more like why stop at trans fat? Alcohol serves no practical purpose, same with corn syrup. You know, let's just make all things that aren't outstanding for you illegal, because we need bigpapa government to tell us what we need to do in our lives
more like why stop at trans fat? Alcohol serves no practical purpose, same with corn syrup. You know, let's just make all things that aren't outstanding for you illegal, because we need bigpapa government to tell us what we need to do in our lives
Debatable, whilst trans fat has no positive side that i'm aware of, and with that sort of logic you mind as well make all drugs legal.Alcohol serves no practical purpose
why isn't taste a practical purpose for trans fat, and I actually agree with that drug part.
I am having trouble justifying to myself why most of the drugs are illegal, but thats for a different day
What?
If I believed in slippery slope arguments, I'd be against gay marriage since I'm against bestial and pedophile marriages.
Trans-fats were chosen to be banned because it was shown to be much deadlier than other bad things like corn syrup. If corn syrup was proven that deadly, then yes, I would say action should be considered. An alcohol ban was attempted, the government isn't stupid enough to try it again.
trans fat is just a cheap alternative to natural fats in "oils, margarine and shortening" that is linked to obesity and coronary heart disease. it's an unnecessary industrialized process (injecting hydrogen into oil to create fat) with very bad health consequences.
Plus in the case of alcohol, well, just try and take it away from America and see what happens, lol.
ironic liberals always scream about their freedoms being taken away yet are perfectly ok with this kind of stuff
I think we need a new word for things that might kill you when you're 60 if you eat them when you're 30. Cause, ya know, "deadly" kinda already means something slightly different. How about "anti-sustainable"? Too long? Maybe not precise enough... oh, I know: "Counter-survivaline". Perfect!
Incidentally, the relative ease of producing and using artificially hydrogenated oils compared to natural saturated fatty acids does constitute a purpose. As I understand it, the taste should be the same.
This : "it's either all ok or nothing" is incredibly stupid.
Trans-fats are a problem of free-market, basically. They needed a cheap way to make fat solid at room temperature for various foodmaking purposes, and created something that was extremely unhealthy. This is the government saying "yeah, um, no - try something else".
At some point someone has to step in between the "gimme money" crowd and the "om nom nom nom nom nom nom wait, what is diabeetus" crowd and try to stem the tide a bit.
Also, jesus christ this got derailed, I thought I was posting in the fast-food thread still, I thought my post got eaten as if it was covered in transfats.
The trans-fat in hydrogenated oils is probably less dangerous then smoking... It's not like it's 100% trans-fat, most of it is cis-fat which is the uh... "good" kind of fat.
Also there are ways to minimize the trans-fat content in hydrogenation, which will probably still be cheaper then natural oils.
Deciding when the government should intervene on the behalf of the population is a tricky thing, if only Americans actually cared more about healthy living, then these health problems wouldn't be such a big deals to the point of requiring intervention.
Since this thread got derailed I'd like to take the opportunity to point out that Obama compared himself to Paris Hilton back in '05, long before McCain recently did.
This should be routine by now, but, link?
Is Swampy's avatar extremely racist or is it just really really funny? I laf'd either way.
Oops my bad. http://newsbusters.org/blogs/seton-m...not-sen-mccain
Edit: No clue if that site is partisan or not.
No clue? Did you just look for a random link or something?