Website Feedback
Closed Threads
IRC Chat
irc.quakenet.org #teamliquid
IRC Web ClientTeamSpeak 3 (75 users) | |
|
| najreteip Belgium. June 02 2012 23:53. Posts 2694 | Profile # |
| Seems silly to give such massive fines for something like this, though I do think that soda should not be sold at schools, it's really very unhealthy |
| |
|
| manloveman June 02 2012 23:56. Posts 344 | Profile # |
On June 02 2012 23:34 r.Evo wrote:
Show nested quote +On June 02 2012 23:27 Derez wrote:
On June 02 2012 23:17 r.Evo wrote:
Everyone knows how much sugar is in soft drinks. Everyone. Including six year olds. Also everyone knows how bad lots of sugar is.
It's just that no one cares about it. And that's not fixed by forbidding certain items.
Edit: To the comparison to cigarettes.. at my old school cigarettes were sold about 2min from the school area and we had a smoking area for people at 16+. Right when most of the people in class turned 16, that was one of the coolest places to be. Like 40% smoked. When we finished school about 5 years later I remember... 2-3 smokers out of like 120 people. Why? Because smoking wasn't cool anymore.
So what exactly? None of that means that unhealthy products should be sold in a place where parents can reasonably expect to leave their kids without them turning into blobs of fat. If schools sell anything, it should be reasonably healthy products. It's not a free marketplace where you get to sell anything you want, and it is perfectly reasonable to impose certain limits on what can be sold. Yes, you can walk 2 minutes to the nearest supermarket to go get soda or cigarettes, and students always will, but at least in that case the school isn't actively contributing to the problem.
That's just being ignorant and hypocritical. The only point of that is that the school can say "Oh, your kid is fat? Oh, well, can't be our problem - see? We're not selling it!" What about like.. teaching kids to act reasonable around stuff that's not good for them? When I was like 10 I wasn't allowed to drink soft drinks. That's fine. If you'd have done the same to me when I was 16 I would have said "Fuck off" and gotten them anyway. What the adults around me said at that time instead was "Welp. That stuff isn't good for you, just try to compensate with this and that and that, okay?" and that stuff was enforced during meals or family events. Personally, I'm for treating people who are about to be adults just like that. A 16 year old should be free to drink a soft drink, orange juice, water or coffee at his school. The job of a school (just like the job of parents) should be to teach responsibility, especially about stuff that isn't considered good if you do/eat/drink it in excess.
So the school should sell cigarettes and alchohol too? And why should there be an 21 age discrimination on alchohol anyways. Its not the state's responsibiliy but the parents...
|
|
|
| msl Germany. June 02 2012 23:57. Posts 230 | Profile # |
On June 02 2012 23:34 r.Evo wrote:
Show nested quote +On June 02 2012 23:27 Derez wrote:
On June 02 2012 23:17 r.Evo wrote:
Everyone knows how much sugar is in soft drinks. Everyone. Including six year olds. Also everyone knows how bad lots of sugar is.
It's just that no one cares about it. And that's not fixed by forbidding certain items.
Edit: To the comparison to cigarettes.. at my old school cigarettes were sold about 2min from the school area and we had a smoking area for people at 16+. Right when most of the people in class turned 16, that was one of the coolest places to be. Like 40% smoked. When we finished school about 5 years later I remember... 2-3 smokers out of like 120 people. Why? Because smoking wasn't cool anymore.
So what exactly? None of that means that unhealthy products should be sold in a place where parents can reasonably expect to leave their kids without them turning into blobs of fat. If schools sell anything, it should be reasonably healthy products. It's not a free marketplace where you get to sell anything you want, and it is perfectly reasonable to impose certain limits on what can be sold. Yes, you can walk 2 minutes to the nearest supermarket to go get soda or cigarettes, and students always will, but at least in that case the school isn't actively contributing to the problem.
That's just being ignorant and hypocritical. The only point of that is that the school can say "Oh, your kid is fat? Oh, well, can't be our problem - see? We're not selling it!"
How it is ignorant and hypocitical to not participate in perpetuating a problem even if you cannot solve it? It seems more hypocritical to me to just ignore a problem with the convinient excuse that you can't change it then to do your part to solve a problem even if you know your part is not enough to solve the problem as a whole.
On June 02 2012 23:34 r.Evo wrote:
What about like.. teaching kids to act reasonable around stuff that's not good for them? When I was like 10 I wasn't allowed to drink soft drinks. That's fine. If you'd have done the same to me when I was 16 I would have said "Fuck off" and gotten them anyway. What the adults around me said at that time instead was "Welp. That stuff isn't good for you, just try to compensate with this and that and that, okay?" and that stuff was enforced during meals or family events.
Personally, I'm for treating people who are about to be adults just like that. A 16 year old should be free to drink a soft drink, orange juice, water or coffee at his school. The job of a school (just like the job of parents) should be to teach responsibility, especially about stuff that isn't considered good if you do/eat/drink it in excess.
Undoubtedly a 16 year old should be able to choose his own beverage, but the job of schools does not include to provide a wide variety of soft drinks. Just because a 16 year old wants to drink soda does not mean schools have to provide it. Just like a 16 years old making the choice to smoke does not mean schools have to install cigarette machines. With 16 you're at an age were you can make all sorts of bad choices and get away with them, because you're almost an adult. Doesn't mean everyone has to support and/or cater to this choices. Especially not schools.
As far as teaching about responsible nutrion, seems to me a school doing that is more believable when it does not sell just the stuff it warns about. |
| |
|
| Serthius Samoa. June 03 2012 00:04. Posts 222 | Profile # |
| I see no reason schools should provide students with sugary soft drinks. I don't think they should give them cigarettes either. |
|
|
| XXhkXX June 03 2012 00:06. Posts 167 | Profile # |
On June 02 2012 23:45 micronesia wrote:
I've heard from multiple sources that diet drinks are bad for you despite having no sugar. I assume this is being researched rigorously even now.
Having diet drinks as a kid is worse than having diet drinks as an adult since you have more years ahead of you for the crap in diet drinks to degrade your health.
Yeah diet drinks are supposed to be extremely bad for you, I had a teacher once who used to drink obscene amounts of diet drinks everyday and had to go to the hospital. However, it should be noted that she drank a crazy amount of diet soda.
Also, theres been numerous claims that artificial sweetners cause cancer, however these claims have yet to be backed by official studies.
On another note, both diet and regular pop drinks contribute significantly to diabetes and obesity, as well as osteoporosis (due to the caffeine content). Overally, I find it kind of funny that Bloomberg is attempting to outright ban soft drinks in the Big Apple, but still the government could theoretically make a case for it considering two main factors: increased obesity rates increase the medical costs the government needs to pay and that the obesity rates have become a matter of national security to some extent becase it decreases the amount of eligible men for the military. However, that being said, while it may be in the government's interest, the national government would never ban it partly due to opposition but primarily due to the massive lobbying power of the soda industry.
Here's a Yahoo Finance article highlighting that obesity costs American taxpayers $190 billion a year: http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/daily-ticker/obesity-cost-taxpayers-billions-dollars-weight-watchers-ceo-183227647.html
Here's one article from an NBC affiliate highlighting the national security risk caused by obesity:
http://www.wkyc.com/news/health/article/245757/7/Obesity-epidemic-considered-national-security-threat
|
|
|
| Serthius Samoa. June 03 2012 00:29. Posts 222 | Profile # |
On June 02 2012 23:17 r.Evo wrote:
Everyone knows how much sugar is in soft drinks. Everyone. Including six year olds. Also everyone knows how bad lots of sugar is.
I dunno about that. I have friends who think sugar is bad only because it's bad for your teeth and because you can get diabetes from overconsuming it. |
|
|
| jdsowa June 03 2012 00:35. Posts 368 | Profile # |
| People are educated about soda. There is no deception going on. People consume it because they like it and that's their choice. Soda doesn't make people fat. A 12 oz can is 140 calories. As long as you create a deficit of calories below your maintenance level, you will lose weight, regardless of whether your diet consists of soda, fast food, chips, beer, pizza, etc. |
|
|
| manloveman June 03 2012 00:54. Posts 344 | Profile # |
On June 03 2012 00:35 jdsowa wrote:
People are educated about soda. There is no deception going on. People consume it because they like it and that's their choice. Soda doesn't make people fat. A 12 oz can is 140 calories. As long as you create a deficit of calories below your maintenance level, you will lose weight, regardless of whether your diet consists of soda, fast food, chips, beer, pizza, etc.
And that is exactly the problem. People tend to not count in the calories they drink.
Usually when eating calories, you feel full afterwards. Not the case with liquids.
And no. The general population knowledge on nutrition is dreadful. All they know is: "Dont eat suger and fat, it will get you obese."
They have no idea about how to even count the calories they put in their body, or how many they should aim at.
Ask any common person on the street how many cal/day they can approx eat without being in danger of gaining weight. Even worse, how many can you feed your child? People dont know this stuff. |
|
|
| Roachu Sweden. June 03 2012 00:59. Posts 509 | Profile # |
On June 03 2012 00:04 Serthius wrote:
I see no reason schools should provide students with sugary soft drinks. I don't think they should give them cigarettes either.
When I was in high school soda and coffee machines saved my (and all of my friends) grades. Good luck trying to punch down a physics exam, a spanish oral exam as well as finishing up a project in graphic design in one day without some energy.
Although I seriously doubt they were drinking it for any other reason than it tastes better than water. |
| |
|
| Undrass Norway. June 03 2012 00:59. Posts 348 | Profile # |
Pretty much everyone knows sugar is bad for you, but they still consume mountains of it. Why?
The well documented fact that coolness trumps healthiness. |
|
|
| Chargelot June 03 2012 01:02. Posts 2274 | Profile Blog # |
On June 02 2012 23:45 micronesia wrote:
I've heard from multiple sources that diet drinks are bad for you despite having no sugar. I assume this is being researched rigorously even now.
Having diet drinks as a kid is worse than having diet drinks as an adult since you have more years ahead of you for the crap in diet drinks to degrade your health.
to quote myself:
Unless you can describe the scientific mechanism and/or/of action which causes something to happen, and simultaneously provide an elaborate and informative physically manifested and tangible representation of something, which is infinitely repeatable without error, what you are saying is not proven 100% true beyond the shadow of a doubt.
Do you actually have any reason to believe it is true, has anyone shown exactly why it is bad, and how it is bad, down to the exact mechanisms which cause it to be so? |
| | if (post == "stupid") { document.getElementById('post').style.display = 'none'; } |
|
|
| JustPassingBy June 03 2012 01:06. Posts 6247 | Profile Blog # |
| Sad way to tackle the problem. If you want to get people to eat and drink more healthy, you should do it with an awareness campaign. Try to persuade the people, not force them into something. |
|
|
| WTFZerg United States. June 03 2012 01:08. Posts 650 | Profile # |
On June 02 2012 23:45 micronesia wrote:
I've heard from multiple sources that diet drinks are bad for you despite having no sugar. I assume this is being researched rigorously even now.
Having diet drinks as a kid is worse than having diet drinks as an adult since you have more years ahead of you for the crap in diet drinks to degrade your health.
There's been a lot of debate in regards to the effects of aspartame on the body, but the overwhelming evidence from the FDA and the WHO are that it is perfectly safe. It's actually considered to be one of the most researched food substances on the planet after all the controversy.
Sure, it's not water, but if you're going to drink soda (I drink coke zero sometimes, usually mixed with alcohol) then you're much better off drinking something sweetened with aspartame then say corn syrup. |
| |
|
| mastergriggy United States. June 03 2012 01:08. Posts 1297 | Profile Blog # |
Soda doesn't make kids anymore fat than sitting around for 8 hours a day in front of the tv. As soon as someone takes responsibility and realizes that it's not completely soda's fault or junk food's fault, we'll see some change.
Until then, this is absolute bullshit. I thought the government had better things to do. |
| |
|
 TheFrankOne United States. June 03 2012 01:10. Posts 666 | Profile # | |
|
|
 micronesia United States. June 03 2012 01:10. Posts 19302 | Profile Blog # |
On June 03 2012 01:02 Chargelot wrote:
Show nested quote +On June 02 2012 23:45 micronesia wrote:
I've heard from multiple sources that diet drinks are bad for you despite having no sugar. I assume this is being researched rigorously even now.
Having diet drinks as a kid is worse than having diet drinks as an adult since you have more years ahead of you for the crap in diet drinks to degrade your health.
to quote myself: Unless you can describe the scientific mechanism and/or/of action which causes something to happen, and simultaneously provide an elaborate and informative physically manifested and tangible representation of something, which is infinitely repeatable without error, what you are saying is not proven 100% true beyond the shadow of a doubt. Do you actually have any reason to believe it is true, has anyone shown exactly why it is bad, and how it is bad, down to the exact mechanisms which cause it to be so?
I'm not sure what you are getting at. Are you saying that we should all be drinking tons of diet soda until it has been proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that diet soda is terrible for you and is guaranteed to kill you if you have a gallon a week for 6 years? Most people in this thread most likely recognize that understanding the negative effects of diet soda (or lack thereof) is very complicated.
edit: I honestly cannot describe the mechanism by how drinking a gallon of gasoline would kill me either... so don't use me as any type of a benchmark.Last edit: 2012-06-03 01:11:42 |
| | Haste. Exalted. Flying. Deathtouch. Lifelink. Protection from Red. | |
|
|
| Bigtony United States. June 03 2012 01:13. Posts 891 | Profile Blog # |
On June 03 2012 01:08 mastergriggy wrote:
Soda doesn't make kids anymore fat than sitting around for 8 hours a day in front of the tv. As soon as someone takes responsibility and realizes that it's not completely soda's fault or junk food's fault, we'll see some change.
Until then, this is absolute bullshit. I thought the government had better things to do.
This has absolutely nothing to do with the topic at hand.
If the government wants to promote good health (and they do, and there is nothing stupid about that nor is it "nanny state omg don't tell us what to do"), then sugary drinks should not be permitted in schools. If someone brings it in (which is NOT prohibited) then that is their perogative. The government healthy lunch guidelines might not be perfect, but they are not bad or evil in anyway.
"We should just educate" - ok good, don't you see that this is part of that? If you educate people that they shouldn't drink too much sugary drinks...and then you offer them at lunch time what the fuck is the point of that?
The "omg bullshit, government should not do this, what a waste of resources" is just short-sighted whining. The government isn't banning soda for everyone, they're just saying they will not sell it at schools. Last edit: 2012-06-03 01:14:47 |
| |
|
| Stress United States. June 03 2012 01:13. Posts 651 | Profile # |
| The soda in the vending machines at school made me fat, lol what a gimmick. If people are overweight it isn't because of what they have to drink/eat at school, it is because of their lack of physical activity throughout the entire day plus the surplus of calories that they eat, a vast majority of which is done outside of school. If people want to be fat, let them be fat, it isn't any of my business and it sure as shit isn't the governments. |
| | "Touch my gosu hands." - Tastosis | | fOrGG // MC // Ret |
|
|
| micronesia United States. June 03 2012 01:14. Posts 19302 | Profile Blog # |
On June 03 2012 01:13 Stress wrote:
The soda in the vending machines at school made me fat, lol what a gimmick. If people are overweight it isn't because of what they have to drink/eat at school, it is because of their lack of physical activity throughout the entire day plus the surplus of calories that they eat, a vast majority of which is done outside of school. If people want to be fat, let them be fat, it isn't any of my business and it sure as shit isn't the governments.
But your and my money goes towards paying for some of the medical treatment they get down the road because they are too fat. |
| | Haste. Exalted. Flying. Deathtouch. Lifelink. Protection from Red. | |
|
|
| Chargelot June 03 2012 01:15. Posts 2274 | Profile Blog # |
I asked for science, and you delivered studies based on statistics based on analysis of small groups. It isn't science because it correlates. It's statistics because it correlates. If you can't say aspartame is metabolized into x, which does y to z causing problem a, then you can't say aspartame is bad. You can only say "it may or may not be bad". |
| | if (post == "stupid") { document.getElementById('post').style.display = 'none'; } |
|
|
| Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next All | |
|
|
|
| |
|
Sidebar Settings...
|
Store
