iamshack Posted April 10, 2012 Author Share Posted April 10, 2012 QUOTE (Tex @ Apr 10, 2012 -> 03:10 PM) Which brings up an interesting point. A dog's diet should be the same if they are roaming the woods trying to bring down game or sitting on a couch and going to a dog park? My answer will continue to be what is the most biologically appropriate. This isn't going to change based on whether or not he is hunting lions or sitting on the couch. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockRaines Posted April 10, 2012 Share Posted April 10, 2012 QUOTE (Tex @ Apr 10, 2012 -> 04:10 PM) Which brings up an interesting point. A dog's diet should be the same if they are roaming the woods trying to bring down game or sitting on a couch and going to a dog park? Whichever one makes them not puke all over your couch and doesnt make their hair fall out all over your tiny apt. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted April 10, 2012 Share Posted April 10, 2012 QUOTE (RockRaines @ Apr 10, 2012 -> 04:16 PM) Whichever one makes them not puke all over your couch and doesnt make their hair fall out all over your tiny apt. I hated when my ex would buy cat food with artificial dyes. My cat would puke it up and stain the carpet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted April 10, 2012 Share Posted April 10, 2012 QUOTE (iamshack @ Apr 10, 2012 -> 05:08 PM) And this was done in order to accomplish feeding the largest number of people possible. Unfortunately they have no idea what they're doing from a financial standpoint or a nutritional standpoint. Really, no it wasn't. It was done to support preferred, politically connected industries. If we were trying to feed the largest number of people possible we wouldn't be processing so much of our corn into corn syrup, plastic, and gasoline. We're trying to "produce the largest amount of a commodity we can possibly justify in order to support several well-connected industries". Fundamentally different from trying to feed people. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve9347 Posted April 10, 2012 Share Posted April 10, 2012 QUOTE (iamshack @ Apr 10, 2012 -> 03:56 PM) So over the past 50 years, our government has deliberately recommended we eat diets which produce high rates of cancers and heart disease? They f***ing listed pizza as a God damned vegetable. Yes. A thousand times yes. They're in bed with these industries and incapable of giving unbiased information and recommendations. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamshack Posted April 10, 2012 Author Share Posted April 10, 2012 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Apr 10, 2012 -> 03:47 PM) Really, no it wasn't. It was done to support preferred, politically connected industries. If we were trying to feed the largest number of people possible we wouldn't be processing so much of our corn into corn syrup, plastic, and gasoline. We're trying to "produce the largest amount of a commodity we can possibly justify in order to support several well-connected industries". Fundamentally different from trying to feed people. The point remains that our current food industry did not deliberately set out to cause cancer and heart failure. They took one step at a time towards choosing cheap foods that could be produced in mass quantities easily without considering the long-term health-effects and without the knowledge of what a diet consisting of just these processed foods would result in from a health perspective. How that interplays with all sorts of other competing industries, I don't really care to discuss. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve9347 Posted April 10, 2012 Share Posted April 10, 2012 QUOTE (iamshack @ Apr 10, 2012 -> 05:04 PM) The point remains that our current food industry did not deliberately set out to cause cancer and heart failure. They set out to make fat cash. Upon seeing that the disgusting s*** they were distributing to the sheep of America was giving everyone diabetes, skyrocketing obesity rates, and killing them, they also didn't give a crap, because money. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamshack Posted April 10, 2012 Author Share Posted April 10, 2012 QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Apr 10, 2012 -> 03:59 PM) They f***ing listed pizza as a God damned vegetable. Yes. A thousand times yes. They're in bed with these industries and incapable of giving unbiased information and recommendations. So what would be the benefits of the government purposefully poisoning its citizenry, since you are so certain? And secondly, if they are incapable, that seems to go towards my point that we are not even certain what the optimal diet is. Go read some science journals...tell me what that consensus optimal diet is, while you're at it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamshack Posted April 10, 2012 Author Share Posted April 10, 2012 QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Apr 10, 2012 -> 04:06 PM) They set out to make fat cash. Upon seeing that the disgusting s*** they were distributing to the sheep of America was giving everyone diabetes, skyrocketing obesity rates, and killing them, they also didn't give a crap, because money. Yes, this is exactly how it went... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted April 10, 2012 Share Posted April 10, 2012 QUOTE (iamshack @ Apr 10, 2012 -> 06:08 PM) Yes, this is exactly how it went... We agree then. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamshack Posted April 10, 2012 Author Share Posted April 10, 2012 (edited) QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Apr 10, 2012 -> 05:09 PM) We agree then. Why on earth would you choose to live here if you believe your government is purposefully encouraging you to poison yourself? Take off your tinfoil hats...what your both doing is an incredibly gross and inaccurate exaggeration. It's easy to look back in hindsight and craft these conspiracy theories...don't get me wrong, the government certainly advanced their own interests as they relate to the food industry...but they did not in their wildest dreams understand the health ramifications of what they were doing. Edited April 10, 2012 by iamshack Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted April 10, 2012 Share Posted April 10, 2012 QUOTE (iamshack @ Apr 10, 2012 -> 06:12 PM) Why on earth would you choose to live here if you believe your government is purposefully encouraging you to poison yourself? Better than a government that shoots its own people, you gotta admit that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamshack Posted April 10, 2012 Author Share Posted April 10, 2012 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Apr 10, 2012 -> 04:13 PM) Better than a government that shoots its own people, you gotta admit that. Is it? Better than the one that tells you to slowly poison your child? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted April 10, 2012 Share Posted April 10, 2012 QUOTE (iamshack @ Apr 10, 2012 -> 06:16 PM) Is it? Better than the one that tells you to slowly poison your child? I'm an intelligent being, so i have every right to attempt to control the things that a child of mine would take in. That would include controlling the levels of processed garbage in their diet...and also, perhaps more importantly, controlling the levels of high sugar, high fat food advertising that they are exposed to. I don't know if things have changed recently, but I can still remember being absolutely bombarded with ads for sugary cereals and snacks along with toy ads while watching cartoons as a youngin'. Other people obviously have the right to make similar choices...but then my question should be whether it's the governments job to be subsidizing choices that are clearly bad for people but good for certain businesses. I wouldn't think people need the help to make choices that are bad for them and bad for their families, but the government, big ag, and big advertising are certainly convinced they do, so they help at every step. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamshack Posted April 10, 2012 Author Share Posted April 10, 2012 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Apr 10, 2012 -> 05:21 PM) I'm an intelligent being, so i have every right to attempt to control the things that a child of mine would take in. That would include controlling the levels of processed garbage in their diet...and also, perhaps more importantly, controlling the levels of high sugar, high fat food advertising that they are exposed to. I don't know if things have changed recently, but I can still remember being absolutely bombarded with ads for sugary cereals and snacks along with toy ads while watching cartoons as a youngin'. Other people obviously have the right to make similar choices...but then my question should be whether it's the governments job to be subsidizing choices that are clearly bad for people but good for certain businesses. I wouldn't think people need the help to make choices that are bad for them and bad for their families, but the government, big ag, and big advertising are certainly convinced they do, so they help at every step. Well that, is a tragedy. Back to dog foods. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockRaines Posted April 10, 2012 Share Posted April 10, 2012 The only parents I see poisoning their kids are lazy motherf***ers who didnt want the kids in the first place. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamshack Posted April 10, 2012 Author Share Posted April 10, 2012 QUOTE (RockRaines @ Apr 10, 2012 -> 05:30 PM) The only parents I see poisoning their kids are lazy motherf***ers who didnt want the kids in the first place. That's because you shop at places like Whole Foods, where, because you live in a somewhat urban area, you have that choice. Go to the local Jewel or Aldi or to some Piggy Wiggly in Kentucky and see what is on the shelves. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
knightni Posted April 10, 2012 Share Posted April 10, 2012 Any possible way that we can get back to talking about pets? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve9347 Posted April 10, 2012 Share Posted April 10, 2012 (edited) QUOTE (iamshack @ Apr 10, 2012 -> 05:16 PM) Is it? Better than the one that tells you to slowly poison your child? Dude, how can you deny that the government is in bed with a lot of business that produces the food stupid (I point out stupid because you seem to think Americans have no choice, when they do) Americans are feeding their children? Am I going to have to enforce my future child takes his/her own lunch to school? There's a good chance I will. I remember how I ate in school, and it was reprehensible. I, of course, burned it off playing hockey and baseball, but a lot of kids don't burn it off and also get themselves exempt from gym class for a variety of reasons. The government is in bed with the meat industry, and again, they defined pizza as a vegetable. How Pizza Became a Vegetable through the Magic of Influence-Peddling School meals that are subsidized by the federal government must include a certain amount of vegetables," the AP reports, "and USDA's proposal could have pushed pizza-makers and potato growers out of the school lunch business." It would have pushed vegetable growers into the business, but their lobbyists aren't as powerful, it seems. Because money. Because yeah, it's been happening for a very long time. Until the consumer on a large-scale cries foul (clearly not happening, look at fat America), then nothing will change. Edited April 10, 2012 by Steve9347 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve9347 Posted April 10, 2012 Share Posted April 10, 2012 QUOTE (knightni @ Apr 10, 2012 -> 05:53 PM) Any possible way that we can get back to talking about pets? This convo is great. Feel free to split the two topics, Mr. Moderator! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyyle23 Posted April 10, 2012 Share Posted April 10, 2012 So my daughters Sulcata tortoise has pretty much doubled in size in the past 3 months. It is an eating machine Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve9347 Posted April 10, 2012 Share Posted April 10, 2012 QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Apr 10, 2012 -> 06:05 PM) So my daughters Sulcata tortoise has pretty much doubled in size in the past 3 months. It is an eating machine I hate when people post things like this without a picture. Let's see that bastard. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyyle23 Posted April 10, 2012 Share Posted April 10, 2012 Fine then Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamshack Posted April 10, 2012 Author Share Posted April 10, 2012 (edited) QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Apr 10, 2012 -> 05:01 PM) Dude, how can you deny that the government is in bed with a lot of business that produces the food stupid (I point out stupid because you seem to think Americans have no choice, when they do) Americans are feeding their children? Am I going to have to enforce my future child takes his/her own lunch to school? There's a good chance I will. I remember how I ate in school, and it was reprehensible. I, of course, burned it off playing hockey and baseball, but a lot of kids don't burn it off and also get themselves exempt from gym class for a variety of reasons. The government is in bed with the meat industry, and again, they defined pizza as a vegetable. How Pizza Became a Vegetable through the Magic of Influence-Peddling Because money. Because yeah, it's been happening for a very long time. Until the consumer on a large-scale cries foul (clearly not happening, look at fat America), then nothing will change. I didn't deny much of what you and Balta were arguing, only the reasons for why it occurred. I think I specifically stated that the government looked out for it's best interests when partnering with the food industry. But this didn't all happen overnight in one big colossal conspiracy theory and implementation. What you and Balta are doing is coming up with some ad hoc explanation for why things are how they are, when that is simply not true. It was the result of a hundred and fifty years of industrialization, poor decisions regarding fortification with various vitamins, poor decisions for the sake of longer shelf lives, misunderstanding the role of sugars in our diets, etc. One can go on and on and on if one only reads the actual history of the food industry as it relates to the government instead of attempting to sum it all up in one catchy and bold statement designed to win a debate on a message board about baseball. Additionally, if that is truly what you believe, the fact that you would stand by and accept that something so core and central to your well-being, your health, and especially that of our children, would be deliberately fed destructive diets simply for the reason that they were more profitable for some group of farmers and some movers and shakers in our government is really frightening to me. You truly believe we should have to sift through our government's purposeful lies in regards to recommendations on how to properly feed our children? Can you imagine if they lied about how to properly restrain your child in a car seat? Edited April 10, 2012 by iamshack Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted April 11, 2012 Share Posted April 11, 2012 QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Apr 10, 2012 -> 07:22 PM) Fine then Can't stand turtles as pets. Had one, eventually realized I really didn't enjoy having to care for that one. When I left for college, parents replaced everything with neglect, think that was the last time it's tank was cleaned. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.