Originally posted by spruce112358 Speaking of honesty, where do you see the phrase "wild speculation" in that article?
" Ainsi, un peu à la manière des paquets de cigarettes, les pots de Nutella pourraient se voir décorés d'un message d'avertissement du type : "Attention, danger, favorise l'obésité"."
which I translate as:
"So, a little bit like with packets of cigarettes, jars decorated with a warning message like: "Warning, danger, promotes obesity."
?
It was my own addition, hence I put it in between square brackets (I thought that was obvious, so I didn't explicitly mention it). Sorry for any misunderstanding.
In any case, it cannot be inferred from the article that the EU is genuinely considering such warnings.
Also, it appears you (deliberately?) did not translate "pourraient".
Originally posted by spruce112358 Has putting warnings on cigarettes decreased smoking?
Isn't it an issue of consumers being able to make informed choices? Not so long ago, the tobacco industry was defrauding the general public with impunity.
Originally posted by KazetNagorra It was my own addition, hence I put it in between square brackets (I thought that was obvious, so I didn't explicitly mention it). Sorry for any misunderstanding.
In any case, it cannot be inferred from the article that the EU is genuinely considering such warnings.
Also, it appears you (deliberately?) did not translate "pourraient".
[OK.]
Yes, I didn't translate "pourraient." I substituted, "should" to make it into a debate topic. Sorry for any misunderstanding.
Originally posted by pawnhandler Why not just label all food that way? Isn't food the leading cause of obesity? Sure, inactivity contributes, but only if you actually eat.
I don't think you could become obese following a vegan diet.
Originally posted by KazetNagorra Quite easily. Just eat a lot of bread, pasta, rice, etc.
most mainstream refined food, would probably not qualify as vegan. But just to be sure if you made an unrefined as possible caveat to the vegan diet and you cut out frying as a preparation option ( you know jacket potatoes boiled, vegies steamed, cut out spreads, sauces etc, but all the raw fruit nuts and veg you can eat, and I would very much doubt you could sustain your hunger through all that nutritious gear long enough to still put on weight.
Originally posted by kmax87 most mainstream refined food, would probably not qualify as vegan. But just to be sure if you made an unrefined as possible caveat to the vegan diet and you cut out frying as a preparation option ( you know jacket potatoes boiled, vegies steamed, cut out spreads, sauces etc, but all the raw fruit nuts and veg you can eat, and I would very much doubt you could sustain your hunger through all that nutritious gear long enough to still put on weight.
Professional cyclists burn a lot of calories, up to 8000 a day. It's important for them to take in a large amount of calories. They don't go to the Mac for that. To get in a large amount of calories they eat lots of pasta and rice. The best way to consume a large amount of calories while not feeling bloated is by eating high-carbohydrate, low-fat, low-protein, low-fiber foods. I would suspect the main reason many vegans are not obese is simply that vegan food tends not to be very tasty (and a vegan diet often consists of a large amount of vegetables). Chug in a large amount of ve tsin in their foods, and most will probably end up a lot fatter than they were.
Originally posted by FMF Isn't it an issue of consumers being able to make informed choices? Not so long ago, the tobacco industry was defrauding the general public with impunity.
Yes, but the vast majority of people just buy what they want and pay no attention to what is on the label.
So the question is, "Is it worth it?" Or could a single website exist somewhere for people who are interested to query -- "Should I eat Nutella? Is it bad for me?" and they would get back pictures of obese people with stern cautionary warnings like, "These people ate Nutella everyday. You could end up like this."
And everyone would benefit from lower costs of labeling, etc. Or better yet, companies would start putting information on the labels that people actually WERE interested in and WOULD take the time to read -- you know, things they care about.
The free market in action! Liberty instead of regulation!
Originally posted by spruce112358 Yes, but the vast majority of people just buy what they want and pay no attention to what is on the label. So the question is, "Is it worth it?" Or could a single website exist somewhere for people who are interested to query -- "Should I eat Nutella? Is it bad for me?" ...
Nutella doesn't kill 500,000 Americans every year. Tobacco does.
Originally posted by FMF Consumers being less able to make informed choices about the potential dangers of the products they buy is an example of "liberty"?
I didn't say the information shouldn't be available. I said putting it on the label is putting it in a place and format few care about.
We don't know what companies might put there instead that might be more interesting to us because it isn't allowed.
Probably, companies would start competing with each other to post information that is more relevant to us. Very likely the labeling for different products would evolve differently.
That's the rich potential of alllowing competition instead of stifling it as you suggest.
Originally posted by spruce112358 That's the rich potential of alllowing competition instead of stifling it as you suggest.
As a matter of interest, do you think that, say, a TV news item talking about tobacco killing 500,000 Americans every year, and other detrimental effects of smoking, encroaches on Big Tobacco's liberty in some way? If the TV report took pains to mention every single brand of cigarette, would that stifle competition between the producers of those brands?
Nutella could carry warning...
30 Jun '10 08:573 edits
Back to Top