Can Someone Help me?

[Richard]

www.myfoxny.com/story/18774940/health-panel-talks-about-wider-food-ban

How will reducing the size of high caloric beverages and food reduce obesity? Will people not just end up buying two smaller ones?

Price will not matter. Cigarettes still sell, and look what they are selling for. The only people that whole facade helped was government, insurance companies, and the Tobacco Industry.

The Tobacco Industry? How could that be? They are taxed more now. Yes, but in the deal with their lawsuit, the government in turn regulated the price of sale. That is why even Indian Reservation produced cigarettes are so expensive. There is a minimum price fixed by regulators. Big Tobacco is doing just fine.

Smokers lost, and still have to pay more. I don't smoke so I am not affected.

Aside of the "Control" aspect, what type of so-called intelligence thinks this will actually achieve what they "claim" it is aimed at?

You'd think educated people actually had some higher level of intellect. This proves one of two things; 1. They do not or 2. It is not what it is promoted to be, and it is supported and swallowed by those who suffer from a lack of intellect.

Only "51% of those polled oppose the ban?" Really? I guess they should get what they deserve.

One thing people should always remember, politicians, the medical industry and government are not personally concerned about your health and well-being. It all comes down to money; even when we do not see it.


Unless I am missing something which someone could help me with?

[BlueLotus]

Nope I think you hit the nail on the head money money money!
Gotta love humans eh.

[bubblegum91]

I don't get it either. Here in Australia they put a tax on alcopops, under the guise of discouraging youth from drinking it, thereby, "reducing" the chance that they will get hooked. It was a failure, of course. Because it forced the kids to hit the scotch, the vodka and even the brandy instead. Our cigarettes are not too far behind. Right now, they are all plastered with grotesque images of the possible consequences for smoking. I think this is fair, if people wish to risk their lives and know the risks involved, then they should be free to do so. However, the Government now wishes to make all cigarettes "plain" because the "bright colours attract the children." (I don't think I was the only person who "head desked" at that ridiculous assertion.) So in essence, they will all look the same and boring, but I'm not too sure weather they'll be allowing the pictures to remain. I was literally gobsmacked. They really need to step into reality or work with health professionals and if they are now, get better ones!
*facepalm*

[Richard]

Jun 13, 2012 20:36:28 GMT -5 bubblegum91 said:

I don't get it either. Here in Australia they put a tax on alcopops, under the guise of discouraging youth from drinking it, thereby, "reducing" the chance that they will get hooked. It was a failure, of course. Because it forced the kids to hit the scotch, the vodka and even the brandy instead. Our cigarettes are not too far behind. Right now, they are all plastered with grotesque images of the possible consequences for smoking. I think this is fair, if people wish to risk their lives and know the risks involved, then they should be free to do so. However, the Government now wishes to make all cigarettes "plain" because the "bright colours attract the children." (I don't think I was the only person who "head desked" at that ridiculous assertion.) So in essence, they will all look the same and boring, but I'm not too sure weather they'll be allowing the pictures to remain. I was literally gobsmacked. They really need to step into reality or work with health professionals and if they are now, get better ones!
*facepalm*

I have no problem with warning labels, or raising health insurance costs for those who freely make lifestyle choices which contribute to higher health care costs. You choose a corvette, your insurance is higher. That is just the way it is.

You bring out the example of children. I think this campaign is going to be as effective in reducing obesity as parents are successful at telling their kids they can't do things, like smoke, have sex, and drink alcohol when they are determined to do so. Little to none.

Now they are also talking about popcorn and milk products like shakes.

[bubblegum91]

Warning labels are good, they want to remove even those, I'm told. Is it so hard to warn people!? I don't think raising health insurance costs over here will do much. I assume all smokers just go through the public system.
Still, why not put in some more effort in educating people about the risks of obesity, or just chuck a label on the food lol, or try to get to the bottom of people's eating habits, some people just eat because they are bored or depressed. (Doctors, I'm looking at you!)

[joshuachrisstoff]

Have you ever seen a car wreck, in the US?
Have you ever seen a car accident in UK, OZ, NZ?
Have you ever seen a fatal? They are bad for your health. Are they going to put horror pictures on cars, after all, these fatal wrecks need to scare the mugs into driving better, right?

I don't need to drive better, I only sit 10% above the speed limit when the cops are not around, 2% over when they are, well you can't stay under the limit or they guess you are pissed and stoned, correct?

I have only had a few accidents, none were my fault, 50% were caused by booze and the other 50% were caused thru lack of it.

When I walk tho, road rules don't apply to me. I don't have to walk down a side walk properly. I don't have to walk across the street square on, I don't have to use a pedestrian crossing, and I refuse to wait for the lights to green at intersections, hell, I don't have a registration number, they can't catch me!

Have you ever tried to LEAD by example. Do it right, no matter what?
Here is an experiment for all those who don't try to lead by example!

Get a pointed stick and push sand uphill. See how long it takes you to get to the goal!

[bubblegum91]

Well, yes, driving carries with it a risk factor. And yes, everybody speeds, in fact, on the roads we even have an warning system in place for motorists to warn other motorists when they see the cops! (Gotta love Aussies and their distaste for law lol) Almost everything in this world has risks associated with it. My uncle was killed by a driver trying to evade the Police!
If you know the risks and do the activity anyway, fantastic. But you can't say, well, cigarettes aren't any more dangerous than driving without a seat belt, therefore we shouldn't warn people about the potential risks. Hell, we had a class devoted to the risks associated with an all soy diet and other diets during school! People ought to know what they are getting themselves into. We constantly parade ads about drink driving, the risks about driving a vehicle are discussed with everybody when you go for a test, well, at least over here they are. We even had to erect a bridge for Redcliffe High School students, after one was killed trying to cross the street (again, when someone was trying to evade the Police, pattern much.) We have to point out these risks and either find a way to overcome it, or try to minimize it whilst we live. Of course, we don't have to wrap ourselves in bubblewrap, risks are a part of life, after all. And if you get seriously injured, well, at least you'll have a funny story to tell the kids =P

[thetourist]

Since I live in the USA, the problem with a continuing slate of laws doesn't represent safety or convenience. We are supposed to be a Republic of laws, but we have stopped thinking and acting about just what a "law" should be doing.

For example, in my home state of Wisconsin, we just got our concealed carry rights back this year. For the first time in my life, and I'm 62 years old, I can enjoy all ten of the amendments in our Bill of Rights--supposedly my birthright.

Our form of government has long since changed from being driven by civilians, but rather treating the civilians like subjects. I want my full measure of freedom, including that which limits the scope of rule.

We refer to this process as "the nanny state." And it's time it ends. Wisconsin repealed our motorcycle helmet law in 1978. And while the liberals have always gotten lathered up about the end of the word, there are no "brain dead biker wards," no saloon gunfights, and no anarchy in other states which limit the power of labor unions.

And so with this. I go to the gym everyday. I use a Gaunlet machine from 90 minutes to two hours. Most 20-somethings have trouble with 12 minutes. I lift more weight, and my blood numbers are better than most tubby grade school kids.

The law doesn't effect me. While I ride my Harley without a helmet *gasp* I don't use sugar, salt, soft drinks, fast food or red meat. I don't need to be ordered to do that, it's just smart.

Fat people will not go away with this soda law. Idiots will still remain fat smokers. That's what idiots do. I want to live free, and clearly I'm better at it then the guy with the 32 ounce Slurpy and the pack of Salems.

[Richard]

Another Mayor, Henrietta Davis, getting into the mix to ban soda: radio.foxnews.com/toddstarnes/top-stories/city-wants-to-outlaw-coca-cola-sodas.html


“Only in Mass-ghanistan could driving a Coke across town lines constitute smuggling,” said one of Katz’s listeners. “Such is the mind of a liberal politician.”

I wonder if that goes for soda mixed with alcohol at bars and restaurants? That has to be twice as bad, right?

[thetourist]

Jun 19, 2012 12:15:12 GMT -5 Richard said:

I wonder if that goes for soda mixed with alcohol at bars and restaurants? That has to be twice as bad, right?

Now you've opened another can of worms. The liquor industry.

In Wisconsin the tavern league is so powerful that common sense laws will never be passed. By the very definition of a "tavern," the patrons consume liquor. Getting behind the wheel at the very least is called "buzz driving."

However, several years ago cops sat near taverns with problematic reputations and ticketed and arrested members teetering home. This was taken to court as "entrapment."

Evidently getting righteously arrested for being willfully stupid is now called "entrapment."

No one is against freedom, and that's not what we're discussing. 'Abusing' is not 'using' in any sense of the meaning. If you abuse, you're breaking the law, but more importantly endangering anyone you cross.

On your first offense, I think we ought to whack off the guy's nuts. If he minds his manners, we return his scrotum in 30 days.

However, next offense, we keep his sack for good.

My guess is that the concept of a "designated driver" will finally be implemented.

[bubblegum91]

Lol, we have a law over here that says you must wear a helmet whilst riding a bicycle. I don't know if it does anything, because if you're under 16 they can't arrest you, so you just give em a fake name.