We are what we eat
 

As many of you know, I have maintained that we should create regulations to enforce against the production and advertising of the sort of food products that cause far more harm than good to our population. I have done this repeatedly and have been in a minority of just about one around here on this issue.

This means I've already received the many dozens of predictable responses that have as their source the attitude that people should take personal responsibility for their lives, their intake, etc. So I'm certain there will be the same sort of general response to this news. Nevertheless, I'll restate my position on mass-media mind control succinctly.

It is the height of absurdity to believe that average and normative individuals have the power or ability to withstand the onslaught of billions of dollars of research, and megadollar initiatives regarding how humans can be manipulated into consuming anything that is advertised heavily in the mass media. Therefore, government needs to take responsibility for deflecting the most deleterious messages that private industry is capable of wreaking on our population. This current change in policy is a beginning to the process of reclaiming the territory of diet and human health for the vast majority of our citizens.

.....................................

Policy shift energizes obesity field

The New York Times


The new policy announced by the federal government last week that enables Medicare to consider paying for obesity treatments may transform the weight loss field, obesity experts say.

For the first time, reliable data on methods for losing weight will be gathered, they say.

Health and Human Services Secretary Tommy Thompson announced Thursday that Medicare was abandoning a long-held policy that said obesity was not a disease, opening the way for the government to pay for a range of possible treatments, from surgery and diets to psychotherapy.

The government also said that to be eligible for coverage, treatments must be proved effective. To determine whether an obesity treatment works, Medicare says, it could end up paying for large studies of the treatment's effectiveness.

That could finally put hard data behind a notoriously fuzzy field and perhaps help millions of overweight Americans decide what to do, obesity experts said.

Mark McClellan, administrator of the federal Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, said he was expecting a deluge of requests that Medicare pay for treatments such as surgery, diets, behavioral therapy and exercise therapy. The agency does not pay for drug treatments.

An estimated 18 percent of the Medicare population meets the official definition of obese: a body mass index above 30, as would occur, for example, in a woman who was 5 feet 5 and weighed more than 180 pounds, or a 6-foot man weighing more than 221 pounds. With weight loss surgery costing $30,000 to $40,000 if there are no complications, the cost to Medicare of obesity treatments could be astronomical.

That depends on whether the agency decides that obesity treatments are effective.

One question is how to define success. Obese people want to look thinner. But academic obesity programs define success as losing 5 percent to 10 percent of your weight, said Gary Foster, clinical director of the weight and eating disorder program at the University of Pennsylvania. That, he says, is the amount of weight loss needed to improve blood pressure, glucose levels and cholesterol levels. People may still be fat, but healthier.

Other experts, such as Jules Hirsch, an obesity researcher at Rockefeller University in New York, say there is another definition of success: getting rid of the weight problem for good.

“At the end of the treatment, are they now like all kinds of other people who never had the problem of obesity?” Hirsch said. “By that definition, there has been nothing that works.”

..................

Personally, I would welcome some form of change in the American Diet. There is a definate problem with "fast" food, and "junk" food in our society which is creating the foundation for disease.
It is unlikely people will simply decide to eat better on thier own, as the industry makes it far to easy to get a burger and fries on your way home from work. Part of the problem is the sedintary lifestyle of Americans, and this can be partially blamed on the amount of work hours we all put in.
After working for 40-60 hrs. a week (Average work week in America is 52 hrs. *NY Times 2003 data*) It is far more likely we will want to relax after work and grab a quick meal. This has contributed to an unhealthy and stressed home life. When you consider the impact on family, and children, we simply do not have the time to be healthy.
This is one of the many reasons I have asked my wife to stay out of the work force, and have commited to struggling thru a single income lifestyle.....in my opinion, it is worth the effort, as my kids are well adjusted (so far) and very healthy.

I agree with both of you. Clever marketing brainwashes us into believing that whatever is easiest to cook is what we should go with- and cook? Why cook when McDonalds is just down the road?

In grocery stores, healthy food (what healthy food they may carry) is placed WAY out of your path, while boxed meals and bagged snacks take up 3/4ths of the store and are in the most accessible areas.

The government finds a way to regulate and monitor everything else; I would be more than happy if they stepped in and did this, because as much as I try, it is just too overwhelming to do on my own.

What have do-nuts, burgers, chicken-wings, hot-dogs and coffee all have in common?

Astronomical profit margins, that's what.

I avoid fast-food outlets in support of local businesses rather than for health reasons.

___________

Part of my work involves converting houses for disabled people under contract from the local council. The cost of the conversion is taken from the 'Disabled Persons Adaptations' purse which is ultimately paid for by the tax-payer. Over the years I have met quite a few people afflicted with obesity.

These are people who are so fat that they can't get out of their front door or can't negotiate a normal staircase due their surplus girth.

On top of that, once a person hit's the 'golden-weight' they are given extra money on their dole cheque to pay for all this extra food. It's fucking insane.

How can a person do this to themselves if they can't get out of the house?

In every situation that I have come across there is a partner involved who is slowly but surely feeding their other half to death. I often get the impression that the feeder is fully aware of what they are doing.

One job that comes to mind is a 40stone man who had to support his specially made wheelchair/commode on cooking pans to prevent the wheels collapsing. When I arrived to take some measurements he told his wife in his gruff voice "move my fucking pans, I need a shit." which was met with a cold glare from his wife though she did, after a great struggle, move his fucking pans. It's in situations like these where opinions on euthenasia are formed.


p.s.
Unfortunately the man died before the work was completed which meant I only got 50% of my fee. Bastard.

The problem isn't just fast foods, though. Even if your wife DOES stay home and cook all your meals, it's very possible that you still end up cooking high calorie/fat meals because of all the different butters/oils people use these days, as well as the dsitorted views of portion sizes.

I really think that the main problem isn't really the type of food that we eat, it is the portion size.

Obviously, fast food, as well as many other foods that people may purchase in typical grocery stores are unhealthy, but I really think that more of the problem lies in portion size.

Basically, many children were brought up with Depression-era thinking, "eat everything on your plate, hungry or not"

Well, now that our plate consists of a half gallon of soda, a pound of fries, and a 3/4 pound burger, we still continue to do it.

In addition to the monsterous proportions that people are fed nowadays, the fact that people feel guilty about wasting money, combined with the fact that most fast food places offer something like "Buy a meal for $4.99, spend an extra .39 and get 10 extra burgers!" does not help the situation at all.

Art, I agree with you wholeheartedly as far as the mass media mind control aspect. I don't think many people realize how much their lives are affected by this. When they pull into McDonalds, I don't think they even consider why/how they are there, as opposed to a healthier alternative. Basically, I think people have difficulty admitting that in large masses, they are as easy to herd as sheep. Billions of dollars a year wouldn't be spent on research and advertising if it didn't work.

NoSoup, Yes. There also exists a great deal of defensiveness and denial preventing people from admitting they are relatively powerless against the behemoth of persuasive technology. This adds nothing but noise to the necessary dialog and action to engage this ever-increasing threat to the kind of personal autonomy and responsibility we might possess.

even more of a concern than the general push to eat unhealthy food is the fact that much of the advertising dollars that the manufacturer spends goes towards pushing unhealthy eating at children. i am baffled as to how our society can continue to let corporations court children. kids cannot differentiate between healthy and unhealthy foods and parents cannot possibly compete with the food industry which not only targets children through advertising (something i think we should consider regulating as is done is part of europe) but has infiltrated schools. Children should not be offered mcdonalds as their school lunch.

I use smaller plates and smaller utensils....

and I try to stop eating when I am no longer hungery, not continuing until I'm full

WTF? Of course it's YOUR OWN FAULT if you can't resist a frikkin commercial! If everyone was buying everything that marketting money was put into, everyone would be frikkin broke!

I'm 23, a female, and I'm proud to say that I have not eaten at McDonalds or any similar place since I was about...mm...10 years old? With the exception of that one time I tried (and was disgusted) by their new salads.
I know a good amount of other people who DONT EAT THERE. If there was some of mass mind control going on, then how would so many people I know be able to resist it?

I mean, COME ON PEOPLE! Why is it so hard to take responsibility for your actions? Yes, look down at your 25 rolls and say "This is MY FAULT. I am a lazy BUM. I can't get off my ass to so much as cook spaghetti and I like to eat bad food."
Don't blame the media because you can't sit down with a bottle of coke and only drink one glass. ITS YOUR OWN FAULT! Learn to have some control! Nobody is sitting down and forcing that bottle of coke down your throat. Nobody is driving your car to McDonalds.


You say that the media causes it? Please, tell me how? Because I don't know about you, but when I turn on MY television or open a magazine, I see beautiful people in beautiful clothes. They give me something to strive for. Then there are ads all over the television and magazines saying "lose wight now!" "lose weight!" "lose weight!" If we were really that brainwashed by the media, we'd all by heroin sheek by now.


All we have to blame, at the end of the day, is our sedementary, lazy lifestyles. If you eat at McDonalds for three meals a day, 7 days a week, you have a problem. COOKING is NOT THAT HARD. There are lots of easy meals - hell, I think even slim fast has some TV dinners now. And there are tons of power bars out there that you can eat for breakfast or lunch. Or you can even just make a fruit smoothie with yogurt. Just pour some stuff in the blender, pressa button, pour, and run. THESE THINGS ARE NOT HARD. People just can't get over the fact that a smoothie isn't oozing oil.
Hell, I know a few chicken recipes where you just put some stuff on a baking sheet or something and stick it in the oven for a while. This takes practically NO EFFORT. The only way that's a problem is if you can't press the buttons on a timer.


People need to learn to get off their lazy asses and move away from the television long enough to burn some calories. Another huge problem has nothing to do with where people eat - lack of excersize. With cars these days, people have no reason to get off their asses. JOIN A GYM (and actually go). Yes, it will take work. Yes, you will suck when you start....but, hell, don't you think breaking a sweat is worth it if it adds an extra 10 years to your life and maybe even...*gasp* helps your love life?

SO get off your lazy ass, stop blaming others for your own lack of control, and get to the gym. Oh yeah, and eat a powerbar on your way.

Yes. Thanks for your opinion regarding the myth of free-will. It's a grand one and it has inspired strong individuals to attain better lives for themselves. Unfortunately, most people are not strong-willed individuals. The main reason for that is because there are cultural factors that send negative-self-image messages to us every second.

Most of the rest of the world is not so strong willed. Taking a look around makes that clear. I wouldn't say ranting and raving at them to take more responsibility for their lives is an effective way to improve the condition of the world. It it were that easy, I'd certainly advocate it. As it is not, I am in favor of legislation to protect society at large from the manipulativeness that has been proven highly effective in persuading people to buy advertised products.

We wake up in the morning in advertised bedsheets, brush our teeth with advertised dental products, put on advertised makeup and clothing, eat advertised foods for breakfast, drive advertised cars to work and listen to advertised music on advertised radio stations, read advertised magazines and watch advertised films, etc.

mmmhmm...just because we own products that have been advertised doesn't mean we buy it *for the advertisements*. MY toothpaste is a brand my friend reccomended to me. My sheets, I found in a store and bought because I liked the pattern/texture. I buy magazines to see the beautiful people and beautiful clothing but I don't go out and buy $500 prada shoes when I'm done looking through it (although I might like to).

Just because you are so weak-willed that you just do everything a commercial tells you and you have no self control, you shouldn't blame other people.
Negative self images should, if anything, make people more motivated to achieve higher and better themselves. The reason I started going to the gym every day is because I simply wasn't happy with how I looked. Instead of sitting around and wallowing in self pity and whining about how bad you look or how controlled by society you are, DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT. There is no media marketting telling you to NOT excersize. So why are so many people just sitting on their asses?

IN all seriousness...it doesn't take strong will to not buy a burger when you see a McDonalds commercial. How does pointing out that it's no one's fault but their own NOT help them? WHat ever happened to "the first step to fixing a problem is admitting you have one?" ONce people realize that their own actions can change things, they will start to take action (if they care).

And don't tell me I don't know what I'm talking about - I've been in a situation where I just felt like I had no choice but to fail at things and I just wanted to blame my parents for all my shit (I had abusive parents growing up). But I realized that blaming them wasnt helping ME. It was just inhibiting me to think that I wasn't in control. This is the same thing, only with a different subject.

But I really don't think it's going to help to argue with you. I just wish people would stop looking to blame anyone but themselves for where they are in life.

Trisk, were you overweight when you lost all that weight by diet and exercise and eating powerbars?

Yes. Actually I am not one of the weak-willed persons. I take this position in the interest of my fellow citizens. I see it as a social responsibility initiative. These have proven historically necessary restraints on the pure operation of the capitalistic marketplace which by its own logic has zero social responsibility. We have many such regulations in place.

The arguments regrding free will and responsibility have no relationship at all to the situation as regards children. I prefer that the forces of unregulated capitalism are not the prime programmers of our nation's youth.

No I was never seriously overweight or obese. I'm just saying that there are healthier alternatives to McDonalds (and Mcdonalds isn't exactly good for feuling excersize).

I have, however, seen a friend who was over 200 lbs cut out junk food, eat healthier, excersize and lose 40-50 pounds. So, yeah, it can be done.

My mother had weight problems around my age so I'm assuming I could easily get there. I just pay close attention to my diet/excersize routine and, as of now, it seems to be working.

Diet and excercise. That's all that is needed. One problem is that the weak minded America is so fad oriented that they float from one diet fad to the next and one trendy excercise program to the next (Atkins, south beach, taebo, gastric bypass surgery, etc.). They want instant results and when they don't get them they do off the diet and end up in worse shape than they were at first.

I can't wait until the low-carb craze ends and I can go back to buying steak at a reasonable price. $11.99/lb for a ribeye is fucking insane.

I think that the solution to a complex problem is always a complex answer. And in this case, it's "both/and": BOTH personal responsibility AND regulation to make healthy choices easier to make.

You can't realistically insist that people be iron-willed at all times when the vast majority of choices around them are unhealthy, and the messages they're being bombarded with encourage indulgence and instant gratification, not long-term well-being. It's all fine and good to insist that people SHOULD do that, but if you're going to find a workable solution you need to be realistic and work with people's capacities and not insist that they live up to some ideal.

Similarly, you can't expect government to protect us from ourselves all of the time. I don't want butter to be rationed depending on your cholesterol, or for unhealthy options to be eliminated completely. But I do think that advertising is way over the fucking top, especially when aimed at children when they're forming habits and preferences that are hard to counteract, however good a parent you are. It's not enough that billions of dollars are spent figuring out how to make people buy products - they're startign to do neuroimaging of subjects while watching advertising so they can see if ads are activating the "right" centers of the brain, the parts that determine whether you're really turned on by the ad. Granted, it doesn't guarantee that you're going to act on that impulse, but it makes the advertisers that much more effective at steering you in the direction of making a choice that is favorable to THEM, not necessarily to YOU. I find it frightening, and I think that something needs to be done to curb the power of corporations.

My point is that not all overweight people got there or stay there because they are lazy and sedentary. It is not easy to lose weight, as I am learning, and have many others. Instead of belittling people for not being the ideal weight or size, society should applaud those who at least try.

You know, this whole arguement has a lot in common with other media-related arguements. One in particular I can think of is video games. Parents wanted the video games to be rated by age group and have certian games require an ID to buy. Couldn't we have said "Do it yourself, parents! It isn't hard! Why make someone else do it!" But it happened. Parents could not control what their children played, so they had the toy stores do it for them. The same with TV- how often do you see strictly adult commercials on while the sun is still out? If the government can control that much media, why not control it over this, too?

lurkette, a brilliant entry and contribution. Thanks much for the balanced view! Your statements make such obvious sense here. You are right, of course...

We need moderation and we also need to get back to eating more natural foods.

The new sweetener craze is splenda. We need another artificial sweetener? Each one that has been approved has eventually shown that it has effects that are worse than real sugar. What will we learn about splenda in 10 years? How about just using less real sugar overall?

Margarine has trans fatty acids. Bad news. Try less butter or substitue olive oil or canola oil.

Why the hell do we need to inject raw chicken with 15% broth solutions in order to "enhance the flavor?"

I'm sorry Rubyee...I'm not trying to belittle people. It just makes me angry when people try to blame big corperations and the media for stuff like this. Really, all I'm saying is that this is a bad attitude because when people have something aside from themselves to blame, they begin to think that it has nothing to do with them and they can't fix it. Therefore, they never even try.

ARTelevision's attitude is that nobody can even so much as *try* to lose weight because they are so brainwashed by the media. If you have tried and my posts offend you then I'm truly sorry. But the fact that you so much as tried probably means that you cut out McDonalds and other crap foods for enough time to notice whether there was an impact or not....in which case, ARTelevision is still wrong because according to him, the media makes it impossible to resist McDonalds for that long.

I just think that it's the next step in the "blame the x" mentality in America. We can't fix our problems so we look to the govt to fix it for us.

I lost nearly 100 pounds 2 years ago. It's still gone. I understand that some people have unusual abilities in some areas.

I only respond to assertions that I actually make. I'm very careful about my choice of words. I don't respond to inferences.

I know you didn't mean any harm. No offense taken here :) !

The problem is not only that people cannot say no to what they see on tv, but what control the media has over aspects other than our choices and preferrences, like price and availability.

If you are trying to eat healthy, then good for you! But you had better have the money to do so. Since the media popularizes what it wants, fast food for example, fast food becomes more prevalant because more people want it more due to the media, which makes it easy to find, and it also forces the prices down.

However, mom and pop organic store down the street has to raise their prices to be able to compete. They could make a commercial, sure, but the media has control over those prices, too, so it would be even harder.

I think that a lot of things in life could be better with no advertising. In fact, lets get rid of the TV, billboards, and any printed material that cannot be proved to be of importance altogether!

Funny, I actually want to go into advertising. I would love to make and direct television commercials.

for those that have different values than you, you have to admit that it is POSSIBLE that it can be "impossible" for others to resist.

I try to eat healthy and I do go thru spurts where I don't eat at McDonald's, but there are times that I do because of convenience.

I agree It isn't I cook as often as I can. When I was single I hated cooking for just me. I love to cook. I love to cook for more than just me though. It's not all that compelling to just cook for myself. For my wife, I do cook as often as I can as healthy as I can for lunches and dinners (not as much for health reasons but for financial ones)

But look at what you yourself have posted in my quote. You have listed 2 products that have been heavily marketed.... seems to me that the media has made an impression on you.

For the record, smart ones, slim fast, Weight Watchers, Healthy Choice, are better alternatives, but not as healthy since the food is still processed and usually high in sodium.

As for smoothies, I do love going to Jamba Juice. But I don't find it as satisfying as having a hot cooked meal.

As I was reading this I was eating a bowl of cheese dip :-p... Thats not normal for me, but I saw it in my fridge so I grabbed it rather than making the sandwich I really wanted... It is very easy to pick the fast food rather than the good food... and after making the wrong choice I am not even satisfied. i feel a little sick.


Parents are responcable for teaching their children about a healthy diet. Unfortunately most adults dont know what a healthy diet is... I agree it is a growing problem, but I have no idea how to go about fixing it.

and with that im off to go get some fruit.

I wouldnt recomend conola oil... I have heard some bad things about it... but yes olive oil is the only thing I use in my home. For many reasons... the main reason being that it is so tasty.

You can eat healthy for a reasonable price. It just takes patience and creativity. Rice, beans, and potatoes are all very cheap and will provide the carbs and starches you need. Veggies are all pretty inexpensive. For $2 you can buy a bunch or lettuce and a bunch of spinach or a pound of green beans. Add a reasonable amount of protien via chicken, pork, beef, or seafood and you have a well balanced meal at an affordable price.

I still haven't been able to apply this to my lunch schedule. Although I like eating leftovers it doesn't get me out of this hellhole office of mine. Therefore, fast food here I come. :)

Fast food is hardly even affordable anymore. It seems like everything I get ends up costing $5-6 bucks.

I've drastically cut down on canola oil. However it's just because my wife can't stand the smell of it while she's been pregnant. Pregnant women are crazy.

People eat out at fast food restaurants for convenience, but I think that people are literally *addicted* to it. Not that it taste's overly good, but people are still addicted to the taste. They love the greese, the salt, and it makes them happy to eat frenchfries, and a bigmac.
When I want to eat fast food, I usually go get a pita or a sub, I mean, it is possible to eat healthier fast food. But people are drawn to the taste.

Next thing will be something like this: "We should not punish car robbers, but the car industry, because they are responsible for putting in the robber's minds the irresistible desire to own a vehicle they can't pay for". C'mmon!!! everybody is responsible for their own acts, lets stop taking responsability away from those who has it.

You're certainly on to something here, but the only thing that will stop corporate America will be us. Obviously millions are being led around by their wallets willingly by advertisers. Do you really think companies spend five or six million dollars for a thirty second Super Bowl ad just so we can have a few laughs around the water cooler the next day? You'd better believe these ads are working, otherwise, there wouldn't even be a Super Bowl to watch.

Damn hard thing to do, just say no. I know I can't many times. Those bastards and their catchy little jingles and pretty, colorful images. Bastards. Maybe though, the next time I get ready to cave, I'll think of this thread.

Really a very good discussion of far-reaching consequence. Thanks for everyone's good contributions.

I would argue that on one hand people are GREATLY influenced by what they experience in the media. I don't like the term "mind control" as it completely strips the individual of ANY responsibility. That said it is impossible to ignore the impact of the messages we recieve from the media and how they shape our lives. Again, this is especially odious as it relates to what is being "sold" to our children. Some norther European countries have banned Television ads aimed a children. I am all for this.

The other side of the equation is us... people... citizens. Clearly many of us are not eating healty food or are overeating as obeseity is at an all time high. Clearly we can "escape" the pull of the media and eat healthy and live well, as evidenced by Art (100 pounds is nothing to sneeze at... bully for you!). I agree with Trisk that many of us are weak willed and continue to make terrible choices... I want to scream, "Get up off you Fat LAZY ass and do something!"

Not all the time, but when I see extremely overweight people who have to ride around on electric scooters because they have blown both of their knees (scooters paid for in whole or part by the public health care system) I get a bit cranky. I love the public health care system but don't like paying for other's lack of self-control.

It is always easier to grab a frozen pizza pop than it is to make rice. Fast food and even a lot of what we buy in the grocery store is produced from crap that is not good for us... Trans fats, nitrates, various additives, etc. The food industry loves these things because they increase profits -- they create shelf stable products that will stay "fresh" a long time... they cost less to manufacture... take your pick of reasons.

But are they healthy in the long run?

We need stronger regulations on the kinds of food that are sold. We need stronger regulations on how Corporation market those products to us. We need reguations with teeth that will make difference.



I say, use the system. Spend government money marketing healthy living. Give tax breaks to Corporations that bring healthy foods to the market and tax those that don't. Educate the public on what is exactly in their foods... the new lables indicating the presence of transfat is a start.

The government already does this with some products. Cigarrettes. Do you ever wonder why cigarrettes cost so much? The cigg companies get taxed up the ass by the government because they're not healthy. I'm not sure about the truth ads but maybe the government even puts some money into that.
Still...people do what they want to. Lots of people still smoke....even when it's starting to be banned in lots of resturaunts and bars (the whole of NYC did this and I believe places in Cali did this too).

As for educating people about what's in their foods...I believe this is taught in health education in high school and middle school. There are already labels on most foods saying the ingredients and nutrition facts. I'm not exactly sure how people can be forced to read them.

I guess it wouldn't be too hard to incorperate these policies into other things...but there's a point where it crosses the line. More government involvement is never a good thing. Nobody wants the government telling them what to eat and what not to eat.

My wife may stay at home, but she does not "cook all my meals". She is a vegetarian though, so when she does cook, it is very healthy. We do try to shop organic, and use fresh fruit and veggies as a mainstay in our diets. Still, we eat fast food two or three times a month, because it is easy, and seems a treat to the kids.

I agree with some of the things you said Charlatan but I'd stop short at involving taxes. I'm totally opposed to sin related taxes, but this is what you get after going after the tobacco companies. When we started taxing smokers few people thought it would lead to a tax on unhealthy foods. We get closer to that every day.

I'm not in favor of the government removing types of ingredients we can use but would be in favor of more regulation aimed at how advetising is made. I thought that subliminal messages were banned some time ago, it's time to increase that to include methods like those mentioned by lurkette.

The funny thing is that a frozen pizza takes over 20 minutes to make if you include the time it takes to heat up the oven. In that same amount of time someone can cook two cups of rice (real rice, not minute rice), steam some veggies, and cook some chicken. It's so much healthier and it doesn't even take longer. Sub a baked potato for the rice and you can cut the prep and cooking time down to about 15 minutes.

I believe the government should stay out of controlling advertising. That moves away from the core principle of a free-market economy and starts moving us towards a command economy. Best idea, government keeps a minimal part in the economy (pretty much just regulating monopolies), and let the economy work naturally. McDonalds did not become a massive corporation because the government made it that way, people paid for burgers and they grew to be a massive multi-national corporation that sells millions of burgers a day. If people have a problem with fast food, they should stop eatting it.

Limiting advertising creates another problem too. People could lose jobs due to decreased demand in the fast-food industry, and what about people like me, who can control what they eat and say, once a month decide, "Hell, I guess I'll just pick up one of those nice flame-broiled whoppers on my way home" after hearing a commercial? Not everyone gets fat from eatting fast food.

Last, about wieght loss: it really isn't too difficult. Best way to lose weight is to watch how many calories you are eatting a day, and to seriously work out. Last summer I lost a little wieght and built up a little bit by doing just that; I cut down how many cokes I drank, stopped eatting ice cream, and ran down to the gym from 9 to 10 at night 5 times a week and lifted wieghts. Simply increasing your heart rate to a steady rate for an hour burns a ton of calories.

Anyway, I think I covered it all, from the economy to dieting, hah.

Advertising is fine until it starts to encroach on mind control. Hooking people up to neuroimaging devices in order to see how the ad effects viewers is way too close to mind control.

I would really like to see some response to advertisement directed at children. the fast food mentality is something that we are raised with and it is incredibly difficult to resist a product that was pushed at you during an impressionable time. Additionally some schools are also being encouraged *NOT* to include basic dietary guidelines in their health classes because fast food and soda industries are supplementing their funding through cafeteria lunches and vending machines. we cannot expect adults to make healthy choices if they are not armed with the information to make such choices. One could argue that parents should take more responsibility but it is incredibly difficult for parents to counterbalance billion dollar industries. As things stand now our society is getting less and less healthy and the cost is being passed on to everyone through higher insurance premiums. we have a problem and, as art stated, yelling at people to be more personally responsible is not going to solve it.

nope. teaching them how to handle and deal with responsibility and consequence will.

Seriously. The quality of school lunches needs to increase big time. Before we even worry about the shit our kids get from McD's we should worry about what the government feels is acceptable for our kids to eat.

This is true, I never went to public schools so I had no idea what these kids ate untill recently. I now realize why all these kids are "ADD" now... they all eat crap food all day and their brain can not function!

What I was taught had no real relevance to anything I knew. It was all obscure bits of information that required a preexisting understanding of the subject that I dind't get until much later, so none of what I was taught had any impact, as none of it had any relation to what I knew about eating. Eating was just another activity like games, TV, movies, magazines, etc.


That is where advertising comes in. Billions wouldn't be spent on advertising by companies if more billions weren't too be earned from it, it works, it takes more than simply having in your head that it's bad for you. We're bombarded by so much information daily that it takes more than simply knowing something to have it affect your life.

I personally don't believe that being bombarded by so much crap information is healthy for anyone. For most adults I'd wager that, assuming they are sound of mind, they can take that with no ill affect. Children however know nothing, their environment has the most affect on them and the two biggest influence in most children's lives now adays it seems is the Education system and the media. Neither of which I think should have much influence on a child outside of skills and consumer awareness.

I don't about you, but I was brought up to be a monkey of consumerism and reinventing myself is quite energy consuming, I can't just up and change myself, my environment as a child was so riddled with horseshit that any good information about how to live had it's meaning perverted to suit the purposes of what I was being raised to be, a monkey of the US brand of rampant consumerism.

"Hah" indeed Mr. Aroe, "hah", indeed.



One thing I'd say is a great issue for society is the public education system, school was usually the least mentally stimulating activity I had all day. It quite literally had a negative affect on me overall, and up till 6th grade I was teaching myself probably about 3x times the amount of junk they taught us in roughly an hour a day of personal studies, most of high school was a refresher, the schools I went to were pathetic and most of the people knew considered them the standard, and feeling the standards were too high, generally fell a bit below what was expected.

I, as an obese American lemming who loves to eat and whose mind has long ago been taken over by corporate advertising gamma rays via the delivery sytem known as TV, resent the fact that anyone else should tell me what I shouldn't eat, and that its wrong to eat at McDonalds or White Castle or Subway. In case anyones never been there, Burger King makes a damn tasty double cheeseburger that I hope to enjoy til the day I die.

And speaking of dying, so what if I die from heart disease, its a reasonably acceptable way to kick off as far as Im concerned. I'd rather die from clogged arteries than drown or get shot or get hit by a drunk driver or get a brain aneurysm. I don't understand this institutional concern over obesity, seems like yet another way for somebody already rich to get even richer.

Leave the fat people alone. Go pick on the skinny people. I can't stand bony girls with no ass. And to those fat people looking to make a buck by suing the advertising industry, just stop, you fools. This is America, built on entreprenuership. Find another way to make a buck.

The day I want to lose the fat, I'll know what to do. Until then: GIMME A CHEESEBURGER, DAMMITT!!

As long as you are comfortable with yourself that's cool with me. I have to disagree with you on the BK double cheeseburger though. Whenever I eat that, my burps taste like BK for the rest of the day. I've completely stopped eating there because it grosses me out so much. :)

For the most part though people should be more healthy. We should start with our children by instilling good health knowledge at young ages. Once they are adults they can do whatever they want but they should at least have the chance to live a healthy lifestyle.

AMEN!!!!

Sorry my post wasn't specifically directed as you, as I have no idea what your situation is :)

I was just saying that, in general, a lot of north americans have it drilled in their head that cooking is healthy, so no matter what they eat at home its going to be good for them. As a result, many eat way too big portions and fill their foods with buttery, oily shit that keeps them overweight. Yeah, its better then fastfood, much better then fastfood, but as you get older and your metabolism slows down..its going to start taking a toll.

Someone mentioned earlier about "adding 10 years to your life"...well for me, it's not that I want to add 10 years to my life, but that I want to make the last 10 years of my life that much more enjoyable....I don't want to be sitting around in a room dependant on others to serve my fucked up body...

This type of thinking is very dangerous. As long as we ask the government to legislate our problems away we will continue to give our freedoms away. This is a very serious problem and a sign of an even bigger one. In a free market WE HAVE THE CONTROL. If we don't like the unfair advertising practices we can not buy the product, not watch the TV station, not buy the magazine and make sure we get others to do the same. As long as we BELIEVE this does no good and we don't have any power we won't have any. Once we start asking the government to regulate markets for our own good we have opened a dangerous and scary door. Next thing you know nightclubs are bad for you so we will shut them down, or driving is too dangerous so we will make everyone ride public transit. Living in a free society means there will be some things we need to take care of ourselves. I think we need to find a way to deal with this advertising and the image they are putting in our minds, but it should not be through legislation; once the government is involved you have a real mess. If these companies are spending millions on advertising what makes you think they won't spend millions on elected officials to get their commercials approved. Then you have people thinking they are protected and they are not. Any type of media can be resisted if need be. If people stop watching stations that run questionable advertising it will change. If we learn to use our power of the free market we as consumers will have an enormous amount of control. With the internet growing as fast as it is I would think this type of control is more realistic that ever. The biggest crime against our society is the fact we have been convinced we have no influence in a free market, people have bought that line and we are suffering because of it. JMO

It is equally dangerous to believe that human beings are super-endowed with awesome and impenetrable will power.

It may well be seen as simply our hubris - that is, our inability to comprehend the relative helplessness of the individual against the collected might of billions of dollars of corporate research into the most sophisticated and advanced manipulation apparatus ever imagined by mankind - that was responsible for the blind unwillingness to stem the causes of our ultimate downfall.

Asking people to be more responsible for their own lives may not help them, but neither is asking them to become professional victims. I can't believe people let themselves be belittled with this trash. In essence what is being said is "here, you can't take care of yourself so let me do it". If that isn't control of another person I don't know what is. This country is full of sheep, because people let self important snobs control them. You are complaining about the corporations using mind control, at least their mind control is not in form of legislation, if you had your way a LAW would tell me what I can and cannot watch. If you want this kind of control please move to Europe, leave us FREE AMERICANS to make our own decisions, a right our fore fathers died for. I am fat and it has nothing to do with advertising or “mind control”. It has everything to do with liking to eat and making poor choices when I do. The weight I have lost has been from making better food decisions and exercise, which is the ONLY thing that will make ME loose weight. Quit looking at us poor helpless victims that are brainwashed by the big nasty corporations. It will not help me and it will insult me. I am a free American and I don’t need some pompous leaf eater turning me into a victim. I am more that capable of turning off the TV (and pretty much have done that.) We are doomed as a free society if we let well intentioned, misinformed snobs take our freedoms away. If you are one of the brainwashed and you are speaking from experience I am sorry for that, but don't try to take our freedoms away because you are weak. If you are not one of the brainwashed get over your arrogance, and let people live THEIR life as they see fit.

Yes. It is clear that you have strong feelings about the subject. It is best to address the subject in less emotional ways. Please take a step back and count to ten before you post again. I am expressing a set of ideas in a reasonable manner. You are requested to do the same.

I trust you will consider this public request.

Once upon a time, we used to shoot the shit about starting up a chain of health-food drive-thru restaurants. Just like McDonalds, but instead you could order low-fat sandwiches, fruit, yogurt, bran muffins, just healthy foods. I know this isn't an original idea, but I also wonder why there aren't chains of "fast health-food" places around the world also.

If I was what I ate. Then I would be a Subway sandwich.

Well there's this really good fast food(ish) place in California (and a few in MD) that are really good and pretty healthy. I really want to see them spread out.
Baja Fresh

I think it would be good to get more healthy chains out there but, in a free market, companies aren't able to survive and expand without a good amount of demand. ANd right now...I'm not sure how much demand they'll get in much of America. However....this dieting fad America is on right now is slowly changing a lot of normal fast food places. At least they offer salads now...which is a change. Perhaps if we keep this up, they'll keep offering healthier and healthier foods :)

Simple. Most "real" or "healthy" foods rot. What are you going to do, freeze a shitload of bran-muffins and then microwave them when they want to be served?

I mean, ya, there probably IS a way you could work around it..but it would be so expensive to the customer, and at such a smaller profit to the owner, that *most* people wouldn't go for it.



ps. Yes, places like Tim Hortons(here in Canada), etc serve up Bran-muffins and the like, but take a look at the nutritional info sometime....they cut corners to preserve costs.

I am really perplexed (sp?) by how people are "brainwashed" by commercials. I hate commercials. I change the channel during commercials, TV and Radio.

There are PLENTY of people in America who are not fat, and who are resposible enough to control what they eat. When I look in the fridge for something to eat at night, and I already had a bowl of icecream earlier that afternoon, I'll make a turkey sandwich or something a little more healthy to snack on. McDonalds can fit into a healthy diet with moderation. Eatting fast food 2 or 3 times a month will not kill you or make you fat, if you are responsible in what else you eat.

I also don't buy the arguement concerning costs of healthy foods compared to fast food. Go into the grocery store and you can buy fruits, vegatables, chicken, beef, whatever, and make a meal to feed 4 people for the price of 1 person's meal at McDonalds. Meats are healthy anyway, and don't always lead to clogged arteries.

I know some people might not believe this, but for my brother and I, we could really care less about losing wieght and are trying to GAIN wieght all the time. We drink protein shakes with 2000 calories for desert. My brother is a football player and I work out for an hour 5 days a week. An hour a day of intense physical activity is not much, it makes you feel better about yourself, and it also allows you to not have to starve yourself. Maybe exercise is what these weak-willed people need; they will feel more confident (the body releases adreneline and other chemicals to give a natural high), and they will still be able to eat their burgers and not gain weight, even though they will probably soon stop eatting the burgers because they will be throwing up when they exercise.

We are influenced by media. The only differences between possible points of view regarding this fact are a matter of degree.

There's an ongoing general discussion of the subject here:

http://www.tfproject.org/tfp/showthr...=&threadid=911

You'll have to do better than just be marketed to...
link

Originally Posted by Trisk

__________________________________________

**This is not meant to be a personal attack, just an example. If this is not appropriate, please remove it**

Trisk, do you see what the problem is now? You say that you haven't eaten at McDonalds or any similar place, then base your next comment on a resteraunt that obviously assumed their goal in marketing to you. Alright, so you haven't really been too influenced by fast food marketing. What type of shoes are you wearing? What kind of clothes? What car do you drive? What toilet paper do you buy?

Marketing certainly doesn't "Control your Mind" and force you to do whatever the commercial is you're watching, but it certainly does have an influence on you. You have proved that it does, regardless of all actual facts, in your previous posts. Simply because you aren't as affected by certain advertisements doesn't mean others aren't either. Your very ignorance as to the actual "healthiness" of the food chain you had mentioned illustrates my point very well. You can walk around thinking that you haven't been affected by all this advertising, believing that it is simply willpower and that YOU can't be herded around and manipulated like the rest of America - while wearing your Nikes, driving your Lexus, buying Charmin and eating "healthy" fast food. Everyone else feels the same way.

It is a constant daily battle to ignore advertizing. Especially with my daughter. She sees friends wearing things or playing with things that they saw on TV and decided was "COOL". She sees things inbetween her shows that make her want more stuff. I go to the store and the encaps and racks beside the cash register have the flashiest kid appealing things. It's a battle with her to just get out the door without spending practically hundreds of dollars for this "HOT" item or that "NEW" thing.

I also struggle to ignore it. I go out on a hot day walk into the store and see a picture of a sexy chick drinking a COLD soda. At least subconsciously I want that soda whether I succumb or not. It would be nice to not have that battle with myself and my daughter daily.

Most of the time I can resist. Part of the reason I'm a SAHM and do daycare in my home is so that I can fix our meals. Yeah I might fix something oily but will my portions be as big as the restaurant?? I can put it in the fridge right away before it gets stale or goes bad. I do rarely use butter or oil in my cooking unless I absolutely have to. I have come up with a way of making gravy with no oil whatsoever and hubby doesn't even notice. I use spices and herbs to flavor things instead of relying on fat to make things rich. I bake a lot of my own cookies and things using more whole grains and fewer empty calories. I never make my daughter finish what she is served even if I've paid for it at the store. I will ask that she TRY a bite of each thing but that is only to widen her tastes and teach her to enjoy more healthy foods. Most of the time if we go to get fast food I'll either buy her and myself a kids meal to share or I'll get one for each of us. I always promise myself that "If I'm still hungry I can go get more to eat." I'm never still hungry. I'm not tempted to finish the last of those fries because I paid for them because there aren't any last fries. I walk out satisfied and not stuffed. Part of it is a matter of deciding BEFORE you go to the store or the restaurant decide what you're going to eat. BEFORE you're exposed to the deluge of advertizing on the shelfs or specials in the menu. I find when I make my grocery list and promise myself to get only that, that I tend to buy possibly $20-$30 less in groceries each week. I also don't find that stuff is left over or unused for weeks at a time. I buy what I need. A lot of it is planning. Plan what you're going to eat for supper and you won't be snacking as much, you'll be looking forward to supper.

People today are rushed, buy on impulse, and consequently succumb to advertizing more often than they themselves would like to admit.

One thing I learned as a preteen from my mother was "If you see something in the store that you want, walk away, go home, and if you still want it next time you go to the store, then get it." Most of the time you'll find that you realize you don't really need it or want it. Impulse buying is what advertizing relies on. If you PLAN buy, you won't succumb as much.

Hubby and I also have canceled our credit cards completely and we never take our checkbook anywhere unless we absolutely have to. We pay our bills in person as often as we can and we usually only end up writing one check a month. We put our money in a tin or box where we keep the cash. We take out only what we plan to use at the grocery, store, or restaurant. Then we're limiting ourselves to begin with. We CAN'T succumb to the temptation. We've only learned this method in the past few years. It works great and we rarely feel like we're going without.

that's great advice. I do that to and I do something along those lines as well...for *any* large purchase

If it's over $100 there is a 24 hour cooling off period before buying or signing on the dotted line.

Exactly. However, Chipotle's ingredients aren't the problem. The problem there is the portion size. When I eat there, a burrito is a minimum of two meals. I'll get the steak burrito and add lettuce, salsa, and cheese. If you split that over two meals, a total of around 1000 calories and 12 grams of saturated fat isn't that bad (especially since I only eat two meals a day). I don't see how people can eat those burritos in one sitting.

Cynthetiq's article is a bit misleading though. For an effect, the article has the calorie content and fat increase with each burrito by adding more ingredients. At Chipotle they make it for you at a counter. You tell them what you want and they put it in there. You can add the things that really boost the fat and calories (cheese, sour cream, guagamole) or you can leave them out. You can also ask for less beans, rice, or meat (or none at all).

Basically it is a combination of meat plus beans and/or rice. They should have presented it in that fashion and then tell you what each extra item adds to the overall fat and calorie content.

Imagine that, an article about deceptive marketting using deceptive journalism...

edit
I was just looking at the pasted portion of the article. The link is a little better. There is also a pdf link on that page that has a much better breakdown of Chipolte, Baja Fresh, Rubios, and La Salsa. I was really surprised that Rubios and Baja Fresh did so well. They both had a lot of recommended items.

The idea that people are not smart enough to take control of their lives and not be controlled by advertising is absurd. It serves, one purpose, and that is to convince people they need the government to control their lives, as they aren’t smart enough to do so.

Our fore fathers did not believe in an elitist society. That is why they felt “..all men are created equal..” Even if it is for their protection, our fore fathers believed one person should not make decisions for another. Our Constitution protects our freedom of speech, there is no footnote saying “unless someone thinks it’s bad for society”. I agree advertising has gotten out of hand, but treating the public like substandard individuals, powerless against the evil empire is not the solution. If we can teach people to take control in their lives, we not only fix the advertising problem, but give the individuals the tools to solve other problems in their lives.

So long as we are told over and over we have no power against this vicious advertising demon we have no hope of control. As any sports coach will tell you, you cannot motivate a team to win by telling them they can’t do it. When faced with a constant “you can’t do it” message, chances are you can’t.

This thread made me think of an old friend. I have not seen her in about 15 years, but I know where she would stand on this issue. My sister ran into her a while back, she is teaching in an urban area of a major city. She stated the kids she was teaching would never have what she does, and she thought this was sad. I did indeed think this was sad. It is sad that their teacher is helping convince them they are victims and have no choices in life. It is sad that she doesn’t even realize she will be aiding this fact by her supremist attitude. I know she doesn’t realize that she is looking down on these kids and classifying them as less than equal to others.

Please don’t insult me and others by telling us we aren’t smart enough, or strong enough to overcome advertising we can chose to ignore and dismiss as irrelevant.

From the sounds of it, you've got an extremely fast metabolism that most of us are not blessed with. If I, for example, ate a 2000 calorie shake, the majority of it would quickly be turned to fat. My body simply doesn't process food as quickly as yours.

So, I don't think its really fair to be using yourself and your brothers example and say others are weak willed because they're not in shape like you and your bro.. for some of us, Mcdonalds once or twice a month IS too much, and moderation means *never* eating it.

If that was the case then people wouldn't be consuming the following products:

veal (based on the unethical way the animal is raised)
SUV's (in light of the gas situation and eco impact)
Von Dutch Apparel (based on a racist alcoholic)
smoking (based on the number of deaths and warnings on cigarettes)

and if you read history books and understand how they did setup the land you'll know that they did set up the country as ELITIST...

only LANDOWNERS could vote... that's a class division right there.

lefty8080, no one is insulting you.
You are taking a general statement, that has it's own reason for being, personally. I'm responsible for exactly what I say - not for how you may incorrectly interpret it.

That is a very good point.

A lot of frightening things could happen if we start delegating our competence at deciding what we are capable of to the government.

Just a couple quick questions , How far do you live from where you work?
What kind of car do you drive?

Cynthetiq/NoSoup....you do realize that companies like Baja Fresh can be bought out? Only a year or two ago, they were a their own company, only in California. When the dieting fad started sweeping America, Wendy's bought them out because they thought a healthy chain might help them gain money...plus, a chain like Wendy's had pretty much spread out as much as it was going to. A budding chain is always good for more business.
In the article you posted, they're trying to say it's unhealthy IF YOU ORDER A QUESADILLA! Do you *know* what a quesadilla is? It's a piece of pita bread stuffed with cheese. OF COURSE that's going to be unhealthy - no matter where you get it. Hell, Subway says they're healthy but if you walk in and get a steak and cheese sandwhich, you know you're doing something wrong.
HOWEVER, did you take a look at the specials? 300-600 calories? That's not bad. AT ALL. I am not ignorant to the healthiness of the chain. But at least it's possible to order FRESH, healthy food there IF THAT'S WHAT YOU WANT.

As for what NoSoup said....actually, since Baja Fresh is predominantely in California and I've never been to California (as a matter of fact, I live on the opposite coast), I'd have to say that no, I haven't had Baja Fresh marketted to me. As a matter of fact, I never even HEARD of it until I was driving around in Maryland and saw it. And no, I would hardly put it in the same league as McDonalds. McDonalds goes with Burger King, Taco Bell, Wendy's and other stuff. At places like McDonalds, most of their food is cooked and frozen in liquid nitrogen and shipped from a factory to the resturaunts, where it sits on a hot surface on the side. When you order, they plop your heated stuff in a bag and that's that.
At Baja Fresh, all of their food is fresh - made that day. Even the salsa. I'm not just buying into marketting when I say that because if you've ever had tomato salsa, you can tell the difference between "just made" and "5 days old". They have an open kitchen there that you can SEE when you walk in. WHen you order, they go to the kitchen and cook it right there in front of you. Have you ever seen McDonalds or another fast food place do this? If you go to the site, they have all their nutrition info there. If you care to check it out, you'll see that it's not that bad.

I'm not trying to say that the media or society has absolutely NO INFLUENCE on me. I *will* buy a brand name shoe over a no-name shoe, simply because I know the name. BUT, if I don't like a New Balance shoe, for example, I'm not going to buy it because their commercial was just SO DAMNED GOOD. There's a difference between influence and MIND CONTROL.

And...at the end of the day, yes, I will take my friend's word over that of the television. I mean, the television tells you to buy about 20 different kinds of shampoos/cars all the time. Does that mean I'm going to buy all 20 of those shampoos/cars? No. But if I'm with my friend and she says "Wow XYZ shampoo smells soooo good and it made my hair so silky smooth!" I might be like "hmm maybe I'll try XYZ shampoo."

And I will take common sense over that of the television. Just because, let's say, I see a commercial for Kentucky Fried Chicken saying they're healthy because they're good for Atkins, doesn't mean I'm going to run to KFC and start buying FRIED chicken. That's just not how things work. YOu have to use a teensy bit of common sense now and then if you want to get by in the world.

To me, it takes absolutely no willpower to pass by McDonalds or Niketown or some other big name store and not buy anything. Yes, I've seen the McDonalds commercials tons of times and...actually...McDonalds *still* disgusts me. All advertisements do is let the name be known to me. I never find my feet walking to the store to buy brand name stuff after commercials. And, considering that 90% of the stuff in America *has* been advertisted somewhere, I think I can safely say that buying a brand name shoe doesn't mean you are brainwashed and just being herded around like cattle.

Re: We are what we eat
 

But, why?

DIY, the PETArds were trying to sue KFC for that ad? That organization is so pathetic.

powerclown, simply because they are harmful to children.

claiming you are completely unaffected by advertisements is naive. no one consciously buys things based on a commercial. advertisements affect our subconscious, esp when the're directed at children for long periods of time. when we see something advertised repeatedly our subconscious mind internalizes that image and it leads to name recognition and us buying more of the product often without the consumer being aware of how his/her mind made the choice to buy the advertised product. If everyone in society were more aware of how advertising works and how to resist it this would not be much of a problem but that is hardly the case esp when children are concerned.

I thought parents had authority of their children.

I hate this part of marketing. I hate where they are targeting our children. They're using our children against us.

And yes we have authority over our children. The ability and responsibility to say no when something wouldn't be good for them. We want them to be happy and when they want something VERY badly because it's flashy or they've seen the commercials and think it's cool or tastes good we would LIKE to get it for them because it would make them TEMPORARILY happy. Many parents do this too. I have done this on occaision. I try not to make a habit of it though. It's a battle that I would rather not have to fight. Why should I have to fight it? In short it causes family conflict - Not what I would consider good for America.

What gets me the worst is when I see advertizing for things that just aren't kid appropriate on the cartoon channels for Nickelodian and things. At times when the elementary kids are just getting home from school and are all begging to watch TV. A couple months ago and once again in the past month or so I've seen commercials for CONDOMS. I realize that sex isn't a bad thing but what parent wants their 4 yr old coming to them talking about freaking condoms?? This isn't sex Ed. They are directing brain washing at my kids and they get it all the time even if I turn off the TV. They get it filtered through their friends, at the store, walking down the isle, on the little TV's at Walmart (god I hate those), and on bilboards and posters and signs all over timbucktu. It's ridiculous. I think the choice of target audiences should at least be controlled. My kid has no idea yet that she's been "brainwashed" by the fancy music, pictures, colors and slogans of commercial America. I can't stop it completely. It would be nice to not have to deal with it quite so much. Everyone's got some freaking agenda. Leave my kid out of it.

If you make a product for kids, who else are you going to market it to? The parents? Do the parents care that GI Joe has a kung fu grip or do the kids?

Say we regulate what can be advertised to kids. Who would be the authority for what is and isn't acceptable for kids? How can you be certain that their beliefs are considered extreme when compared to your beliefs? How can you be sure that they aren't taking kickbacks from the industry? What if you're a parent that would rather their 12 yr old used a condom instead of risking a pregnancy?

You have the power. If you have cable you can probably block the channel so that your kid can't even watch it.

It isn't about being blessed or not. You can control your metabolism by increasing your aerobic exercise. You will require more feul when you burn more energy.

To make the point that this is purely an over eating problem is to simplify a more complex issue. I also require an intake of 2.5K to 3K calorie diet. This is because I work out very often (Training for IM distance Tri's). I can eat those burritos in one sitting easily and then be hungry again within a few hours.

The only reason I would use myself as an example here is because I eat what is required by my body, and not more. I choose quality food instead of the crap that many people choose (McDonalds's, HoHo's, Crispy Creams, etc.).

The fact that we see astronomical percentages of the population here in the states that are over weight says that there is a problem, that people do need to be told what to do. If you feel insulted by what Art is suggesting then you are ignoring the problem and you should open your eyes to other persepectives.

Would I rather have my tax dollars go toward avoiding a problem, or toward fixing the result of the problem. Which do you think will be more expensive?

Edit: Spelling

I could go on and on but in deference to artelevision - who started the thread - I won't.

Healthy kids are a good thing.

Re: We are what we eat
 

You believe the government should pass a law telling us what advertising we should be able to see and what food we can eat.



The reason is you believe the average person is not capable of making good decisions on their own because of the power of advertising.


You believe the government needs to protect us, for the good of society.


What did I misinterpret?

What we have here is a difference of opinion, I agree advertising has got out of hand, but I do not believe we should let the government make the decisions on what we can eat and what advertising we can watch.

I believe the average person does have the power to resist advertising, if they want.

When you shift responsibility you also give away rights, I do not feel we should give away anymore rights.


This will be my last post on this thread because obliviously neither of us will be swayed from our position.

Luckily we live in a free society where we can both express our opinions freely. Unless of course the arguments are so strong the average person can't resist them - then they can be deemed "bad for society" and outlawed - right Art?

lefty8080, well stated.
Yes, that about sums it up.
And yes, we disagree.

Except for your final paragraph.
I don't grant you that.

I think I see what your saying ART, I'm not exactly sure what your proposing to end the problem.

Are you saying you want the government to stop private companies from making these things so that we can't eat em.

Or saying that the government should regulate how they advertise to the populace?


If you mean something different altogether please let me know. I'm a firm believer that the media is a huge player in what probably 90% of the population think is "Truth" whether it is truth or propaganda.

I can't see limiting free enterprise because people are sheep.

I'm not a politician and I don't go far in my proposals. That would be for someone else who is sufficiently motivated in that direction and convinced enough that government regulation of unchecked capitalism is a necessary part of the processes of government and capitalism to extend the protection against the marketing of harmful agents to children to include food products that cause nothing but obesity and attention-deficit and other disorders. Realistically, these foods are as dangerous as cigarettes.

Free enterprise is everywhere limited in the real world. The excesses and danger of unregulated free enterprise began as a result of the lethal results of the first phase of the Industrial Revolution.

As those who pay attention to this forum are aware. I am in general, a proponent of capitalism and not of government intervention in our lives. I am interested however in continuing the practice of using government as our collective agent to wield power against the titanic forces of enterprise that negatively manipulate the population with no motive other than shareholder profit. There are other things more crucial to the survival and welfare of human beings than enterprise is willing or able to promote.

Uncontrolled corporations can lead to misguided, and often destructive descisions. There is, in my opinion, a level of control that the government must maintain over corporate manipulation of the population. We have seen, in recent years the results of what happens when Corporations begin to control the power (lobbies, and campaign contribution) of our Governmental descisions.
Due to the Capitalist nature of the United States, we have a fine line to walk, and must be wary of this line moving too far in either direction. Over-regulation can have detrimental effects as in the 70's and early 80's. But, a lack of regulation can be equally destructive, as we are witnessing now.
The ability of large corporations, and indeed entire industries to guide legislation intended to keep it in check is a major flaw in our system, and will likely lead to serious problems in the future.
As for the issue of health, and the food we eat, there is a fine line here as well. The government has a duty to protect the population from itself, when we as a people cannot (through ignorance of stupidity, and yes, these are different).
As Art has pointed out, it is not in my job description to lay out the specifics of these controls, but that does not mean I do not see the problem.

Yes..you can control your metabolism. However, some people are naturally born with faster metabolisms then other. Case in point: I work out 4 days a week and run the other 3 days a week, and still my body only burns ~2000 calories a day(including the workouts/running). My brother, on the otherhand, has never done an ounce of exercise in his life, and eats all day without consequence.

Im not denying that you can boost your metabolism, but people are born with different metabolisms. As well, your metabolism tends to decrease as you get older, thus older people will find it harder to lose weight then younger people.

In Canada we currently regulate what kinds of advertisments can be used to promote alcohol, cigarettes, legal services, adult entertainment, perscription drugs, etc. As a society we have agreed that we want limits to how these goods and services are marketed to us.

Regulating how certain types of food are marketed to us needs to happen... again, most importantly as it pertains to our children.


Not if you use a microwave...


Lefty... I agree with you that promoting "vicitimhood" is a dangerous thing, however sticking your head in the sand claiming "my personal freedoms" are paramount is no answer either. I suppose this is just another way that Canadians are different from Americans but I don't think personal freedom is the "ultimate" when faced with a citizenry is clearly floundering.

As it has been noted here, people are a nations most valuable resource. If we don't keep them healthy we are neglecting those resources.

There has to be a happy medium between draconian measures and lassez-faire...

'unchecked capitalism' ...hardly. the kind of capitalism everyone thinks is ruining the US is the kind with its big profit generating balls cut off. Capitalism as it exists now is nowhere near the juggernaut of social irresponsibility in this country that it was in the late 1800' and early 1900's. Put kids in factories at age 6 and pay them a penny a week and make them work 17 hour days. pump out smog and soot from evey stack on the factory and dump every polutant and bi-product over the fence and into the water. THAT was capitalism 'unchecked'. We as a country have cut the proverbial balls off of the true notion of capitalism.

And while some things have gotten better in the way of environmental protection and child labor, and labor practice in general...it has not come without expense to the corporation. so how does the corporation dilute the the signficant costs of social responsibility? VOLUME!!!!! the more product or service sold...the cheaper the fixed costs become. how do you achieve volume? MARKETING ON A MASS SCALE!!!

at the end of the day, the CFO making capital budgeting decisions is doing what he has to do to keep the shareholders from putting him in front of a firing squad. the common belief of the corporate criminal is far too rampant and has become the default notion of executives for those who have absolutely no business education or experience at the corporate level. most of these guys and girls just want to make enough money and have enough job stability to feed their kids and themselves and afford some of lifes finer pleasures. the 2 or 3 % of executives who abuse thier power, position, and influence shed a false light on the business world.

a more intricate understanding of economics, fiscal policy, and the underpinnings of TRUE capitalism need to be grasped before anyone starts lobbying for the destruction of the cheeseburger.

Yes... that is just what is needed... less regulation. :rolleyes:

Please. The balls, as you say, have not been cut off. Corporations are still extremely powerful entities in our world.

It is a matter of record that Corporations left unchecked do not do what is "right" only what makes money. Left unregualted, as you point out, we'd still have child labour and WAY more environmental damage.

Corporations get aways with murder on a daily basis. It is time they were held accountable.

Yes, that will likely create some ripples in the economy. Our cheap goods will likely go up in price because the process used for making them will be more costly.

A small price to pay for sustainable development.

(this is of course related directly to the food industry as well as pretty much all industries)

interesting...

consider though...

the profits derived from higher unit sales volumes are distributed in the form of earnings and payments to the various financial stakeholders or plowed back into the corporation in the form on capital investment. most often in research and development and product development. unfortunately, product development does not always equal product improvement. but the advancement of technology is fueled by profit. inventors dont want to be paid with brownies, meatballs, and kind words. they want a paycheck like anyone else. by restricting the corporation's ability to continue bringing in profits, you restrict its ability to attract bright young talent. when the corporation cant afford to hire our own homegrown talent...we have to move our labor resource offshore. to india for instance, where highly skilled engineers are willing to work for half the price of an equally skilled american. then someone is going to cry "CORPORATIONS ARE GIVING AMERIANS JOBS AWAY TO FOREIGNERS!!!" i mean, i could go on and on...the effects of continuing to restrict corporate profiteering are pretty nasty and at some the point the law of diminishing returns kicks in on this whole social responsibility thing. at what point do you regulate the corporation so much that the sideaffects begin to outwiegh the advantages gleaned from this regulation.

in my opinion, you need to chose your battles with corporate americe very carefully...and fighting them about cheeseburgers when its really our job not to eat them if we are fat, is the wrong fight.

NB
In general, it's best not to assume a lack of knowledge on the part of one's fellow contributors.

The simple fact is: "...intricate understanding of economics, fiscal policy, and the underpinnings of TRUE capitalism..." is held by proponents of positions on both sides of this issue. Yet, differences of opinion remain.

But in not eating them are we not doing the same thing... driving down profits?

For one of the *older* TFP'ers: Were hamburgers a normal or popular thing to eat at HOME before fast-food chains become popular? I mean, did people make hamburgers in their home from hamburger meat regularly, or did that only become popular after people got used to eating hamburgers at fastfood resturants?

bigoldalphamale, I think you stated your position well in your last post. I also see the need to exercise due dilligence in analyzing the effects of regulation upon industry. The solutions we, as a society, arrive at are generally accomplished as a result of long processes of education, analysis, and anticipated impact. We are just at the beginning of recognizing this issue as worthy of consideration on a large society-wide scale.

do you really think that if corporate investors were making more money they would forgo the possibility of making EVEN MORE by outsourcing to other countries? outsourcing is not happening because corporations arn't making money, it's happening because they want to make even more.

I don't want to go back to the days of child labor or unrestricted work hours, and I don't want corporations to continue to target children with their misleading advertisements. history has shown that corporate responsibility is rarely willingly acted out without some government regulation. I don't think anyone in this thread is advocating the elimination of advertisement across the board, there is a middle ground between no ads and the unrestrained commercial society that we have today.

I used to eat delivery pizza, giant double cheesburgers, fries, you know all the crap you aren't supposed to eat but taste good and are quick, cheap and easy. I finally got tired of feeling bad all the time so I make my food for the week on Sunday, freeze it and can eat healthy every day pretty simply and still cheaply. I lost fifty pounds after I left the junk behind so I firmly believe cooking healthy food at home is the way to go. There are many other reasons to avoid fast food though. The fast food corporations treat their workers deplorably and have altered the way beef, poultry and potatos are produced and processed in America. Fast food has forced farmers to go broke, cattlemen to lose their ranches and the average poultry breeder makes about $12,000 dollars a year and ends up leaving the business in three years broke and in deep debt. Workers in slaughterhouses and processing plants work in horrible conditions, are often injured and then denied assistance by the company when they can't return immediatly to work. The foods taste good because a chemical plant in New Jersey creates new chemical combinations to give the various items their unique taste. I could go on and on but I end with just recommending anyone interested to read the book "Fast Food Nation" by Eric Schlosser. Its absolutely fascinating and a real eye opener about how our "friend" Ronald McDonald and other fast food giants work.

By implementing heavy regulations you are effectively telling parents what is best for their kids to hear. My unbord daughter is the responsibility of my wife and I. We are the ones who will dictate what is appropriate for her to watch, not some Washington beuracrate.

one could argue that right now parents may have a hard time making sure their children do not see ads (assuming that's what they want) -- advertising currently blankets the halls of public schools and is quickly being incorporated into the classroom. and who can blame schools? the're severely strapped for cash and corporations are willing to offer them large chunks of it if teachers and administrators will only allow the school to become one big commercial for their product.

additionally i care about children other than my own and i care about our society as a whole, i do not see any benefit to allowing corporations to target children with their advertisements outside of corporate profits. it should not be difficult for a parent to limit their child's exposure to advertisements and i am perfectly willing to error on the side of companies making a little less money off of pint size consumers if it helps to raise a generation of children more capable of making informed decisions.

The problem is that even if I only allow my daughter to watch 30 minutes of Nickelodian or Nick Jr a day she will see approximately 30-50 commercials or more a week. Plus my 4 yr old daughter has the chance to view commericals for Condoms with "Trojan Man" before I realize a the commerical is even on. Then there's the Nick Jr and even Public Television websites that she enjoys going to that have pop-ups like you wouldn't believe.

No matter how hard I try she is exposed to advertizing that I'd rather her not be exposed to. Part of the problem is the VOLUME of it that we are deluged with daily. There is no escape.

I wouldn't want too many regulations but perhaps the number of advertizements daily or the locations could all be regulated. There are regulations already inplace for bilboards and such things. They are limited in size and such. If future limitations would be in the same line then I wouldn't consider it all too limiting.

Pardon me for going on a tangent, but I think this is relevant.

These days whenever there is a fight to be fought against corporate America the opposition is always bringing the "poor children" into the fight. Special interest groups are using children as a weapon to fight the battles that can't be won without bringing innocent children into the mix.

Music with nasty lyrics was forcing kids into murder, drugs, and satanism so we slapped labels on the record as if a label won't make it more appealing. Same goes for smoking, TV, movies, and video games. Now we have these insane fines that can be imposed by subjective people based on vague regulations. Are the children safe now? Is everything perfect?

I'm all for enforcing clear and strict policies regarding actual truth in advertising. If they want to say it is healthy they better have damn good proof that it is, otherwise they can face strict penalties such as bans against any advertising for a certain time period or monetary fines.

How else do you expect to have television for free or cable television at a low price without having advertisements? Should Nickelodean be running ads based on the target group for the show or should they have Depends and mutual investment advertisements in there? I know what you're saying but you don't seem like you're being realistic with your expectations.

If the government starts shutting things down corporations lose money. They don't like that so they lay people off, hire less, charge more, or do all three things plus others. They are important parts of healthy competition and an economy.

I get the impression that people are vastly unaware of the power of the consumer or they are unwilling to put in the time needed to fight against the corporations. If it's the content you are offended by, there are groups that protest advertising and program content. When they've gotten enough pressure from those groups things have changed.

I guess it's the minute conservative or liberatarian part of me that says that we can't expect the govt to intervene every time we have a problem with corporate America.

One case does not a representive sample make. You likely will be a fantastic parent and your children will grow healthy and strong. You'll teach them what is good for them and bad for them so they can make educated decisions later in life.

However, you aren't representative of the problem. There are millions of parents out there who don't dictate what is appropriate for their children. They turn to the Television or other media outlet as a babysitter. They take little to no responsibility for raising their children. In the end more and more of yours and my tax dollars are going to be spent to support these Medicare programs because the children of these millions are getting their stomachs stapled after their lipo surgery because they were so unhealthy they couldn't walk out of the house under their own power.

I think people should be required to pass a test in order to have children...Really.

Well....since the likelyhood of testing for reproduction is slim at best, let us again debate the choices we have before us to combat the epidemic of obesity, heart disease, and cancer our fast food diets have created.
It is all good and fine to have beliefs and opinion, but compromise and intellegent consideration of possibilities are the course of progress. There is a problem, and it will either be repaired, or it will become a larger problem.

Obviously we cannot, and I doubt anyone here seriously suggests we do, limit corporate advertising. That said, perhaps the message can be changed, or the product itself.