Quote:
Originally Posted by Cimarron29414
If only the question were that simple. I support a policy which forces companies to reveal the ingredients, calories, and potential health consequences of ingestible products so that Americans can make an informed decision about what they put in their bodies (and their children's bodies).
|
Do you have any sort of evidence that this is an effective way of doing anything but ensuring the obesity epidemic gets worse? People already know fast food is bad for them and are typically undereducated when it comes to knowing their own nutritional needs. Adding numbers is either going to have no effect or its going make things worse (
See Salad, Eat Fries: When Healthy Menus Backfire). Do you think that adding the Surgeon General's warning to packs of cigarettes was an effective anti-smoking strategy? I suspect not.
Do you think a society increasingly weighted down by the high social and monetary costs of obesity is going to net more or less freedom?
We've been relying on the personal responsibility-centric model for a long time. It is the model which has given us the obesity epidemic. Why do you think that it can provide the solution all on its own?
Where does this deification of personal responsibility come from? I doubt anyone who works in the marketing industry shares it.
Quote:
|
I oppose a policy which dictates what products a company can sell and what a person can consume.
|
Why? No one here is dictating what a person can or can't consume.