@cubytes - Education I can get behind, absolutely. I don't know how it is in the US but by law Canadian restaurants must have a nutrition guide available in some form, one of which (assuming more than one) must be paper and available on request in the restaurant. Perhaps more fliers should be available on eating well or moderation or whatever, but that would be strictly voluntary. Businesses are all in the business of one thing: Making money. If it doesn't make money for them, or at the very least if it doesn't bolster their reputation and standing and keep their brand in the public consciousness (good-deeds-as-advertising, which in turn can can make money for them) then not only will they not do it, they are not required to do so, nor should they be. What you're suggesting are two things: 1) Businesses should take some responsibility to save people from themselves. (The point Scott is arguing.) Problem is, it doesn't work that way. You can't save people who don't want or to be saved or can't be bothered to start with, but more to the point this isn't and should not ever be a business's responsibility if that business is not doing something they know is harmful. And before you say fast food is, it isn't. Or perhaps put another way, absolutely everything is harmful in large enough doses. Even water. Only the consumer is capable of determining where to draw the line, and doing so for themselves. It would be nice of businesses to help educate the consumer about moderation, but it isn't their job. Sure, the "truth" adverts helped with the tobacco industry, but that's all run by the American Legacy Foundation, a watchdog group born out of the big class-action lawsuit settlement against Big Tobacco. No such group exists against the fast food industry, nor is the fast food industry regarded as being a threat to public health in the same way the tobacco industry is. Not yet, anyway, but I'm sure the FUD will eventually ratchet up to that point even though it's misplaced here. (Tobacco is physically addictive and harmful even in small doses; food is not.) 2) Forcing businesses to fork over cash to help mitigate the obesity issue. This one already has a name: The fat tax. The only difference is that this tax as proposed (but never passed) would have taxed the consumer, not the business, but the end result would be the same: Consumers would ultimately pay more for their fast foods, if not by being taxed directly on their meals, then by the businesses hiking the prices to cover what they are being taxed. As proposed, this concept was received by the public ... well, poorly, to put it mildly. Even currently, such a measure is opposed by 60% of Americans, and over 70% of Americans don't believe such a measure would help the obesity problem at all. I tend to agree, because the problem isn't just the price, nor even its convenience or ubiquity. The problem is education. You need to make sure the public is well aware of what they're stuffing their faces with, and what stuffing their faces with lots of it does, and you need to do it with as few words and as many sound-bitey, bullet-pointy, picture-bookie factoids as possible to get your message across in a way that doesn't require people to read too much. Because if people don't put an effort into watching their food intake, how do you think they're going to warm to reading about watching their food intake? But again this does not fall to the businesses. If they want to educate, great, fine, I'm all for it. But it isn't their job and shouldn't be made their job either by force or by proxy. They're there to make money -- and let's be totally honest here: Whose education would you put more faith in the efficacy and depth of: Those whose motivation is profit, or one whose primary interests and goals are the health of the people?
yea tru that thanks for the hyperlinks too either way the obesity epidemic and the rising toll of deaths from heart disease is clearly an issue that desperately needs some kind of resolution...
No, you have not upset me. I would point out that, as I have said before, nutritional info is readily available. Heart disease may be the most glaring health issue of the day, but in the end, people make their bed. There is nothing we can do other than except people will choose to do things we don't approve of. If you have ever dealt with alcoholics, this becomes clear very quickly.
ehh idk man I mean I understand where your coming from and all but I just don't like the idea of giving up on ppl. I guess I'm a kind hearted person who ignores reality and believes that anyone can change, foolish I know but hey what can I say I'm a dreamer we can't just give up on ppl tho right? I for one tend to think it's the food industry as a whole that is at least partly responsible for the obesity epidemic but I also tend to feel that there is a big picture issue and other factors involved as well in addition to a lack of moderation and living unhealthy lifestyles ppl do need to eat responsively but for some reason the mainstream doesn't now I think (and your not going to like this) it's a conditioning or a doctrination of the norm or other enviromental influences that is also to blame which is a part of the big picture issues or the other factors involved that I was talking about above... but in terms of fast food I wouldn't be surprised to see the whole process of preparing fast food automated within my lifetime, imagine all the workers that will displace and the food will be perfect made even quicker and much cheaper which will most likely increase the problems we are facing today but i digress I'm just rambling.. again I just don't like the idea of giving up on ppl
It's not giving up on people. The idea is to not enable their behavior. It takes a little faith in people, but it is the only way, besides death, to end their behavior. In the example of the alcoholic, it is the only choice. I know blaming environmental conditions is fashionable today, but it doesn't work. It creates scapegoats and relieves the individual, the one part of the equation that has the absolute control, of their responsibility to change. So they don't. Then they die. As a person who cares, you must look to results, not intentions.
Just intended to freak a few people out and start a random debate among the rest in which would end with a new discussion about animal cruelty while people wrote me off as a complete idiot. Looks like I succeeded doesn't it?
1) Why would comparing Calories and calories spark a new discussion about animal cruelty? 2) The discussion decided before you posted your comment, which brings us to... 3) The post was still pointless.
tru that I can agree with this but I also tend to feel (and this is all my personal opinion) that enviromental/insitutional conditioning has a very powerful influence over a persons behavior mostly in how behaviors emerge and develop as well as influence over a persons day-by-day behavior. once the conditioning is set its extremely hard to break through that conditioning that's why ppl rarely ever change but once you realize just how much of your behavior is influenced by your conditioning it's really not about alleviating responsibility or create excuses for people as it is empowering, well that how it is for me anyways. the reason being is that if you understand how much the conditioning effects your behavior there really is no excuse left as your aware of this influence now and understand it to a point where you can consciously choose to change your behavior it's almost like having an apiphany like "hmm that's why I act like this I didnt know that, this is whack i feel that this is not how i want to act so I will change my behavior" it's almost like self un-conditioning but again it depends on your grasp and understanding of your own behavior and the factors that influence that behavior. And the whole idea that a person could think "hmm I eat too much fast food because it's the fast food industries fault so im going to keep eating because its not my fault" is ignorance on part of the individual that thinks that way. its an excuse from someone who doesn't comprehend or fully understand their own behavior and what factors and/or conditioning is influencing their behavior the most you can mold a person into any doctrination you want but once that conditioning sets in though its hard to break through and be like "you know what i was wrong about christianity lets convert to scientology" or something to that effect. from there it's all about education and self awareness and in-line with many of your arguement only the person can truly un-condition themselves as they see fit no third party can do it any of that make sense?
I can respect where you are coming from. I do agree that intense exposure to a certain aspect of an evironment can effect behavior. That kind of exposure can be experienced through military basic training, for example. I have gone through that, and I will tell you it's not the same. Last time I was in a McDonalds, Ronald wasn't telling me to drop and give him 30. It is not the same. Also, there are those who, despite the intense exposure, do not change there behavior. Given that, most people should be able to control themselves when they are around a "Big Mac".
+10000000000 oh and btw Good ol' American fast food. That's what it does. You guys are all saying it's beef (when we dont even know, they do make imitation meats and they're cheaper) but you can't forget PRESERVATIVES. That, is what is causing majority of health problems these days. And they put it in the "meat" to make it taste better.
OMG i just eated a big mac am i gonna wake up lyk that guy tomorrow? but i am in the uk so its not american fast food so i am probably okay right also if i turn into a fat guy, can i go out and bite people and they turn into fat people too?
Well the portions thing is true. Our large fries would probably be a medium over there at most, same goes for drinks. Plus over here it only goes up to large, but you get extra/super/whatever.
I don't think Fast Food is bad on its own. Weight gain only happens because people eat too much. You can eat greasy, fatty, fried foods every once in awhile if you know how to balance out your diet and only eat "bad" foods with moderation (i do it all the time and i am super skinny). The problem is that most people don't know how to. When it comes to the advertising, however, fast food is very problematic. There is simply a drive for the most profits at the expense of people's diets and health. Americans have never really had good diets or knowledge of fruits and vegetables in the first place, so fast food culture has only made that worse. I don't think they are entirely to blame, but they do have very limited offerings.
