Thank you for being a valued part of the CNET community. As of December 1, 2020, the forums are in read-only format. In early 2021, CNET Forums will no longer be available. We are grateful for the participation and advice you have provided to one another over the years.

Thanks,

CNET Support

General discussion

You think the obesity police is an overreaction?

Nov 24, 2003 11:15PM PST

Well .... first it was just the warnings on cigarette boxes, then the ad infinitum studies that despite dubious links re: second hand smoke spawned some rational and some draconian laws, ordinances etc. Taxes on cigarettes were boosted, and continue to be to fill the coffers left bare by unrestrained state spending on unrelated matters. A bunch of lawyers became billionaires bringing suits against the manufacturers who have paid billions.

So..... where am I going here?

We all thought it pretty ridiculous last year when a few folks sought to sue McDonald's for their obesity. But, it resulted in further notification and labeling. Did you know the FDA is considering requiring ALL restaurants to provide detailed nutritional info on their menus? I dunno about you, but when I go eat fetuccine carbonara I *know* it's got too much fat, starch, calories, and whatnot. I'll have a salad the next day thankyouverymuch Happy

And now this just in from Austrailia:
a "percentage of social insurance contributions could be linked to a person's Body Mass Index" - meaning overweight Austrians would pay more.

To my fellow Americans, are those in favor *REALLY* sure they want socialized medicine?

OTOH, unlike smoking, obesity is quickly creating another "protected group" by those seeking to classify it as a disease, disability, etc. Granted a certain few cases do rightly qualify, but there have already been enough ridiculous cases filed under the ADA as regards obesity to know this isn't the solution.

I just finished watching a Fox report on some 800 lb lady who has been confined to her bed for over a year. Apparently the last time she needed medical assistance it took 20+ firefighters and emergency medical personel to move her! And now she is suing the housing authority because her apartment isn't big enough! Nothing on the Fox site, but here is a link to a local story.

Wow, I went every which way with this post! Bottom line, for the large majority, obesity is a product of behavior and lifestyle choices. Keep the government out of it!

Evie Happy

Discussion is locked

- Collapse -
Re:You think the obesity police is an overreaction?
Nov 25, 2003 12:29AM PST

You mean you really think it is MY FAULT if I order a two Double Cheese Burgers and extra large fries with a chocolate shake instead of a salad?

What a novel idea Wink

I think it is a GOOD IDEA to force food establishments to label everything because then we could do away with all those classes on food groups and healthy nutrition they still teach in elementary schools across the country. Why waste children's time learning about such things as nutrition? We could even do away with Physical Exercise classes and devote the school time freed up to what is necessary to modern life such as "cheat codes" for computer games.

My only worry is that due to the illiteracy rates such labeling would do no good so maybe instead of labeling foods the government should force the establishments to color code the foods according to some specific standards. Might require a new Agency but what the heck!

- Collapse -
Re:You think the obesity police is an overreaction?
Nov 25, 2003 2:12AM PST

While obesity police is patently silly, the idea of having the nutritional makeup of food available to patrons has a lot going for it. If we want people to be responsible for their decisions we can't think it's that bad an idea to give them accurate information to make them.

Dan

- Collapse -
Some agreement ...
Nov 25, 2003 2:32AM PST

... I can see the info being posted by fast food joints that probably do that -- or easily can -- as a matter of normal process anyway. I mean you go to a Subway and the meat is presliced and separated into portions, McD's burgers are all the same size from a package, etc.

The new thing for the FDA would be requiring even the Mom & Pop or gourmet restaurant to supply such. There isn't as stringent portion control in such places, and calculating the nutritional info is a bit time consuming. I, frankly, don't want to pay for the extra time and effort to be able to know exactly what is in everything I eat at every time.

Food labels have been available for pre-packaged entrees and every sort of snack food available in the grocery for ages now. You still see people buying and eating the stuff. So displaying the info is a small part of the equation in terms of eating habits in this country. Having an Italian restaurant do so will probably not dissuade too many folks from ordering the lasagna -- it will just cost more to implement the added government requirements and probably pay for insurance against lawsuits despite complying! Why does the federal government need to involve itself in this?

- Collapse -
Re:Some agreement ...
Nov 25, 2003 2:47AM PST

The costs involved would, of course, be minimal. The nutritional factors involved are fairly common and allowances would have to be made for individual preparation. As a matter of fact, Subway does post this information and should be complimented for being a responsible food seller. If other establishments stepped up and were just as responsible then the regulation would not be enacted.

Dan

- Collapse -
Re:Re:Some agreement ...
Nov 25, 2003 3:02AM PST

OK, so you want more regulation. Of course the cost would be minimal. Yeah right. Soon enough there will be the lawsuits, and more government bureaucracy to enforce the slew of new regulations, verify the accuracy of the menus, etc. Give me a break! Cheers to Subway and Jared (can he be more annoying?). Most fast food establishments have been providing the info for quite a while now. Some good can come from public pressure and a genuine need for this info. The federal government has better ways to spend our money, or better yet not to spend it!

- Collapse -
The proposal would not affect all restaurants ...
Nov 25, 2003 6:05AM PST

I don't have a link, but the information I've seen is that the requirement would basically apply to chains that have a certain number of restaurants. I don't remember the number, but I think it was in the 10-20 range.

- Collapse -
We should require a license
Nov 25, 2003 2:24AM PST

People should have to pass a test before being allowed to make their own selections in a restaurant. Otherwise, they should get a government approved meal. It will save the cost of analyzing all the menu combinations.

Do you think a restaurant could be sued for malpractice if their nutrition label is wrong?

- Collapse -
Well for decades ...
Nov 25, 2003 2:35AM PST

... we had the warning labels on cigarettes and that still didn't even slow the juggernaught against the manufacturers. So I put nothing past the trial lawyers to see an opportunity.

Evie Happy

- Collapse -
Re:You think the obesity police is an overreaction?
Nov 25, 2003 6:15AM PST

Hi, Evie.

It's not just a matter of fat content -- lots of folks are allergic to things, so letting them know that that fettucine carbonera is based on peanut oil could be a life-saver. The other problem is that sometimes things that one expects to be low fat or low calorie aren't. It used to be, for example, that there were rules about what could be called "light." Apparently the Bush Administration has given them the deep six as "too much regulation;" e.g., I was VERY glad to have read the label on a new store brand of salad dressing that recently appeared ("Litehouse," which took the shelfspace that used to be occupied by "Marie's Light," which really were low fat and low cal) The sad facts: 130 calories per two tablespoons, 110 of them from fat. That's outrageous -- not that they sell such dressings, but that once again they're allowed to use a name that implies to most people that the product is something something it's not, namely, "light" in fat and/or calories. Maybe "lite" can be used for such products, but "light" can't? Give me a break -- half the population probably either won't notice the different spelling or won't realize there's a difference!
-- Dave K. (My borrowed computer is slow on robotype, so I'm not using the "canned" sig all the time...)

- Collapse -
nt) Umm - that was Austria (next to Germany), not Australia.
Nov 25, 2003 9:40AM PST

.

- Collapse -
nt Hold that look whilst I whip out my digital camera for a memorable mug shot. :)
Nov 25, 2003 10:00AM PST
- Collapse -
(NT) Oops ... sorry!
Nov 26, 2003 1:23AM PST

.

- Collapse -
Re:You think the obesity police is an overreaction?
Nov 25, 2003 10:09AM PST

Evie,

As for fast food places, no problems w/labeling. As for fine restauraunts, no way! That destroys the whole fine dining experience, IMO (although knowing exactly what's in the "prepare to lose the roof of your mouth" shrimp cocktail sauce served at St. Elmo's Steak House in Indy might be educational).

As for the Austrian (as Ian noted, NOT Australian) proposal, I'm not surprised. It certainly gives the phrase "means testing" a whole new connotation. Wink

The concept is akin to the way we set life insurance rates based on personal behavior (e.g., smoking) or auto insurance rates based on driving record. What is different, and troubling to me, is that while it would appear that the cause and effect relationship is well established, in fact it's not that way at all. I think we'd need a whole lot more research before anyone could presume to have an ironclad correlation.

- Collapse -
Yippee! A whole new set of programs!!!
Nov 25, 2003 11:31AM PST

And when people try to stop buying those fatburgers and fries and go into mood depressions and withdrawals as their cravings mount, we can make government subsidized rationing programs to dole out a taste of the offending foods - kind of like Methadone programs. We can psychological studies and secret entrances to buildings, and all that neat stuff that comes with other addictions. Maybe even a 12-Step Fat Program. Ah, the possibilities!

I think the whole thing is insane. At my office today, someone called asking for all the ingredients some HOMEMADE spiced pecans that were for sale, were coated with. You would think that if allergies were a factor, the pecans would be the issue more than the spices. Sheesh!

Most of the restaurants out by my way are ethnic restaurants where your main concern is hoping that the meat you're getting is really some form of beef, pork or chicken.

People generally know what makes them gain weight I think. It is the conscious choice to go ahead and eat the food anyway that is the problem, and all the labels in the world won't solve that; they'll just create frivilous lawsuits alleging false representations or fraud where the fat content is .021 in one item versus .023 in another one tested.

Forcing restaurants to label their foods will just create a fertile ground for litigious people to try to hit the jackpot with frivilous suits, causing us all to lose in the longrun, with us bearing increased costs and (likely) less tasty food.

- Collapse -
Re:Yippee! A whole new set of programs!!!
Nov 26, 2003 12:19AM PST
"Most of the restaurants out by my way are ethnic restaurants where your main concern is hoping that the meat you're getting is really some form of beef, pork or chicken."

You mean you still haven't developed a taste for "Ally Rabbit" in the ethnic Asian, Hispanic, and French/British cuisines? Wink
- Collapse -
Equal opportunity, about time there was a victim group I can join.
Nov 25, 2003 12:20PM PST
Wink
- Collapse -
How about this, Evie...
Nov 26, 2003 12:38AM PST

On the subject of overreaction, how about this, Evie: According to a local TV news story last night in the Washington, D.C. area, the State of Virginia just adopted some things in their fire codes. It is now illegal to have a cut Christmas tree if you live in an apartment building or condo. Violation is a class one misdemeanor and carries a fine of $2500 and/or up to a year in jail. If you think that some ordinary people were caught "flat footed" suddenly, you should have heard some of the Christmas tree sellers who had received their trees that they had ordered. Talk about a surprise. BTW, that reg does not affect "single family detached dwellings" according to that news story.