Shouldn't some of these substances be outright banned though if their full effects haven't even been properly researched?
Also, the problem isn't just being knowledgeable. It's to the point where virtually everything has these food additives in it. Try to go out and eat while avoiding all of these substances. It's virtually impossible. It's not like I just say, oh yeah, I don't want the soup with MSG in it, I'll go get that can saying "No MSG." Easy peasy! NOT. Because then you turn the can around, read the label on the back, and down there in the middle, mixed in with tons of other words is "autolyzed yeast extract." Yup, another name for MSG. But for some reason the food companies hope we won't notice it if they just rename it.
It's nowhere near as easy as you're saying. It takes extra hours sitting in the grocery store reading labels and limits your selection to virtually a single product every time. There's an issue when avoiding artificial substances that are harmful to your body limits you to one or sometimes no selections in a store or restaurant.
Just look at a chain like Too Jays. I ask the manager if there's anything in the restaurant without MSG in it. He went in the back, got the menu ingredients index, came back out and told me only the salad, and that's if I didn't eat it with dressing. Ended up going home and eating canned tuna with mixed vegetables that I had to cut, peel, and cook on my own. You're telling me I should be happy about living that way?
On July 14 2009 12:47 BisuBoi wrote: So does this surgeon general have any public stance on MSG and the food additives issue we have going on in America right now? What about the almost outright lying when it comes to food labels? There's a lot of good reasons for why America's population is obese. It's not just the citizen's fault. The food industry has a lot to do with it too. There's a lot of homework involved just trying to avoid artificial substances in your diet.
If by homework, you mean "google." With easy access to internet nowadays, ignorance is no excuse for obesity. Sure, food industry may or may not share some of the blame, but really, consumers have all the information they need at the tip of their fingers. Finger pointing at corporations is just being lazy and irresponsible.
Do you know all the names for MSG? Do you know all of its side effects? Are you aware of all the food additives being put in something as simple as chicken tenders and what the health effects of these compounds are?
Sorry, not trying to be aggressive towards you, but I think you might be underestimating exactly how many peculiarities are in prepared foods. I think it's kind of misleading to say "google." Google what? If people don't know to even look for something, Google's not going to do much good. Yes, consumers have all the information they need at their fingertips. Humans have everything they need to understand the laws of physics at their fingertips too. Doesn't mean it's easy.
I'm fit and in shape so I don't need the lecture about lazy and irresponsible. WHat I think is disgusting is that I need to pay a 30% premium on my groceries just to ensure they're not putting chemistry kits in my protein.
Stop being a lazy piece of shit and buy regular meat, and you're all set. You don't have to eat chicken tenders or microwave dinners every day, eh.
Also stop fearing everything just because it's 'artificial'. That's how diabetics die because their homeopathic 'doctor' told them to stop eating splenda. Really, 99% of those additives are completely harmless, unless you're eating 60 servings a day.
They're not harmless when you have an allergic reaction to glutamates. And don't call people a lazy piece of shit. That's rude. Want me to get out a list of all the steroids you'll find in "regular" meats? There's nothing "regular" about them.
On July 14 2009 12:47 BisuBoi wrote: So does this surgeon general have any public stance on MSG and the food additives issue we have going on in America right now? What about the almost outright lying when it comes to food labels? There's a lot of good reasons for why America's population is obese. It's not just the citizen's fault. The food industry has a lot to do with it too. There's a lot of homework involved just trying to avoid artificial substances in your diet.
If by homework, you mean "google." With easy access to internet nowadays, ignorance is no excuse for obesity. Sure, food industry may or may not share some of the blame, but really, consumers have all the information they need at the tip of their fingers. Finger pointing at corporations is just being lazy and irresponsible.
Do you know all the names for MSG? Do you know all of its side effects? Are you aware of all the food additives being put in something as simple as chicken tenders and what the health effects of these compounds are?
Sorry, not trying to be aggressive towards you, but I think you might be underestimating exactly how many peculiarities are in prepared foods. I think it's kind of misleading to say "google." Google what? If people don't know to even look for something, Google's not going to do much good. Yes, consumers have all the information they need at their fingertips. Humans have everything they need to understand the laws of physics at their fingertips too. Doesn't mean it's easy.
I'm fit and in shape so I don't need the lecture about lazy and irresponsible. WHat I think is disgusting is that I need to pay a 30% premium on my groceries just to ensure they're not putting chemistry kits in my protein.
Stop being a lazy piece of shit and buy regular meat, and you're all set. You don't have to eat chicken tenders or microwave dinners every day, eh.
Also stop fearing everything just because it's 'artificial'. That's how diabetics die because their homeopathic 'doctor' told them to stop eating splenda. Really, 99% of those additives are completely harmless, unless you're eating 60 servings a day.
They're not harmless when you have an allergic reaction to glutamates. And don't call people a lazy piece of shit. That's rude. Want me to get out a list of all the steroids you'll find in "regular" meats? There's nothing "regular" about them.
If you're that concerned, go buy from free range farmers. Allergic reactions are an exceptional case and don't apply to most people. It doesn't have to be that difficult. And really, as far as I'm concerned this stuff isn't dangerous when you're reasonable about what you eat. Read the wiki article on MSG - seems pretty reasonable to me.
This is an example of why it's not as easy as just avoiding foods with MSG.
Monosodium glutamate is one of several forms of glutamic acid found in foods, in large part because glutamic acid is pervasive in nature, being an amino acid. Glutamic acid and its salts can also be present in a wide variety of other additives, including hydrolyzed vegetable proteins, autolyzed yeast, hydrolyzed yeast, yeast extract, soy extracts, and protein isolate, any one of which may appear as "spices" or "natural flavorings."
And don't know how it is in Canada, but where I live I can't just go buy meat from free range farmers. They offer some free-range options in stores but those are very pricey. And also, what part of MSG isn't needed in food don't you get? MSG isn't like some intrinsic part of the food that would cost millions of dollars to take out. MSG is an ADDITIVE, AKA at any time they could say STOP putting this in the food and it could be done. Why are you here trying to convince me out of thinking MSG is bad for me or that it shouldn't be banned?
Also, in that same wiki article it says there was a positive correlation between MSG and BMI. As in MSG has a direct correlation with obesity.
Here are three very easy links to find which further explain the dangers of MSG. It is NOT harmless. That is what the agriculture industry wants you to think. Toxicologists sign off on cholesterol drugs that kill people too. They're corrupt scientists.
http:// www.becomehealthynow.com/article/dietbad/32/ - This article talks about the legal action that's been attempted already just to get the FDA to require food producers to clearly label when MSG is used in a product. Does it sound normal and healthy for a producer to go to such great lengths to avoid admitting the use of an ingredient in a product? That sounds innocent?
http:// www.truthinlabeling.org/ - Another site with additional information on the dangers of MSG.
And I have testimonial from myself that I know every time there is MSG in my food. I get very drowsy, cotton-mouth, swollen joints, and feel like I've eaten ten bowls of salt. This from a normal-sized meal with nothing inordinately salty.
Okay, I'll stop here though. I don't want to derail the thread. This is another topic and it's quite alright if you guys disagree. I was just asking if anyone knew the surgeon general's stance on the issue. Since it doesn't seem like anyone knows, I'll just not mention it any more.
On July 14 2009 15:18 BisuBoi wrote: This is an example of why it's not as easy as just avoiding foods with MSG.
*blah blah blah*
Are you like against organic foods or something? What is wrong with just buying organic foods so that you don't have to post massive things complaining about MSG on TL. For some reason, I find it rather easy to avoid MSG -- I just eat organic and all natural foods for a majority of my diet.
All this talk about MSG is just stupid. First of all, you CANNOT be allergic to MSG. The only way you can have a food allergy is if the food in question has a protein that can be detected by the IgE antibody. What people refer to as an allergic reaction can only be hypersensitivity from overconsumption of MSG, which should be impossible because consumption of that much MSG would kill a person.
Second, the chemical make up of MSG is just a nonessential amino acid (an amino acid that body can make by itself) with a single sodium attached to it. Now explain to me how an extra sodium molecule that comes off of the amino acid can do anything to harm the human body? When MSG hits water, the sodium comes off and you're left with a non essential amino acid.
You're all getting worked up over an amino acid and salt. The "dry mouth" is caused by the sodium, and this:
I get very drowsy, cotton-mouth, swollen joints, and feel like I've eaten ten bowls of salt. This from a normal-sized meal with nothing inordinately salty.
from two posts above is just... Epic fail. Swollen joints from something that gets expelled through urine... You probably have severe kidney issues if that's the case.
I have no idea what happened in this thread. Can someone please explain to a foreigner what a surgeon general does? And how it is relevant whether she is fat or not? Between the GM and health care posts I am really lost.
On July 14 2009 07:24 Caller wrote: i think the idea of a surgeon general is stupid.
politics is like mercury. It's lethal by itself, and mixing it with other things doesn't make it more palatable.
Ha! Funny and so true, and yet people are so gullible time after time they seem to think Government is this omniscient force that cures all ills, when in fact its the direct cause of those ills.
How people expect the Government to provide satisfactory healthcare, but yet they can't even manage one financial institution, mail service, or their own budget. Silly times we are living in.
I tend to agree with this view although I've been living in a country with universal healthcare. The idea of the government as some patriarchal caregiver dumbs people down imo and makes them unable to take control of their lives.
At the same time I can see the obvious positives with universal healthcare, BUT the big question that many people don't seem to understand is whether or not the government should provide healthcare. Why should that be the governments responsibility? Do we want to live in a society where our government takes care of us like children? No thanks.
On July 14 2009 17:07 zatic wrote: I have no idea what happened in this thread. Can someone please explain to a foreigner what a surgeon general does? And how it is relevant whether she is fat or not? Between the GM and health care posts I am really lost.
Well, obesity is like the number one thing that causes the most serious/common illness like cardio-vascular disease and other stuff like diabetes etc. It's also an indirect cause of stroke and alot of stuff since many fat people obviously don't exercise much and in generel lead fucked up unhealthy lives.
On July 14 2009 14:11 TimmyMac wrote: Also stop fearing everything just because it's 'artificial'. That's how diabetics die because their homeopathic 'doctor' told them to stop eating splenda. Really, 99% of those additives are completely harmless, unless you're eating 60 servings a day.
Err, I can throw up alot of research papers showing how sweeteners like aspartame (Splenda) directly affects transmittor substances in our brain and also increases levels of catecholamines (fight/flight hormones); dopamine, epinephrine, norepinephrine.
They have possible links to alot of neurological issues like hyperactivity, stress, tics etc. Sweeteners like aspartam cross over into the brain plasma easily and affects transmittor substances in many ways, of which many are still unknown.
Also your argument of additives being harmless, in general mean that they don't kill people or cause direct, serious illness. However they can cause alot of other issues of which I named some above.
Also, every person is different and reacts in different ways to food, additives, sweeteners etc. But one thing is certain; what we eat, affects us ALOT and that is something that really only has been discussed during more recent years.
MSG is bullshit and so is Splenda imo. Instead use Xylitol or Sorbitol, sweeteners, that don't seem to interact with the brain in the same way like aspartame (splenda). So many cases of instable emotions/behavior, overactivity etc etc could have their cause in what we get into our systems.
Along with pure sugar of course, that seems to be stuffed in everything...ugh. And glycose surup in like every bread in the store, the list of sugary/totally unnecessary stuff in food is gigantic.
Oh and this is not only in the US but everywhere in the world. Start reading what the food you buy contains. The other day I saw a bag of normal peanuts which turned out to contain MSG and 3 different color additives. Fucked up
On July 14 2009 14:11 TimmyMac wrote: Also stop fearing everything just because it's 'artificial'. That's how diabetics die because their homeopathic 'doctor' told them to stop eating splenda. Really, 99% of those additives are completely harmless, unless you're eating 60 servings a day.
Err, I can throw up alot of research papers showing how sweeteners like aspartame (Splenda) directly affects transmittor substances in our brain and also increases levels of catecholamines (fight/flight hormones); dopamine, epinephrine, norepinephrine.
They have possible links to alot of neurological issues like hyperactivity, stress, tics etc. Sweeteners like aspartam cross over into the brain plasma easily and affects transmittor substances in many ways, of which many are still unknown.
Also your argument of additives being harmless, in general mean that they don't kill people or cause direct, serious illness. However they can cause alot of other issues of which I named some above.
Also, every person is different and reacts in different ways to food, additives, sweeteners etc. But one thing is certain; what we eat, affects us ALOT and that is something that really only has been discussed during more recent years.
MSG is bullshit and so is Splenda imo. Instead use Xylitol or Sorbitol, sweeteners, that don't seem to interact with the brain in the same way like aspartame (splenda). So many cases of instable emotions/behavior, overactivity etc etc could have their cause in what we get into our systems.
Along with pure sugar of course, that seems to be stuffed in everything...ugh. And glycose surup in like every bread in the store, the list of sugary/totally unnecessary stuff in food is gigantic.
Oh and this is not only in the US but everywhere in the world. Start reading what the food you buy contains. The other day I saw a bag of normal peanuts which turned out to contain MSG and 3 different color additives. Fucked up
Yeah, that's exactly my sentiment. I find it quite odd that most people are shouting me down and telling me that I shouldn't be annoyed with it. It shows either they're all extremely dedicated cooks or they just don't realize how big of a problem it is. And tbh, I tend to doubt that most of TL sits there and cooks 3 meals a day.
On July 14 2009 17:07 zatic wrote: I have no idea what happened in this thread. Can someone please explain to a foreigner what a surgeon general does? And how it is relevant whether she is fat or not? Between the GM and health care posts I am really lost.
The Surgeon General is basically the executive branch's figurehead for Public Health and the nation's most powerful doctor. Technically, the Secretary of Health and Human Services is a higher position, but the Health and Human Services department usually deals with a lot more than just public health (like the financing of it, medicare, administration, etc). The Surgeon General can be seen as the scientific and medical counterpart of the Secretary. That's why if there are any major health concerns (such as the Swine Flu), it's the Surgeon General who makes the announcement to the public.
As for why she's fat or not, because she's supposed to be the figure head, OP has a problem of her being a role model. I personally disagree because I don't think doctors are really seen as role models anymore, but that's the argument for it.
On July 14 2009 17:07 zatic wrote: I have no idea what happened in this thread. Can someone please explain to a foreigner what a surgeon general does? And how it is relevant whether she is fat or not? Between the GM and health care posts I am really lost.
The Surgeon General is basically the executive branch's figurehead for Public Health and the nation's most powerful doctor. Technically, the Secretary of Health and Human Services is a higher position, but the Health and Human Services department usually deals with a lot more than just public health (like the financing of it, medicare, administration, etc). The Surgeon General can be seen as the scientific and medical counterpart of the Secretary. That's why if there are any major health concerns (such as the Swine Flu), it's the Surgeon General who makes the announcement to the public.
As for why she's fat or not, because she's supposed to be the figure head, OP has a problem of her being a role model. I personally disagree because I don't think doctors are really seen as role models anymore, but that's the argument for it.
Well, the thing with the idea of her being a role model though doesn't even need to be extended as far as doctors being treated as one (Personally, I feel like while they have lost respect overall, it isn't too bad, when have we ever looked upon doctors as perfect examples of taking care of their own health anyway). I mean, when was the last time we remember what the Surgeon General even looks like? There are messages and such mandated by law "from the Surgeon General", but really, it is a position without a face, I feel like.
No. See, you get this misleading crap from people who are trying to paint an ideological picture.
The current US Healthcare system, is an amalgamation of Private and Government. Medicare and Medicaid, SCHIP (Which ironically covers people until their 32...wait? Is a 32 y/o a child? Our congresscritters are insane) puts a huge strain not only on the Federal, State and every health clinic, hospital, etc. because it pays for roughly half of the price of the costs. So, where do the clinics, hospitals, etc. recoup this money? You.
Secondly, the average American is among the top .05% wealthiest people in the world, so of course it's going to be 'expensive' in comparison to outside the US. The U.S. hands down has the greatest doctors, nurses, surgeons, specialists, you name it, practitioners and technology and availability in the world.
You want to know how you cut down costs? You remove government impediment in the market. Quite frankly, I can't remember a time when government intervention into a market didn't result in disaster. Not only that, most Americans are HAPPY with their current healthcare.
And, for the hell of it.
Yeah, I'll pass.
P.S. If you want a look at how government run healthcare would be take a look at the V.A. As a veteran you're more likely to die in the hands of the V.A. than the Enemy (We have a lot of sayings about the V.A., hence why everyone in my family who is retired military never even goes to the V.A. and secondly my mother used to be a RN at a V.A. and we have heard enough bad stories)
God, hearing Republican talking points gives me a headache. The problem with them isn't even the position, it's that they're literally just stock arguments that nobody would come up with on their own. They get it by memorizing the talking points they get from their opinion leaders, then parroting it every chance they get.
Yeah, it MUST be government impediment that's the root of all evil. In fact, people would be better off with no government. Anarchy is the best form of gov't because then the free market would take care of everything and life would be perfect... The invisible hand. That should be our President.
I think it's pretty ridiculous that anyone would think a medical system without government regulation and oversight would be anything worth participating in. Even crazier is the notion that government paying for the patients would increase healthcare costs. Health care costs are high because of insurance for practitioners and because of the ridiculous amount of paperwork needed to validate claims with insurance companies. Most all of the problems in the health care industry are caused by the insurance industry. You could make the argument that insurance is high because of how the legal system handles malpractice cases but it's retarded to say programs that hardly everyone in the US even participates in are the reason the entire health care system is broken.
P.S. I'm not for universal health care. I think it's neither the solution nor the problem. I think it's the health insurance industry that needs to be taken to task. But there's also the issue of what to do with really unhealthy people. See, when someone has a real expensive car, it's easy to gauge what their coverage should be. Nobody has to buy an expensive car. But with health, there's the moral dilemma. What do you do with unhealthy people? Just refuse them service? At the same time, why should healthy people who earned their good health be responsible for subsidizing this unhealthy asshole's health care when they aren't taking care of it themselves?
On July 15 2009 01:37 BisuBoi wrote: God, hearing Republican talking points gives me a headache. The problem with them isn't even the position, it's that they're literally just stock arguments that nobody would come up with on their own. They get it by memorizing the talking points they get from their opinion leaders, then parroting it every chance they get.
Yeah, it MUST be government impediment that's the root of all evil. In fact, people would be better off with no government. Anarchy is the best form of gov't because then the free market would take care of everything and life would be perfect... The invisible hand. That should be our President.
I think it's pretty ridiculous that anyone would think a medical system without government regulation and oversight would be anything worth participating in. Even crazier is the notion that government paying for the patients would increase healthcare costs. Health care costs are high because of insurance for practitioners and because of the ridiculous amount of paperwork needed to validate claims with insurance companies. Most all of the problems in the health care industry are caused by the insurance industry. You could make the argument that insurance is high because of how the legal system handles malpractice cases but it's retarded to say programs that hardly everyone in the US even participates in are the reason the entire health care system is broken.
That's just it, the healthcare system isn't broken. The overwhelming majority are happy with their healthcare. You don't tear down an institution and replace it when it's working and certainly not in the way that Congress intends to do so.
Geeze, have you even read Tom Daschle's book?
Anyways, I don't feel like arguing anymore, I'm going to watch some Crusoe. I'm sure you'll enjoy the central planning and dileanation of healthcare and who gets what, who doesn't, what procedures your doctor can perform, how much he'll get paid, etc. Man that VA is just so great.
EPT
