Should the government interfere to get people to eat healthy diets?

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

No. Sure tons of people eat utter crap, but if they get fat or heart disease, whose fault is it? Plus there's already labels and plenty of places you can look up telling you what's in food, if you know it's toxic and eat it anyway, it's your fault. And honestly if the government started doing things like taxing fast food or stuff that was "bad for you" then I bet people might start proposing things like requiring obese people to exercise a certain amount of time per day.

Put simply, lots of fast food and junk food is bad, but the nanny state is far worse.

[minionofmidas]

Only up to a point.

[Gabu]

Personally, I think there's something seriously messed up when healthy food costs twice as much as crap food, but I don't know what you could possibly do to change that that wouldn't be an overly heavy-handed government action that would start a dangerous slippery slope.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Personally, I think there's something seriously messed up when healthy food costs twice as much as crap food

Nothng messed about it, just the standard marketplace. Which car will be higher quality, one costing $5,000 or one costing $50,000? Which TV will be better, the one you can buy for $50 or the one that costs $10,000?

[minionofmidas]

Personally, I think there's something seriously messed up when healthy food costs twice as much as crap food

Nothng messed about it, just the standard marketplace. Which car will be higher quality, one costing $5,000 or one costing $50,000? Which TV will be better, the one you can buy for $50 or the one that costs $10,000?

That's just part of it. The other part of the answer lies in the intricacies of agricultural subsidies legislation.

[opebo]

Personally, I think there's something seriously messed up when healthy food costs twice as much as crap food

Nothng messed about it, just the standard marketplace. Which car will be higher quality, one costing $5,000 or one costing $50,000? Which TV will be better, the one you can buy for $50 or the one that costs $10,000?

I'm a bit skeptical of 'the market', since I notice that it always leads to less choice and worse quality.  Or anyway whatever it is that is emanating from america and taking over the world does that.  Maybe its fascism, but people tend to call it capitalism or the market.

For example a peice of sh**t Starbucks opened in Khon Kaen recently, and another in Nong Khai.  If you can imagine these places are very far upcountry and were completely uncontaminated just a few years ago, with only high quality food and drink.  It can only be a matter of time..

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Well I'm just referring to the market in the US. Obviously different elsewhere. And yes, US capitalist businesses do contaminate any area they touch.

[Ebowed]

Well, define 'interfere.'  I support banning non-naturally occurring trans fats, I think school lunch programs should take every effort to be nutritional, etc.

[Undisguised Sockpuppet]

As in people's own personal choices on an individual basis(As in Mitty's dream of a cheeseburger tax)? No. But ending useless agricultural subsidies/tarriffs, banning non-natural trans fats and banning high fructose corn syrup yes.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Well, define 'interfere.'  I support banning non-naturally occurring trans fats, I think school lunch programs should take every effort to be nutritional, etc.

Thinks like placing additional taxes or restricting advertising of food that's "bad for you".

As in people's own personal choices on an individual basis(As in Mitty's dream of a cheeseburger tax)? No. But ending useless agricultural subsidies/tarriffs, banning non-natural trans fats and banning high fructose corn syrup yes.

Straha's posts have had a great improvement lately, anyone else notice this? Yes, I completely agree with this one here.

[Undisguised Sockpuppet]

As long as the product being advertised is legal and the advertisement doesn't contain any false statements(stuff like "This brand of cigarettes will make you healthier") they should be able to advertise in any medium in which they can buy a slot. Also besides the no advertising patently illegal stuff or making outrageous claims there should be ZERO restrictions on the content of the ads and most definately no government agency forcing products to have warning labels. Come on people haven't any of you knuckleheads read the first amendment?!

[Ban my account ffs!]

The government should not interfere to FORCE people into eating healthy diets, but:

The government could try a little harder to make sure that healthy options aren't out of reach for so many Americans and schools should stress the importance of healthy eating and require phys. ed. in order to get kids more active for a healthier lifestyle.

Also, I think that restaurants need to work on scaling down portion sizes.  Many restaurants are now offering half portion plates and lighter portioned lunches, but the price often justifies simply ordering hte larger portion and eating most of it.

By educating the public about healthy eating and better lifestyles, people will begin to force restaurants and grocers into offering healthier, more affordable options which would ultimately be better for all of us.

[Ebowed]

Thinks like placing additional taxes or restricting advertising of food that's "bad for you".

Well, look, you can't make blanket statements opposing that sort of thing.  Fast food advertisements shouldn't dishonestly claim to be healthy when they're not.  I probably wouldn't object to mandatory health warnings in fast food advertisements.

I think taxing fast food would largely function as a tax on the poor, but we do need to consider all of the negative health effects on society that are around simply because it's cheaper (or seen as cheaper) to go to McDonald's than eat fruit and vegetables.

[Undisguised Sockpuppet]

Farm subsidies/price supports/tarriffs are why fruit/vegetables are more expensive than fast food.

[AkSaber]

Nope.

[Sensei]

of course not.

[David S]

No. Sure tons of people eat utter crap, but if they get fat or heart disease, whose fault is it? Plus there's already labels and plenty of places you can look up telling you what's in food, if you know it's toxic and eat it anyway, it's your fault. And honestly if the government started doing things like taxing fast food or stuff that was "bad for you" then I bet people might start proposing things like requiring obese people to exercise a certain amount of time per day.

Put simply, lots of fast food and junk food is bad, but the nanny state is far worse.

BRTD on occasion you say something which absolutely impresses the hell out of me. That was an excellent post. Once again you stood up for freedom.

[SPC]

The government's only duty regarding this issue is to put a warning label, so it is at the consumer's disgression. The do otherwise would be totalitarian.

[afleitch]

During WWII, Britain was a country that faced nationwide rationing. If you look at the diet they had and the food they ate, butters, fats, lard, meats, cheese eggs, etc it was, in comparison high in fat and high in calories. Okay it wasn't processed food but it would be, by todays standards, considered 'unhealthy.' Yet again by comparison they were fitter - why? because they worked and exercised to burn it off. Everyone needs to exercise more, to burn off the excess. You need to balance any drive to promote 'healthy eating' with the promotion of exercise.

[Small Business Owner of Any Repute]

Farm subsidies/price supports/tarriffs are why fruit/vegetables are more expensive than fast food.

Just about everything served at fast food restaurants comes from a farm at one point.  You know, potatoes for french fries; wheat for hamburger buns; chicken testicles for McNuggets.

The real problem with eating healthy is that eating healthy often takes a lot more effort.  It's quicker and easier to cook potatoes by dunking them in oil for a few minutes rather than baking them in an oven.  It's easier to serve 73% lean burgers than go through the work to trim the fat and make burgers 95% lean.  It's easier to grind and liquify undesirable chicken meat in a factory than to hand trim a chicken breast to the point that I do at home.

And besides, junk food is popular because it tastes good—liking the taste of fat was an evolutionary advantage.  And there's also an economy of scale working: not that many people are clamoring for health food, and the ones who are can afford to spend a few bucks extra.

Fast food advertisements shouldn't dishonestly claim to be healthy when they're not.  I probably wouldn't object to mandatory health warnings in fast food advertisements.

I think that's a great first step.  Since we're moving more and more towards a restaurant-based society (for better or for worse), I think we need to put the same kind of nutrition labels on menus that come on things we buy in the store.

And yeah, this means the McDonalds menu boards need to list calories and total grams of fat.  They don't want to do it, because it would hurt sales.  Duh.

Getting fat is so easy when you don't have that kind of information.  Everyone knows that McDonalds isn't health food, but does everyone know how bad eating at McDonalds is?  That given the right picks off the message board, you can consume your daily calorie requirement in one meal, and go many, many times over your RDA of sodium and fats?

Or that the dressing for those McSalads often times add as much fat as you'd get from just going for the damned Big Mac?

Also, I think that restaurants need to work on scaling down portion sizes.  Many restaurants are now offering half portion plates and lighter portioned lunches, but the price often justifies simply ordering hte larger portion and eating most of it.

The last time I was at TGI Fridays, I noticed that their menu now offers smaller sized portions—think of it as a lunch menu offered all day long.  I ordered something off it, and was thrilled to finally find a portion I could finish without overstuffing myself.  (And save about $3 in the process—who needs all that extra filler pasta anyway?)

[Friz]

Absolutely not.

[Jake]

Also, I think that restaurants need to work on scaling down portion sizes.  Many restaurants are now offering half portion plates and lighter portioned lunches, but the price often justifies simply ordering hte larger portion and eating most of it.

This is why I don't eat out at sit down restaraunts anymore. I simply couldn't finish meals without feeling sick, and if I didn't finish I felt guilty.

Anyway, to a degree they should. Removing the sales tax exemption for junk food is a good first step. Banning junk foods from schools and requiring meals to be healthy is another. And requiring restaraunts to list nutritional facts on menus or ordering boards is another. I'm also of the mind that junk food commercials should be banned from TV adverstising similar to cigarettes.

[NDN]

As in people's own personal choices on an individual basis(As in Mitty's dream of a cheeseburger tax)? No. But ending useless agricultural subsidies/tarriffs, banning non-natural trans fats and banning high fructose corn syrup yes.

[Undisguised Sockpuppet]

As in people's own personal choices on an individual basis(As in Mitty's dream of a cheeseburger tax)? No. But ending useless agricultural subsidies/tarriffs, banning non-natural trans fats and banning high fructose corn syrup yes.

Yay you agree with me.