Everything about food, from matching food and wine to recipes, techniques and trends.
User avatar
User

Robin Garr

Rank

Forum Janitor

Posts

17414

Joined

Fri Feb 17, 2006 2:44 pm

Location

Louisville, KY

Re: Starbucks news

by Robin Garr » Thu Jan 04, 2007 2:34 pm

Thomas wrote:As I F Stone used to address his new journalism students, the first thing to remember is that governments lie.


Actually, governments don't lie, but people do.

I can't take this stand with much enthusiasm, though, because ...

And who's talking about lawlessness? I am talking about not following edicts blindly.


Oh, absolutely. My Latin genes strongly outweigh my Anglo-Saxon genes in this realm. Regulation in general needs to be strongly tempered with common sense.

Remember, I am on the side of government taking action against food as poison, but I also want to know that it is being done not to pay a debt to some interest group, but to respond to scientific evidence--to get to know that takes work instead of believing things through heresay.


I don't disagree with anything in this statement at all. I was merely taking exception to the bald, flat statement that "governments lie, period."


(Typo "like" edited to "lie" to protect the author from looking more stupid than he is.)
Last edited by Robin Garr on Thu Jan 04, 2007 6:55 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
User

RichardAtkinson

Rank

Wine guru

Posts

732

Joined

Mon Aug 28, 2006 3:15 pm

Location

Houston, TX

Re: Starbucks news

by RichardAtkinson » Thu Jan 04, 2007 3:55 pm

Thomas,

I have been using solid fats for years with little or no effect on my LDL / HDL ( I have a full physical every 2 years). While avoiding the animal based fats because these same people had told us for years how bad they were for us.

That said...like so many medical conditions, you (and so many others) are probably a victim of heredity. A genetic predisposition towards higher than normal HDL / LDL that is aggravated by the intake of these materials.

I just think this whole trans-fat issue is knee jerk reaction complicated by a bored media and worldwide access (via the web) to every kook or cause or supposedly philanthropic organizations with an axe to grind.

Oh...add to my previous list...the new food "buzzword"...Acrylamides. A chemical by product of baking starchy foods at high temperatures. Actually, it was in the google?...or somewhere.. news earlier this morning.

Well..so much for roasted potatoes, bread, muffins, rice, pasta....

Richard
Joy is a matter of finding myself laughable and imperfect...not just in appearance and talents
but in knowledge, virtue and even faith. And yet discovering that Reality is quite able to take such a joke. - Mahlon H Smith
no avatar
User

Carl Eppig

Rank

Our Maine man

Posts

4049

Joined

Tue Jun 13, 2006 2:38 pm

Location

Middleton, NH, USA

Re: Starbucks news

by Carl Eppig » Thu Jan 04, 2007 5:58 pm

OK, OK, OK, OKaaaaaaaaaaaaay. Getting back to the original topic of this thread (and putting alcohol and drugs on the self for awhile), I don't mind the government advising me about what to eat or not eat. I do them telling me what to eat or not eat. If any of you don't think the NYC ban on trans fats could have happened without the previous smoking ban, or if you think the ban on trans fats is the last you are going to hear on this subject; you are not thinking clearly.
User avatar
User

Hoke

Rank

Achieving Wine Immortality

Posts

10565

Joined

Sat Apr 15, 2006 2:07 am

Location

Portland, OR

Re: Starbucks news

by Hoke » Thu Jan 04, 2007 6:28 pm

Carl Eppig (Middleton, NH wrote:OK, OK, OK, OKaaaaaaaaaaaaay. Getting back to the original topic of this thread (and putting alcohol and drugs on the self for awhile), I don't mind the government advising me about what to eat or not eat. I do them telling me what to eat or not eat. If any of you don't think the NYC ban on trans fats could have happened without the previous smoking ban, or if you think the ban on trans fats is the last you are going to hear on this subject; you are not thinking clearly.


Carl: You can stop flogging that horse. It's dead already. And beginning to smell. You're the one arguing about smoking bans and trans fat bans being the same thing, as far as I can see.

Since you insist on everyone else thinking clearly (by which I suppose you mean the way you see things), we might ask the same of you. Don't you think the ban on public smoking (not a ban on smoking, mind you, just restrictions against polluting a shared environment, two very different things) and banning the use of trans fats are totally separate issues?

It is obvious to anyone who pays attention to history that certain people want to prohibit certain actions. It is equally obvious that certain people place greater importance on individual responsibility and independence (although in a civlized society, independence is largely a myth we don't often like to admit to ourselves).

The question I think is important is whether we should

1.) prohibit the use of trans fats because they cause harm to people.

2.) regulate the use of transfats through governmental agency supervision and oversight, as we've done with other things

3.) rely solely on increased education and communication to make people aware of the problem and leave it at that (although the natural response there would be all the people that aren't aware, aren't educated, or don't make the decisions about what they consume, or simply aren't responsible enough to make the decisions---should we not care about those people?)

New York did it one way. I confess I am not real happy with the way they selected (government decision by mandate without vote or plebiscite). But also assume that if the decision causes enough disturbance the people can reverse it through voting, directly or with their representatives.

Since this doesn't directly impede my life or behaviour, it's not a big thing with me though. It's not like I'm going to miss the transfats in the food. I figure some people will scream about having to change, then they'll change. And we won't even notice anymore. You can count that as insidious and evil, or as just human nature. Either way, I think you'd probably be correct to some degree.
no avatar
User

Thomas

Rank

Senior Flamethrower

Posts

3574

Joined

Wed Mar 22, 2006 5:23 pm

Re: Starbucks news

by Thomas » Thu Jan 04, 2007 6:30 pm

Richard--I guess something has to kill us sometime...

Robin, I stand by my statement: governments lie.

A government is like any other organism--its purpose is to survive. Lying is a survival mechanism. And stop with the semantics you old English major!
Sure people do the lying, but which government is made up of anything other than people? Still, as an entity, governments not only lie they construct elaborate ways to do it.

But Carl, the government tells you what to do everyday. Why single out food or cigarettes? I want my opium!!!

Hoke--stop making sense.
User avatar
User

Paul Winalski

Rank

Wok Wielder

Posts

4145

Joined

Wed Mar 22, 2006 10:16 pm

Location

Merrimack, New Hampshire

Re: Starbucks news

by Paul Winalski » Thu Jan 04, 2007 10:23 pm

Bob Ross wrote:Paul, I resonate with your post -- but how does catnip hurt cats?

My experience is that cats love the stuff -- but stop eating or playing it long before it can harm them.


I never said that catnip hurts cats. I just cited it as an example of a psychoactive drug that animals seek out.

-Paul W.
User avatar
User

Mike Filigenzi

Rank

Known for his fashionable hair

Posts

7095

Joined

Mon Mar 20, 2006 5:43 pm

Location

Sacramento, CA

Re: Starbucks news

by Mike Filigenzi » Fri Jan 05, 2007 1:25 am

Carl Eppig (Middleton, NH wrote:OK, OK, OK, OKaaaaaaaaaaaaay. Getting back to the original topic of this thread (and putting alcohol and drugs on the self for awhile),


I've been putting alcohol and drugs on the self for years now, with great results!!







:D

Mike
"People who love to eat are always the best people"

- Julia Child
no avatar
User

TimMc

Re: Starbucks news

by TimMc » Sat Jan 06, 2007 12:29 am

Thomas wrote:Richard--I guess something has to kill us sometime...

Robin, I stand by my statement: governments lie.

A government is like any other organism--its purpose is to survive. Lying is a survival mechanism. And stop with the semantics you old English major!
Sure people do the lying, but which government is made up of anything other than people? Still, as an entity, governments not only lie they construct elaborate ways to do it.

But Carl, the government tells you what to do everyday. Why single out food or cigarettes? I want my opium!!!

Hoke--stop making sense.


OK Thomas.

If your whole position depends upon the premise that governments lie....what would be your alternative?


Anarchy? :shock:


Seems to me that you have painted yourself into the proverbial corner with this blanket statement.
User avatar
User

Stuart Yaniger

Rank

Stud Muffin

Posts

4403

Joined

Thu Mar 23, 2006 8:28 pm

Location

Big Sky

Re: Starbucks news

by Stuart Yaniger » Sat Jan 06, 2007 10:23 am

Tim, that's too easy. Go get a copy of erstwhile WLGD-member Charles Murray's "What It Means to be a Libertarian." A wonderfully readable little book.

We've got a superb constitution, if only we'd follow it...
no avatar
User

Thomas

Rank

Senior Flamethrower

Posts

3574

Joined

Wed Mar 22, 2006 5:23 pm

Re: Starbucks news

by Thomas » Sat Jan 06, 2007 1:10 pm

TimMc wrote:
Thomas wrote:Richard--I guess something has to kill us sometime...

Robin, I stand by my statement: governments lie.

A government is like any other organism--its purpose is to survive. Lying is a survival mechanism. And stop with the semantics you old English major!
Sure people do the lying, but which government is made up of anything other than people? Still, as an entity, governments not only lie they construct elaborate ways to do it.

But Carl, the government tells you what to do everyday. Why single out food or cigarettes? I want my opium!!!

Hoke--stop making sense.


OK Thomas.

If your whole position depends upon the premise that governments lie....what would be your alternative?


Anarchy? :shock:


Seems to me that you have painted yourself into the proverbial corner with this blanket statement.


Alternative to what, Tim? A fact is not a position. All governments lie.

If you read everything I wrote and not just take a phrase out of context and try to assign a position to it you might find out that my position actually is this:
since governments lie, it is up to us to seek the facts to make sure we know when we are being lied to and manipulated and then make our decisions.

Never said anything about changing or seeking another government, if that is the implication in your chide. But if you don't believe that governments lie, then do exactly as you are told and don't complain--stop eating trans fats.
Previous

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 4 guests

Powered by phpBB ® | phpBB3 Style by KomiDesign