Forums | MacLife

Can we also have discourse laws before television programs ?

"By not doing some outdoor physical activity such as playing catch, bicycling, or even walking, you will not burn 230 calories during this episode of 'Wife Swap' "

Requiring the nutrition facts of all foods to be publicly and easily available is a great thing. It gives customers the ability to know what they are consuming and to choose healthier food. It should also make consumers reliable for the vast majority of health problems which may be created by eating unhealthy food, lifting liability from the company selling the food. Those are both good things.

I like it. This would make it easier than reading the board on the side of the wall with tiny ass print to find out a double cheeseburger is 6-800 calories.
I would still eat the cheeseburger, unless it would surpass ym daily calorie limit. So I can see the restaurants fighting this.

JakeTheTall wrote:

Freakout Jackson wrote:

JakeTheTall wrote:

Can we also have discourse laws before television programs ?

"By not doing some outdoor physical activity such as playing catch, bicycling, or even walking, you will not burn 230 calories during this episode of 'Wife Swap' "

Psst....dude your analogy's broken.

I know, but I felt like taking a stab at the other part of the problem, that most people aren't physically active anymore.

Do you live in a county that recently went dry or something?

radarman wrote:

jerwin wrote:

I don't have a bomb calorimeter in my kitchen.

I'm going to assume you aren't a restaurant chain, either. If you were, you would only have to run a few samples of each meal through one - and you could probably rent time at a nearby university that has one.

Or, you could add the calories for each ingredient, deduct a percentage to account for cooking, and call it good - but that probably wouldn't fly as an official figure.

Eh. I cook for myself, from relatively unprocessed ingredients. And I tend not to patronize restaurant chains

I've got a book Blue Cross sent me that lists the nutritional information for major restaurant chains. I keep it in my car.

mo' ron wrote:

After reading a headline recently that 1/4 of all Americans are fat, I do think some of that responsibility goes to businesses and food companies that aggressively push foods made of cheaper less healthy materials, or things that are too "addicting" but unhealthy to try and keep customers dependent.

"Addicting" ?  "Less healthy" ?

Does more calories = less healthy ?  Ask anyone who regularly exercises if more calories (or even more fat content) make food "unhealthy."

I just see people eating too many calories. 

Chocolate cake has been around for ages.  A both delicious and calorie rich food.  Don't blame the cake, nor the cake-maker.

JakeTheTall wrote:

mo' ron wrote:

After reading a headline recently that 1/4 of all Americans are fat, I do think some of that responsibility goes to businesses and food companies that aggressively push foods made of cheaper less healthy materials, or things that are too "addicting" but unhealthy to try and keep customers dependent.

"Addicting" ?  "Less healthy" ?

Does more calories = less healthy ?  Ask anyone who regularly exercises if more calories (or even more fat content) make food "unhealthy."

I just see people eating too many calories. 

Chocolate cake has been around for ages.  A both delicious and calorie rich food.  Don't blame the cake, nor the cake-maker.

Yes cake has been around for ages, so what's changing then? Why are people so fat?

The primary variable is the massive amounts of processed food we eat.

I don't think sedentary lifestyle can be to blamed. Is our lifestyle really more sedentary now than it was 10 or even 20 years ago?

I eat very high calorie meals. I have a rare steak with two eggs almost every lunch. Big salads and lots of green veggies. Supper is yet more meat and veggies.  But it's low carb, with the carbs are accompanied by fibre, so my weight, body fat, blood pressure, cholesterol etc are bang on optimal.

I have no idea how all the excess glucose that finds its way into so much food can't help but create an obesity and diabetes "epidemic". I bet there's not enough hours in the day for normal children to burn off all their processed starchy, sugar-laden food and juiceboxes. Sugar will be the new tobacco at some point.

Last edited by Ribtorus (2008-07-21 8:14 pm)

bratboy wrote:

I enjoy rare red meat, but every day doesn't sound healthy!

I had to compete for my rotations in A'stan. I was up aginst guys half my age, and I' was never an athlete by any stretch. I'm a proponent of an omnivorous diet of whole, unadulterated food. My medical history is a testament to the efficacy of such a diet.

matt wrote:

Requiring the nutrition facts of all foods to be publicly and easily available is a great thing. It gives customers the ability to know what they are consuming and to choose healthier food. It should also make consumers reliable for the vast majority of health problems which may be created by eating unhealthy food, lifting liability from the company selling the food. Those are both good things.

I agree, having the information will be helpful to those who make use of it. Good Change.

But sticking labels on everything won't stop people who are destined to live their whole life without a day's exercise. So it doesn't solve the problem.

mo'ron wrote:

I don't think sedentary lifestyle can be to blamed. Is our lifestyle really more sedentary now than it was 10 or even 20 years ago?

You would have to be pretty blind not to notice that people are spending more and more time behind a computer or TV screen rather then outside herding cattle.

Last edited by Greywolf (2008-07-22 3:56 am)