Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

We're being told to eat seven portions of fruit and vegFollow

#52 Apr 08 2014 at 9:29 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
Jophiel wrote:
gbaji wrote:
If all they hear is how bad fast food is, but not how bad any processed food is, the answer is likely to be "pretty darn high".

Good thing people mention that all the time then. Hooray!


Hooray for me then! Smiley: yippee
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#53 Apr 09 2014 at 6:53 AM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,781 posts
gbaji wrote:
Jophiel wrote:
I don't think anyone is advocating switching from Big Macs to Salisbury steak TV dinners or canned ravioli.


Advocating directly? No. Advocating by default? Absolutely. What percentage of people who decide to cut back on fast food as a result of a "fast food is bad" campaign are going to replace it with processed foods from the grocery store versus healthy home cooked meals from fresh ingredients? If all they hear is how bad fast food is, but not how bad any processed food is, the answer is likely to be "pretty darn high".

Why would that have to be the answer? Why would the assumed substitute be frozen dinners?

Why would they buy a five dollar frozen dinner at the grocery store when they can get a freshly prepared value meal steaming hot and fresh out of the drive-through window of the fast food joint.

If you convince the fast food connoisseur that McD's is gonna kill them, they'll go to Subway for lunch - or maybe they'll up the ante and go to Panera Bread.


____________________________
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
#54 Apr 09 2014 at 7:02 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Elinda wrote:
Why would that have to be the answer? Why would the assumed substitute be frozen dinners?

Because in Gbaji's world, people only hear that "fast food" is bad but never heard anything negative about eating a $2 Hungry Man frozen chicken dinner or promotion of fresh foods over packaged/processed stuff.

Really, it's because if the conventional wisdom is A then Gbaji has to take B to show how smart he is for not agreeing with the sciencey-types. And then you get arguments like "Maybe pregnant women shouldn't drink beer but then they'll just go home and drink wine anyway which is just as bad so drinking beer really isn't that bad."
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#55 Apr 09 2014 at 7:17 AM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,781 posts
Jophiel wrote:
Elinda wrote:
Why would that have to be the answer? Why would the assumed substitute be frozen dinners?

Because in Gbaji's world, people only hear that "fast food" is bad but never heard anything negative about eating a $2 Hungry Man frozen chicken dinner or promotion of fresh foods over packaged/processed stuff.

Really, it's because if the conventional wisdom is A then Gbaji has to take B to show how smart he is for not agreeing with the sciencey-types. And then you get arguments like "Maybe pregnant women shouldn't drink beer but then they'll just go home and drink wine anyway which is just as bad so drinking beer really isn't that bad."

Wine doesn't contribute to beer belly.
____________________________
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
#56 Apr 09 2014 at 7:24 AM Rating: Good
*******
50,767 posts
Jophiel wrote:
Because in Gbaji's world, people only hear that "fast food" is bad but never heard anything negative about eating a $2 Hungry Man frozen chicken dinner or promotion of fresh foods over packaged/processed stuff.
No one can possibly be as well informed as people pretending to be extremist conservatives.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#57 Apr 09 2014 at 7:27 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
In Gabji's world, people say that people are woefully uninformed about Chef Boy-Ar-Dee being a poor step up from Whoppers but then flip their **** when Michelle Obama promotes healthy eating and fresh food.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#58 Apr 09 2014 at 2:36 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
Seriously guys? You don't get that the same kinds of parents who feed their kids McDonalds every other day, upon being convinced that "fast food is bad", are going to put their foot down the next time their kids ask for McDonalds, and open up that can of Chef Boyardee. Absolutely. WTF? Pretty much no one leaps from using fast food as their go-to method for feeding their families, to home cooking meals in one step.

You guys get that the targets for the "convince people fast food is bad" movement are not the folks who once a week or so eat fast food. It's the people who eat there every single day. It's the people for whom dinner for the family means bags of fast food. Those people are going to see hungry man as the first alternative to fast food. And they'll almost certainly think they're doing such a great job for their kids because "I'm not feeding them that junky fast food no more!". Oh yeah...

What do you think people with those sorts of habits will do?
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#59 Apr 09 2014 at 2:41 PM Rating: Good
*******
50,767 posts
gbaji wrote:
You don't get that the same kinds of parents who feed their kids McDonalds every other day, upon being convinced that "fast food is bad", are going to put their foot down the next time their kids ask for McDonalds, and open up that can of Chef Boyardee.
Not the argument being made, but you've double downed like seven times already so it's not like you're going to take a step back or anything.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#60 Apr 09 2014 at 2:42 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
Jophiel wrote:
In Gabji's world, people say that people are woefully uninformed about Chef Boy-Ar-Dee being a poor step up from Whoppers but then flip their sh*t when Michelle Obama promotes healthy eating and fresh food.


And once again, the liberal focuses on the wrong part of the issue. It's not about healthy food versus unhealthy. It's about the method of "promoting". If promoting means mandating what foods schools can serve, or creating regulations that arbitrarily affect the costs of foods in order to influence people's decisions, that's a problem for folks who believe that each individual ought to have rights to do things like choose what to eat. There's a difference between telling people about eating healthy, and forcing them to do so.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#61 Apr 09 2014 at 2:46 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
gbaji wrote:
You don't get that the same kinds of parents who feed their kids McDonalds every other day, upon being convinced that "fast food is bad", are going to put their foot down the next time their kids ask for McDonalds, and open up that can of Chef Boyardee.
Not the argument being made...


Um... Considering it's my argument, I'm reasonably sure I'm right and you're wrong. My argument is that if you over focus on just telling people that fast food is unhealthy, instead of teaching people what makes food healthy versus unhealthy across the board, most of the people who do reduce their fast food intake will replace it with foods that are likely to be just as bad for them (processed packaged foods). Why? Because ultimately, fast food is about convenience. It's about not having to cook. The next obvious step then is something that is easy to cook. Which leads us right to microwave dinners and canned foods.

What the hell do people think happens?
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#62 Apr 09 2014 at 3:21 PM Rating: Good
*******
50,767 posts
gbaji wrote:
Considering it's my argument
Sure, its your argument against things noone really argued. Kind of the point, though there is genuine hilarity in watching you double down so often.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#63 Apr 09 2014 at 3:57 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
lolgaxe wrote:
you've double downed like seven times already

Seven Double Downs can't be good for you no matter what metric.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#64 Apr 09 2014 at 3:58 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
gbaji wrote:
And once again, the liberal focuses on the wrong part of the issue. It's not about healthy food versus unhealthy. It's about the method of "promoting".

So we're agreed that it is being promoted and now you're just going to throw a tizzy and try to change the subject into "liberty" Smiley: laugh

When the only tool you are is a liberty-hammer, every argument looks like the same nail.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#65 Apr 09 2014 at 4:57 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
gbaji wrote:
Considering it's my argument
Sure, its your argument against things noone really argued.


My argument is against documentaries and health movements that focus solely on "fast food", because that's only part of the picture, and can lead people to think that buying processed pre-packaged foods in the grocery store is an improvement, when it really isn't. If you agree with this, then just say "I agree". How freaking simple is that?

I get that there is information out there about the unhealthy nature of processed foods. I've never claimed there isn't. But it's massively overshadowed by the anti-fast-food movement. I do happen to believe that for a hell of a lot of people, their daily food choices usually consist of "something prepared by someone else" or "something that comes in a can or microwave container". Do you disagree? So convincing that person to eat less fast food is most likely going to just result in them eating more processed foods. It's not freaking rocket science.

We should be teaching people to prepare healthy meals at home rather than cherry picking specific enemy foods/industries of the moment and demonizing them. That's just going to result in people moving from one bad food choice to another. And no, nothing that Michelle Obama has done really accomplishes this. A few photo ops isn't really doing anything. If we really want to turn our health/food problems around, we need to maybe bring back things like home economics and cooking classes in schools. We need to stop demonizing choices of being a stay at home Mom/Dad. We need to recognize that taking care of the home is a legitimate thing to do rather than making fun of people who choose to do it (yeah, I'm looking at you liberals).

Mandating the cafeteria menus in schools doesn't teach people anything other than to hate "healthy" foods. It's the *** wrong way of going about this. Requiring restaurants to print calorie info on their menus doesn't do a damn thing either. Limiting the sizes of fountain soda drinks isn't helpful either. See how the stuff we're doing isn't helpful? That's kinda my point.

Edited, Apr 9th 2014 4:28pm by gbaji
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#66 Apr 09 2014 at 5:10 PM Rating: Good
*******
50,767 posts
gbaji wrote:
How freaking simple is that?
When you want to argue the argument that's in front of you instead of just standing on a soap box and Doop-speaking, let us know.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#67 Apr 09 2014 at 5:20 PM Rating: Excellent
GBATE!! Never saw it coming
Avatar
****
9,957 posts
gbaji wrote:
lolgaxe wrote:
gbaji wrote:
You don't get that the same kinds of parents who feed their kids McDonalds every other day, upon being convinced that "fast food is bad", are going to put their foot down the next time their kids ask for McDonalds, and open up that can of Chef Boyardee.
Not the argument being made...


Um... Considering it's my argument, I'm reasonably sure I'm right and you're wrong. My argument is that if you over focus on just telling people that fast food is unhealthy, instead of teaching people what makes food healthy versus unhealthy across the board, most of the people who do reduce their fast food intake will replace it with foods that are likely to be just as bad for them (processed packaged foods). Why? Because ultimately, fast food is about convenience. It's about not having to cook. The next obvious step then is something that is easy to cook. Which leads us right to microwave dinners and canned foods.

What the hell do people think happens?

I'm inclined to think what happens is that people who consume fast food regularly are likely to be less affluent and/or urban poor. Given that I think they'll still buy a lot of processed, microwaveable crap because it's cheaper and the urban poor are less likely to have easy access to decent food markets.

Just, y'know, an slightly related observation.
____________________________
remorajunbao wrote:
One day I'm going to fly to Canada and open the curtains in your office.

#68 Apr 09 2014 at 5:47 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
Friar Bijou wrote:
I'm inclined to think what happens is that people who consume fast food regularly are likely to be less affluent and/or urban poor. Given that I think they'll still buy a lot of processed, microwaveable crap because it's cheaper and the urban poor are less likely to have easy access to decent food markets.


Absolutely. It's a chicken and egg thing though, isn't it? Those neighborhoods have few food market choices because there aren't enough people shopping at them. Hard to ask grocers to stock fresh food if so much of it will just end out spoiling that they lose money on it. Easier for them to stock frozen, boxed, and canned stuff that'll last long (and is chock full of hearty preservatives!).

I'm not even arguing too much about solutions, just trying to get people to recognize that this really is a problem. It's nice and all for the middle class white liberal to declare war on fast food and think that this will resolve the plight of obesity among the poor. But they aren't really fixing anything IMO.

Edited, Apr 9th 2014 4:48pm by gbaji
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#69 Apr 10 2014 at 10:16 AM Rating: Good
gbaji wrote:
Friar Bijou wrote:
I'm inclined to think what happens is that people who consume fast food regularly are likely to be less affluent and/or urban poor. Given that I think they'll still buy a lot of processed, microwaveable crap because it's cheaper and the urban poor are less likely to have easy access to decent food markets.


Absolutely. It's a chicken and egg thing though, isn't it? Those neighborhoods have few food market choices because there aren't enough people shopping at them. Hard to ask grocers to stock fresh food if so much of it will just end out spoiling that they lose money on it. Easier for them to stock frozen, boxed, and canned stuff that'll last long (and is chock full of hearty preservatives!).

I'm not even arguing too much about solutions, just trying to get people to recognize that this really is a problem. It's nice and all for the middle class white liberal to declare war on fast food and think that this will resolve the plight of obesity among the poor. But they aren't really fixing anything IMO.


Actually, you'd be surprised at how many gas stations/convenience stores successfully sell fresh foods. They're all over the place in Japan, and I visited one in Montana.

I think it's actually rural places that are less likely to stock fresh foods in a gas station/convenience store. Everyone has a car by default there and knows that getting groceries is a once a week mega chore, so they might as well go to Super Wal-Mart.

Whereas in a true urban setting (see: Tokyo, New York) consumers are more likely to purchase only as much fresh food as they can carry home as they walk.


Edited, Apr 10th 2014 12:16pm by Catwho
#70 Apr 10 2014 at 10:26 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
I love the straw man of the "white middle class liberal" simply declaring "war" on fast food and calling it a day when the issue of food deserts has been going around for over a decade (probably over two decades at this point).

One of the many issues with gas stations and the like stocking fresh food (generally produce, I'm not ready to buy my pork cutlets from Citgo) is that they can't get supermarket wholesale pricing so they wind up selling apples for a buck each rather than 20¢ each. Which means that people can't afford them as a staple. Forget vegetables; you're lucky to find a shrink wrapped 2-pack of pale pinkish tomatoes for $2.50
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#71 Apr 10 2014 at 11:58 AM Rating: Excellent
*******
50,767 posts
Conservatives seem to be great at declaring war, but **** at winning them.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#72 Apr 10 2014 at 1:27 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
Catwho wrote:
Actually, you'd be surprised at how many gas stations/convenience stores successfully sell fresh foods. They're all over the place in Japan, and I visited one in Montana.


Probably not so many in poor urban neighborhoods in say Detroit, Atlanta, DC, etc, though. That's the target that's missing here.

Quote:
I think it's actually rural places that are less likely to stock fresh foods in a gas station/convenience store. Everyone has a car by default there and knows that getting groceries is a once a week mega chore, so they might as well go to Super Wal-Mart.

Whereas in a true urban setting (see: Tokyo, New York) consumers are more likely to purchase only as much fresh food as they can carry home as they walk.


Sure. We're still missing the target audience here. I'm reasonably sure that the rural folks with their cars and long commutes aren't the ones eating fast food 5+ days a week. Nor are the folks living in upscale urban neighborhoods. It's poor people in urban neighborhoods who are most likely to subsist on a diet of fast food and processed junk because that's primarily what's available to them.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#73 Apr 10 2014 at 1:28 PM Rating: Excellent
*******
50,767 posts
gbaji wrote:
I'm reasonably sure that the rural folks with their cars and long commutes aren't the ones eating fast food 5+ days a week.
You'd be wrong.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#74 Apr 10 2014 at 1:36 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
Jophiel wrote:
I love the straw man of the "white middle class liberal" simply declaring "war" on fast food and calling it a day when the issue of food deserts has been going around for over a decade (probably over two decades at this point).


When one literally gets 1000 times more media than the other and is almost exclusively promoted by white middle class liberals, it's not a strawman.

For the third time, I'm not saying that no one has ever mentioned or addressed other aspects of this issue. I'm saying that we vastly overfocus on fast food as the target of choice and that this therefore distracts attention away from what is really the bigger problem.

Quote:
One of the many issues with gas stations and the like stocking fresh food (generally produce, I'm not ready to buy my pork cutlets from Citgo) is that they can't get supermarket wholesale pricing so they wind up selling apples for a buck each rather than 20¢ each. Which means that people can't afford them as a staple. Forget vegetables; you're lucky to find a shrink wrapped 2-pack of pale pinkish tomatoes for $2.50


Yup. Now find me how many times in the last few years a politician made a major policy movement or even proposal regarding this problem which got more than local media attention? Now go look at the numerous broadly publicized calls for reductions of soda sizes, health information on menus, outrage over kids meals with toys in them, etc, etc, etc.

I'm just pointing out the discrepancy. Fast food is targeted for two reasons:

1. It's an easy target.

2. They're usually sold by largish corporations, so it's a twofer from the liberal perspective.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#75 Apr 10 2014 at 2:05 PM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
*****
13,666 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
gbaji wrote:
I'm reasonably sure that the rural folks with their cars and long commutes aren't the ones eating fast food 5+ days a week.
You'd be wrong.

I don't see how anyone with a long commute doesn't subsist on fast food.

Also, don't shatter the illusion...



Smiley: rolleyes
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#76 Apr 10 2014 at 2:06 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
gbaji wrote:
When one literally gets 1000 times more media than the other and is almost exclusively promoted by white middle class liberals, it's not a strawman.

Smiley: laugh Ah, you...

Quote:
Yup. Now find me how many times in the last few years a politician made a major policy movement or even proposal regarding this problem which got more than local media attention?

Why don't you find out and report back since you know it's "literally 1000 times!" less than blah blah blah. That said, attracting businesses generally *is* a "local issue" by its very nature so of course attention to it will be local. Hell, most of the other stuff you cry about is local as well such as the NYC soda ban or the (San Francisco?) ban on kid's meal toys. Those do make for more interesting stories though than "St. Louis city council votes to supply economic incentives to grocers".

I suppose people finding the NYC soda ban story better water cooler chatter than St. Louis property tax incentives though is all the fault of liberal media and white middle class liberals. Ever get tired of playing the martyr? Even for a little while?

Edited, Apr 10th 2014 3:06pm by Jophiel
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 279 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (279)