that the medical profession and pharmaceutical companies are becoming more and more crooked. I simply don't trust them anymore than i trust a lawyer, JAG, most car salesmen, and politicians.
I will preface it this way....luckily myself and family have been healthy, nothing dramatic. I also know that I don't know it all. Having said that, when i go to the doctor, i don't need a look-over. All i need is his/her signature so i can go to the pharmacy for whatever i have self-diagnosed ourselves with. Blood work on the other hand, is a different story.
(I'm not for government regulating what we consume either)
armymom1228
04-20-2010, 11:43
..
Sierra Bravo
04-20-2010, 11:54
save the U.S. government $32 billion in healthcare costs".
pretty much sums it up in one line.
Sacamuelas
04-20-2010, 11:57
...luckily myself and family have been healthy, nothing dramatic. I also know that I don't know it all.
Your are right. lucky
Instead, you posted.
Having said that, when i go to the doctor, i don't need a look-over. All i need is his/her signature so i can go to the pharmacy for whatever i have self-diagnosed ourselves with. Blood work on the other hand, is a different story.
You obviously forgot what you typed in the prior sentence. Let me highlight it for you in case you've gotten distracted again and lost your train of thought.
I also know that I don't know it all.
Sound familiar? I could care less that you don't trust your docs or that you think they are crooked/overpaid. After all, I am not a MD. LOL
Please save the "I know best crap" unless you have the education/experience under your belt to justify the attitude. :rolleyes: You currrent confidence is based on paper thin reasoning and good luck with your past diagnosis. Things aren't always so simple in life.
Ask the parent of a child with leukemia that thought their child had bruises because she was iron deficient. All they wanted was iron supplements. How about the father who has a sore throat during allergy season that just wants meds? Then he finds out that those swollen lymph nodes ( which he didn't even notice) are due to pharyngeal cancer? These are extreme examples, but are reality to those crooked docs that you need to sign your RX's. :rolleyes:.
armymom1228
04-20-2010, 12:07
..
save the U.S. government $32 billion in healthcare costs".
pretty much sums it up in one line.
I have to wonder that if they hadn't taken over health care, would the savings really matter?
I say this while recognizing that if it wasn't health care it would certainly be something else:rolleyes:
From the USDA website. regulations and policy (http://www.fns.usda.gov/fns/regulations.htm)
TS? look over these programs and thier regs. Tell me is those regs socialism? Pretty much all of them have been in place for many yrs.
How much do we all weigh?
Step on the scale, please.
Where do you draw the line on the government helping you be healthy?
Hmmmmm, the IRS agent comes by. Has the family step on the scale and you are given added taxes based on how much you are overweight.
The Reaper
04-20-2010, 13:12
Welcome to the United Nanny State of America.
TR
armymom1228
04-20-2010, 15:22
How much do we all weigh?
Step on the scale, please.
.
Point taken.
One of my pet peeves is the amount of sodium in childrens cereal.
This isn't about salt, or food, it's about allowing the US Government to dictate what you will do as a "free" person.
This will not stop at salt.
This is a path to socialism, the government making decisions for you, because you're too stupid to limit your own food intake.
This needs to stop here and now.
Very well said, TS Sir!!!!!!!!!
Can just see the headline now:
"Near Bloodbath at local Restaurant Averted by Chefs!"..."
"Local residents were shocked last night when a group of government regulators busted into the kichen at Restaurant SF, demanding the chefs hand over their salt, or else! Responding quickly and quietly, the chefs immediately implemented their plan of action, and within thirty seconds, had the regulators disarmed, bound, gagged, and sitting on the loading dock for transport! Dinner service resumed, and no injuries or fatalities were reported." ;)
Utah Bob
04-20-2010, 17:16
Boy that's a load off my mind.
Now if they'll only tell me when to sh*t.
Hmmm......Will I need a permit to buy a can of Morton's salt??
Or will it just not be legal?
Maybe I could pay a transfer tax under the new NFA (National Food Act):rolleyes:
....Hmmm......Will I need a permit to buy a can of Morton's salt??................
Smuggling sea water to condense into salt will become a crime.
After trips to the beach families will be required to go through desalination stations to extract the excess salt.
After all, it's for the children.
Point taken.
One of my pet peeves is the amount of sodium in childrens cereal.
Not to mention the sugar.
Then again, I don't want the government telling me what I should and shouldn't have. Period. I know what I need to do to be as healthy as possible, I'm sick of the encroachment of this administration. Now that that pig of a health care bill has passed, they won't stop until they control everything.
I'm sick to death of people who expect the government to fix everything, to include the content of the foods they consume.
Yeah, personal accountability anyone?
http://www.kwch.com/Global/story.asp?s=12113952&clienttype=printable
Tax On Sugar In Pop Proposed In Topeka
by Cliff Judy (WICHITA, Kan.)
You may have to pop a few extra coins in the pop machine the next time you want a drink.
Sen. John Vratil, R-Leawood, introduced a bill Tuesday to tax the sugar in your soda. The tax would be a penny for every teaspoon of sugar, or about an extra dime for every 12-ounce can.
Pop drinkers say that could add up in the grocery line, and a new tax would mean less buying and less drinking. Debbie Davidson estimates her family of six drinks two two-liter bottles of pop a day.
"We would cut down a lot because we wouldn't be able to afford it," says Davidson. "Not the way that we drink it, no."
At TJ's Burger House in Delano, the idea of pouring customers a more expensive drink doesn't appeal to employees.
"We don't want to lose any customers or anything because of that," says Angela Abdayen. "I mean, we already get some complaints here and there that pop is already expensive."
Lawmakers believe the extra tax would raise $90 million in the next fiscal year. The current budget shortfall is expected to exceed $450 million.
Wichita Senator Jean Schodorf is on the committee looking at the tax. She tells Eyewitness News it's too early to know if the plan has much chance of passing this year.
More than half of the states in the U.S. already have a tax on soda. Even some cities like Chicago want to put a tax on the beverages.
Our exclusive Fact Finder 12 scientific survey found most Kansans, 63 percent, are against a tax on soda. Less than a third, 28 percent, support it.
The state's also considering extra taxes on cigarettes and alcohol to make money. Our survey found most people would support those taxes. The cigarette gains approval among 64 percent of Kansans, while 55 percent are for the alcohol tax.
It will end up like the Blue Law with no liquor sales on Sunday, it will solve nothing and in the long run cost the state money.....We'll drive across the state line to Missouri we're it cheaper.
Boy that's a load off my mind.
Now if they'll only tell me when to sh*t.
Hmmm......Will I need a permit to buy a can of Morton's salt??
Or will it just not be legal?
Maybe I could pay a transfer tax under the new NFA (National Food Act):rolleyes:
The BATFE will be regulating salt.
GratefulCitizen
04-20-2010, 19:04
They're trying to herd cats.
Bit by bit, people will realize that few laws will actually be enforced.
Methods of gaming the system will be learned and disseminated. Rapidly.
The rise of the "digital native" or "generation z" (those currently 15 and under) will be the death knell for big government and most big business.
Decentralized organizations, social and otherwise, will be the rule.
The libs just happened to surf the front bit of the wave into power.
The wave will grow, and break upon anyone still trying to surf it.
We just need to keep socialism at bay for about 10 years so the transition into the new way of doing things is less painful.
Hold the line.
They're trying to herd cats.
:D:D:D
They're trying to herd cats.
Hearding Cats. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1SmgLtg1Izw)
:D
Pat
You know, when I hear all of this malarkey about salt and everything else, I have to wonder. My great-grandmother (mother's side) was 102 when she passed. She dipped Garrett Snuff as long as I can remember. I had five generation pictures taken with her and my two daughters. My grandfather (father's side) was 94. I remember him rolling his own cigarettes until I was about 14, when he quit. My grandmother (father's side) was 88. My grandfather (mother's side) was 89. My grandmother (mother's side) was 86. They all grew up eating things like fatback, spam, eggs, bacon, salt cured pork, unhealthy things like that. Both of my grandmothers used to make all kinds of nice, sweet pies and cakes and stuff. If I live to be the age of any of them, I will consider myself to have had a long, fruitful life.
The problem is not so much what we eat, but the majority of the people need to get off their lazy asses and DO something! Our grand parents could eat what they wanted because they burned everything off working their butts off, not playing video games.
Team Sergeant
04-20-2010, 20:40
TS, the USDA has for many years, regulated what goes in the food we eat.
I don't have much of a problem with that.
Next time you go to the store, pick up things at random and try to understand _everything_ that is in what you have in your hand. What about that can of peas that has both salt and sugar added? One place they sure as hel can dictate is in kids cerials.. try one serving that has 260 grams of sodium. I won't even go into which ethnic group has a high percentage of hypertension and also has a high percantage of that group that feeds thier kids cereal. Suffice to say, that unless regulated and forced to cereal makers won't remove the sodium from cereal...or...soda.
Do you call regulating that all milk for commerical sale being pastuerized socialism because the government requires it? What about the dictum to stop transfat in cooking oil? is that socialism.. its all the same thing.
I agree completely that people need to learn to eat 'smart'. But in reality that dog don't hunt for a large portion of the population.
From the USDA website. regulations and policy (http://www.fns.usda.gov/fns/regulations.htm)
TS? look over these programs and thier regs. Tell me is those regs socialism? Pretty much all of them have been in place for many yrs.
armymom1228, The next time you wish to correct me or go head to head with me think again. The FDA does not dictate what we eat or how much. The FDA regulates food standards, set the standards for inspecting food, set standards for labels for processed foods, and sets standards for processing facilities and post gidelines and what we should eat. The only items they dictate is non-food items such as dyes.
No where does the FDA dictate what food items we consume, no where. Nothing in your FDA links dictate what we eat.
You do not need to answer me and don't PM me. Get your head out of your ass and your ducks in order before you decide to correct me again.
You are one of the sheeple.
Team Sergeant
You know, when I hear all of this malarkey about salt and everything else, I have to wonder. My great-grandmother (mother's side) was 102 when she passed. She dipped Garrett Snuff as long as I can remember. I had five generation pictures taken with her and my two daughters. My grandfather (father's side) was 94. I remember him rolling his own cigarettes until I was about 14, when he quit. My grandmother (father's side) was 88. My grandfather (mother's side) was 89. My grandmother (mother's side) was 86. They all grew up eating things like fatback, spam, eggs, bacon, salt cured pork, unhealthy things like that. Both of my grandmothers used to make all kinds of nice, sweet pies and cakes and stuff. If I live to be the age of any of them, I will consider myself to have had a long, fruitful life.
The problem is not so much what we eat, but the majority of the people need to get off their lazy asses and DO something! Our grand parents could eat what they wanted because they burned everything off working their butts off, not playing video games.
I believe the big difference might be, your Grandparents grew up on true home made fixings and they didn't pick up the processed shit on a store shelf. In addition I bet work entailed a bit more than parking their bum in an office chair.
These days the majority of folks idea of homemade means picking up some Juiced Up, Inbred Tyson Product, Stouffers Stove Top Stuffing, Canned Green Beans and a pie from the pie shop. And all that stuff has goodies that increase shelf live. It is all Processed, not Farm Fresh and unmolested.
My Grandma weighed at least 300lbs, she lived to be 87 and she cooked with such evil things as LARD.....that makes some mean pie crust BTW! If she would have had a grist mill she would have made her own flour.
ZonieDiver
04-20-2010, 22:22
The problem is not so much what we eat, but the majority of the people need to get off their lazy asses and DO something! Our grand parents could eat what they wanted because they burned everything off working their butts off, not playing video games.
You are right on target there!
I have a friend who is of Norwegian descent. His family hails from Kansas, and for generations have been farmers. His father is alive, at 80 something. His grandfather lived into his 90's. So did his great grandfather. They all worked outside for long days. Their fair skin constantly burned and peeled. They never got skin cancer.
My friend believes that skin cancer is caused by all the chemical crap we rub onto our bodies trying to prevent skin cancer, or promote suntans, etc. I'm not going to argue with him.
Irishsquid
04-21-2010, 04:34
Wah Wah Wah!! I fed my kids nasty shit, and now they're fat! Wah wah wah!
How's this. Let people keep feeding themselves and their children nasty shit. That's fine with me. They'll die of terminal obesity, or chronic fatass-ness, or some shit like that. My kids will not be fat, because I make them eat right and exercise. I do that because it is my responsibility. NOT the government's responsibility. If crappy parents want to feed their kids sugar-loaded cereal, salt-laden potato chips, and tons of soda, that's cool. I feel no obligation to help 'em out.
If you really want to regulate the food industry, simply remember it's a consumer-regulated industry. Stop buying the nasty stuff they sell...demand that they take the nasty stuff out of their food, or you won't buy it anymore. If there are not enough people standing up to make the food companies change their minds...then, well, your opinion must not be shared by the majority of people. So just stop eating it. How hard is that? Really?
1stindoor
04-21-2010, 06:46
How's this....So just stop eating it. How hard is that? Really?
Huh?...By myself? Without my tax dollars telling me what is and isn't good for me? This'll never work.
Soon the government will decide to heavily tax McDonald's, Burger King, Wendsy's, etc. Because their patrons are contributing to the obesity epidemic which of course carries a ton (no pun intended) of health care issues.
We already over tax alcohol and tobacco...fast food will be coming soon.
Utah Bob
04-21-2010, 09:40
My Grandma weighed at least 300lbs, she lived to be 87 and she cooked with such evil things as LARD.....that makes some mean pie crust BTW! If she would have had a grist mill she would have made her own flour.
Dammit now, lard makes fine stuff!:D
Team Sergeant
04-21-2010, 09:49
Huh?...By myself? Without my tax dollars telling me what is and isn't good for me? This'll never work.
Soon the government will decide to heavily tax McDonald's, Burger King, Wendsy's, etc. Because their patrons are contributing to the obesity epidemic which of course carries a ton (no pun intended) of health care issues.
We already over tax alcohol and tobacco...fast food will be coming soon.
This is what's next if the gov is allowed to dictate what we eat.
Then they will dictate to the restaurants and chefs told how much salt they are "allowed" to use.
It's a "stupid people" regulation designed for the idiots too stupid to read what's in their food. It's right up there with the moron that said "McDonalds made me fat."
Some people are too stupid to live.
But this is America, land of wealth redistribution, defender of illegal aliens and now proposed food legislator for stupid people.
GratefulCitizen
04-21-2010, 10:31
Words on paper.
It takes a sword to give power to the pen.
I'll obey criminal laws.
Civil law -- kinda depends on what the likely consequences are.
Most government bureaucrats aren't interested in pushing the issue.
They come in two types: the "I just work here" and the "I'm important".
The "I just work here" types won't take notice if you don't make yourself into a significant problem.
The "I'm important" types will warn you to get into compliance -- just tip your hat and play along until they find someone else to make them feel important.
Americans have always governed themselves, and will likely keep doing it.
The British learned that lesson the hard way.
I'm going to live within the limits of my conscience, not the limits of some bureaucratic nonsense.
Guessing that most Americans will do the same.
Irishsquid
04-21-2010, 18:06
It's amazing...I saw a news story today that said 75% (I think that was the number) of youth, ages 18-24, are too fat for military service. Fine with me. If they don't have enough self-control to avoid putting bad things into their bodies...I didn't want to serve with them anyway. That said, I still thought it odd that this study was apparently released right when the government is *probably* looking for more evidence to support the theory that they need to control what we eat. Now, controlling what we eat is a matter of national security.
Hmm. The national economy seems to be a focus for government control.
Let's see how that's going: LINK (http://cohort11.americanobserver.net/latoyaegwuekwe/multimediafinal.html)
Our federal government has promoted home ownership for decades. That turned out well. :rolleyes:
The term "war on drugs" was first used around 1969. Children are still using hard drugs. LINK (http://www.drugabuse.gov/infofacts/HSYouthTrends.html)
Now, government is going to manage our food. I'm confident about the outcome. Not in a good way...
Plutarch
04-21-2010, 18:53
They already have "speakeasies" in NY City where you can get food cooked with your choice of fat and smoke a cigar. Salt will be next on the menu.
My most immediate gripe is that this policy will give yet more oversight responsibilities to a federal bureaucracy that has proven incapable of meeting its existing oversight responsibilities. Before .GOV starts telling me what is healthy to eat, I'd like for it to get straight what is safe to eat.
My long term complaint is that this policy stifles both choice (among consumers) and innovation (in the medical and food service industries). In regards to the latter, is the logic of 'an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure' as sound in complex dynamics that include public policy, science, medicine, and technology as it is in everyday life? Should addressing a cause of heart disease trump finding a cure for heart disease?
IMO, these questions should addressed through informed debate, not through diktat.
Damn Yankees....... Always trying to tell you what you can and can not do.
I want to see them stop people from eating country Ham's down south. I have a bunch of nice ones in the smoke house and I dare them to try to take them out for the sake of protecting me from my self....:eek:
Utah Bob
04-22-2010, 13:38
Damn Yankees....... Always trying to tell you what you can and can not do.
I want to see them stop people from eating country Ham's down south. I have a bunch of nice ones in the smoke house and I dare them to try to take them out for the sake of protecting me from my self....:eek:
Mmmmmm. Ham!:lifter
Bacon too...
Don't they still encourage children to win the Presidential award or is there such a thing anymore?
ZonieDiver
04-22-2010, 14:47
Not only is the "Presidential Award" not around (if it existed today, it would probably be for being able to sneak off for a cigarette without being caught), in most schools PE is gone, too. So are most activities that involved running at recess - since kids were "picked on"!
Green Light
04-22-2010, 15:39
The BATFE will be regulating salt.
They'll have to change it to BATFEC: Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, Explosives, and Condiments.
No, it's not short for Bat Feces. :D
Speedgod
04-22-2010, 16:03
Not only is the "Presidential Award" not around (if it existed today, it would probably be for being able to sneak off for a cigarette without being caught), in most schools PE is gone, too. So are most activities that involved running at recess - since kids were "picked on"!
I agree that something has to be done at the school level. The plain outright obesity rate is horrible at elementary schools.
My oldest son who is a slightly heavier build had put on 10lbs from eating the shit in the school lunches. We have moved him off of them and onto home lunches and he has lost a inch or two off his waist line and is starting to slim out. We have friends even say they don't see the roundness in his face.
Now, my youngest was as fit as a stallion. Again, me and the wife had him on school lunches in kindergarten and into first grade. He also started to put on the weight. Same story as above once switched off of school lunches.
Something must be done and while I don't agree with the Government getting involved it has to change.
This is a stat I heard from a retired General "1 out of 4 adults from ages 17-24 is physically fit for military standards". That is an absolute joke. It should never be so low.
While some will argue again it doesn't matter if they don't want to join or if under conscription. Bottom line is, parents and schools need to implement PT :lifter and a healthier diet.
SG :munchin
This will not stop at salt.
This needs to stop here and now.
Amen, but the masses seem to be content with being led by the nose, onto the trains.
The media lables anyone that speaks up as either racist, or nuts. Look at the "tea party".
We are is a whole new world of touble, my friends. They will take, and take, and take, and take, until angry citizens show up on the steps of Washington with pitchforks. Then they will call the military to put down any "uprisings" by people who will be labled by the media as a "small group of unstable racists".
...and the masses will still be content, being led by the nose, onto the trains.
...and the masses will still be content, being led by the nose, onto the trains.
Let's see now. If I wanted to manage some sheep...sheer them for awhile, then ship them off for final processing...how would I do it?
Keep them calm, well-fed, distracted. Keep them in small pens. Restrict their activity. Supply them with their basic needs, in furtherance of the overall goals.
I suspect I would get a herd of fat, contented sheep. No need to lead them by the nose; just put the food dish on the train, and they will gladly trot up the ramp.
How fortunate that people aren't sheep, and so would never succumb to such a strategy.
...and the masses will still be content, being led by the nose, onto the trains.
So, this is why the Liberal Politicians are always pushing for Light Rail. Oh, and the fact that they, and their friends, buy up the land along the proposed routes and then sell it back, at great profit, years later when the construction begins.
Pat
I
Bottom line is, parents and schools need to implement PT :lifter and a healthier diet.
SG :munchin
Aye. As kids my brothers and I brown bagged it, mostly because it was too expensive to "eat out" every day. We were allowed a couple school lunches per month, ie: for pizza day or whatever. All that food is processed packaged crap. And we had PE every day. Every day. It was a very rare thing to see an extremely overweight kid in school back then...because of PE and because we didn't sit in front of a computer every afternoon and every waking moment during weekends. We were out playing, swimming, running, bike riding and walked everywhere. Hell I walked 1.5 miles one way to school every day until we were seniors and were able to drive. (barefoot and uphill :D )
Anybody ever catch the show on Friday nights about that dude from England that comes to W. VA to get the schools to start serving fresh foods?
The parents have to care. Especially the mommies...who's going to tell a pissed off mom no?
Speedgod
04-22-2010, 17:24
)
Anybody ever catch the show on Friday nights about that dude from England that comes to W. VA to get the schools to start serving fresh foods?
The parents have to care. Especially the mommies...who's going to tell a pissed off mom no?
I was trying to remember where it was and who it was, that went and made a big change in one states school lunch system.
Agreed on the PE every day. Now my kids get it once a week! WTF. It does nothing, if I did not have them into cycling, jogging, swimming and hockey.
I cringe whenever I see a child so overweight they can barely walk. It is heart breaking.
SG
I was trying to remember where it was and who it was, that went and made a big change in one states school lunch system.
SG
I've caught it several times, the guy's heart is in the right place and he got a lot of push back at first...especially from the lunch ladies. They still scare me, even though I'm not in school anymore...just like the nuns. ~shivers~ :D
greenberetTFS
04-22-2010, 17:28
Damn Yankees....... Always trying to tell you what you can and can not do.
I want to see them stop people from eating country Ham's down south. I have a bunch of nice ones in the smoke house and I dare them to try to take them out for the sake of protecting me from my self....:eek:
They better not screw around with my country ham with red eye gravy.... Once you've had it you'll fell like you've died and went to heaven..........:D
Big Teddy :munchin
No Presidential Award or PE! that's wonderful. Glad we live in the NF and my 4 and 2 yro love to be outside. I plan on keepin' a close eye on whats goes on at school when its time.
I remember I was bummed when I didn't win my goal of three, guess now its how many points you win in Mario brothers.
ZonieDiver
04-22-2010, 18:21
I misspoke. There is still a President's Physical Fitness Award Program. However, if most schools don't have PE, how the heck are the kids supposed to take part in it?
Utah Bob
04-22-2010, 18:22
Bacon too...
Don't they still encourage children to win the Presidential award or is there such a thing anymore?
I think they can get one for smoking.:rolleyes:
Well put...and lol utah bob!
I misspoke. There is still a President's Physical Fitness Award Program. However, if most schools don't have PE, how the heck are the kids supposed to take part in it?
Yes, the program (http://www.presidentschallenge.org/)is alive and well. As for how to participate, you simply sign up and log your activities, in or out of school. My kids earned the gold award some years back mainly through their year-round participation in sports, plus a little supplementation at home. I guess we're lucky, but our childrens' school (yes, the same school I grip about in regards to lacking leadership and mediocre at best teaching) they have gym class 2-3 time a week, spend a month working on the fitness challenge each year, work on running a mile for time in the fall, and <gasp> even play dodgeball and hockey. It appears, then, that there are islands of hope out there.
LibraryLady
04-24-2010, 12:55
They better not screw around with my country ham with red eye gravy.... Once you've had it you'll fell like you've died and went to heaven..........:D
Big Teddy :munchin
LOL
Betcha if you put your homegrown smoked hams up against the commercial crap in a lab test, the commercial stuff would win hands down with the higher salt content. ;)
Be over next weekend for a taste test... :p
LL
No toy for you, Junior.
Not if you live in unincorporated Santa Clara County, where the Board of Supervisors voted Tuesday to ban restaurants from giving away toys with children's meals that exceed set levels of calories, fat, salt and sugar.
The ordinance, which the board passed by a 3-2 vote, is believed to be the first of its kind in the nation. The target is the fast-food industry and what critics call its practice of marketing unhealthful food to children and fueling an epidemic of obesity among the young.
"This ordinance breaks the link between unhealthy food and prizes," said the law's author, Supervisor Ken Yeager. "Obviously, toys in and of themselves do not make children obese. But it is unfair to parents and children to use toys to capture the tastes of children when they are young and get them hooked on eating high-sugar, high-fat foods early in life."
$1,000 fine for violations
Representatives for the California Restaurant Association, whose members include chains that opposed the ordinance, have 90 days to offer an alternative to the legislation. Violations under the version the board approved Tuesday would be punishable by fines of as much as $1,000 for each meal sold with a toy.
Yeager said he hopes the law will inspire cities and counties across the country to follow suit like "ripples that create a wave."
The law bans toy giveaways in children's meals that contain more than 485 calories, derive more than 35 percent of their calories from fat or 10 percent from added sweeteners, or have more than 600 mg of sodium. The totals are based on children's health standards set by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
Of the 151 restaurants in unincorporated Santa Clara County that are covered by the law, a dozen are part of fast-food chains that offer children's meals.
The county was among the first in the nation two years ago to require restaurants to display nutritional values on menus, legislation that has since been adopted by other jurisdictions, said Miguel Marquez, acting county counsel.
Marquez said his office has been contacted by officials from Orange County, Chicago and New York City about Yeager's toys ordinance. In San Francisco on Tuesday, Supervisor Eric Mar asked the city attorney to draft legislation similar to Santa Clara County's law.
"Just as with menu labeling, this is clearly within our authority," Marquez said. "We're on firm legal ground here."
Marquez said enforcement will be the job of county public health inspectors.
Members of the California Restaurant Association were unsure if they will offer an alternative to the ordinance, said Amalia Chamorro, the association's director of governmental affairs.
"If the point is to get a dialogue going with the industry about health, that dialogue is already ongoing," Chamorro said. "If the point is to solve childhood obesity, taking away a toy isn't going to help."
Chamorro said her members will "obey the laws of the land," but she said she feared the new ordinance could unintentionally punish all child-friendly restaurants. "Where does it stop? Restaurants that offer crayons and coloring books?"
At least one parent, interviewed at a Burger King on Race Street and West San Carlos in an unincorporated area near San Jose, agreed with the restaurant group that the law amounted to government overreaching.
"I don't need politicians to tell me what I can and can't buy for my kid," said Chris Mackey, who bought his daughter, Cattie, a Kids Meal that included an "Iron Man 2" action figure. "We don't come in here every day, and I don't associate giving my daughter a toy with giving her bad food. This is a private matter between me and my child."
Mixed reactions to law
But Chris Markato of San Jose, 18, who said he sometimes buys children's meals for the smaller portions and value, said the law sounded like a good idea. "It's kind of sad when you see really big kids," he said. "They probably shouldn't eat so much sugar."
The supervisors suggested that Chamorro's restaurant group come back to the county with a plan that promotes more healthful food choices to keep the toys.
Supervisor Don Gage, who voted against the ordinance, said he would rather see county funding go toward teaching parents how to buy and prepare more healthful foods.
"If we're going to attack the problem, we need to do it with education of parents, not by taking a toy away from the kids," Gage said. "I agree obesity is a major problem, but it's not a 3-year-old who's buying the meals."
Link (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2010/04/28/MNLA1D5QFV.DTL).
This won't stop with our freedom to choose our own food to eat.
-Susan
1stindoor
04-28-2010, 13:29
I saw that story this morning as well. No toys...but you can still supersize your softdrink and triple your sugar intake.
What needs to happen IMNSHO is a grass roots boycott of ALL restaurants...when the city's tax base drops, the unemployment rate rises, and hours get slashed...maybe the restaurants will stand up to the local government and return control back to the people.
The Reaper
04-28-2010, 14:20
Mmm, mmm!
Unsalted tofu, coming to a restaurant near you.
TR
Green Light
04-28-2010, 15:15
People have the right to be stupid - what they eat or drink is their business. If they want to stuff their veins full of salt and have the top of their head blow off from high blood pressure, no sweat. I also have the right to not pay their medical bills. You pay for your own mistakes.
Our nanny govie is (not so) slowly taking away the people's ability to make decisions. We have all made bad decisions in the past and we learned from them (hopefully). All this is going to do is make the populace dumber. A dumb populace is controled the same as sheep.
People have the right to be stupid - what they eat or drink is their business. If they want to stuff their veins full of salt and have the top of their head blow off from high blood pressure, no sweat. I also have the right to not pay their medical bills. You pay for your own mistakes.
Our nanny govie is (not so) slowly taking away the people's ability to make decisions. We have all made bad decisions in the past and we learned from them (hopefully). All this is going to do is make the populace dumber. A dumb populace is controled the same as sheep.Agreed.
When you take away someone's opportunity to fail you are also taking away an opportunity to succeed.
IMO, the current administration (and many other Democrats) are bringing to public policy a selective (and deeply flawed) reading of John Stuart Mill. (Compare "The Spirit of the Age" [1831] to On Liberty [1859] to Utilitarianism [1863].) While a persistent theme in these works is that "cultivated minds" (i.e. learned elites--not the masses nor the common individual) have a better sense of where a society should go, Mill is unequivocally clear that individual liberty trumps the board.The only freedom which deserves the name, is that of pursuing our own good in our own way, so long as we do not attempt to deprive others of theirs, or impede their efforts to obtain it. Each is the proper guardian of his own health, whether bodily, or mental or spiritual. Mankind are greater gainers by suffering each other to live as seems good to themselves, than by compelling each to live as seems good to the rest.*
__________________________________________________ ____
* John Stuart Mill, Utilitarianism, part I, available here (http://www.utilitarianism.com/ol/one.html).