Posted on 05/17/2003 11:29:39 PM PDT by Tailgunner Joe
The government - ever eager to control every aspect of your life - has now launched a campaign to determine what and how much you eat.
Having taken over much of the health system via Medicare, the government is now concerned about the cost of illnesses resulting from obesity, the same way it worried about the cost of illnesses associated with smoking. As such, the government has embarked on an effort to control individuals' personal lifestyle choices, as well as accusing the fast-food industry of causing obesity.
The lessons of Prohibition, the outlawing of alcoholic beverages in the 1920s, have not been learned and the result is the virtual criminalization of the tobacco industry and now, it would seem, the fast-food industry.
In her book, "Dependent on D.C.: The Rise of Federal Control Over the Lives of Ordinary Americans," author Charlotte A. Twight says, "Few things are more personal than health care, nor more alien to the legitimate functions of limited government. Yet few things are higher on the U.S. government's agenda at the beginning of the twenty-first century. Step by step, the federal government is usurping power to substitute its medical judgments and therapeutic choices for those of individual patients and their physicians." Most Americans are unaware that the newly proclaimed US policy comes right out of the United Nations.
The UN's World Health Organization and its Food and Agricultural Organization issued a draft report making the case that various restrictions must be imposed on everything from soda to snack foods in order to save the world from fat people. The UN report manages to ignore the estimated 815 million undernourished people in the world.
It is a plan to create an Orwellian world in which everyone is compelled to do what Big Brother tells him or her to do. The US campaign, though couched in terms of obesity's financial costs, is a subterfuge for even greater control over our personal lives.
Health and Human Services Secretary Tommy G. Thompson was on television recently, pointing a finger at the fast-food industry and urging it to "do what is right for Americans."
What is right is the right of every American to determine what and how much they eat, and to be responsible for whatever consequences they encounter. This is not a public issue. It is a private one. It is one in which the government should have no role nor say.
The absurdity of the new war on fat people is the assertion, soon to be a nationwide environmental campaign, that housing developments actually cause Americans to exercise less, thus contributing to obesity, diabetes and other disorders.
This is pure junk science that defies common sense, but watch as Americans are told that suburban life is the new enemy that is killing them.
It is a hop, skip and a jump from telling Americans they are too fat to issuing regulations to ensure they do not exceed daily food intake rules set by the government. It's an extension of the same government control that now includes smoking restrictions.
Getting fat or staying slim is a personal lifestyle decision. It is not the government's right, nor role, to determine, and the new campaign, initiated by the UN, can lead to still further loss of freedom in America.
Never said I knew is was supposedly bad - what I said was that I could deduce what "hydrogenated oil" was - but you knew that, as did everyone else reading this thread.
The point I made then is still valid, and you have done nothing to change that, or debate it: A manufacturer does not have a duty to foresee everything that might be wrong with their product in twenty or even ten years, especially if it affects less than one one-hundredth of the population. People with allergies and sensitivities have a responsibility to look out for themselves and all your whining is just that.
In addition, the governments only course of action in any case should be to recommend that people not eat it or feed it to children, especially considering that the conclusion is not concrete by any stretch.
Col Sanders
Which is what I meant. SOme people are "fat" because they have good reasons to want to be so. The government should stay away from telling people how much money or reserves is bad for their health... lest we become malnourished like most of those Euro kids whose parents are too cheap to buy them steak.
Bingo!!! We have a winner. When you pay for your own healthcare, if you are fat and get sick, YOU pay for it. But when the burden of resposiblity shifts from the individual to the group, then we all "pay for it", and then it is "my business" what you do and eat. But of course, the flaw is that nobody else should really be paying for mine or your healthcare. This is the core of socialism, pure and simple.
He does (did) not say this......only in the induction phase of the diet. Plums have only 9 or 10 carbs in them. Bananas are a no no. Please read his books. So much disinformation here.
His diet lifestyle works.......I lost 44 pounds and am still losing weight while I gradually increase my carb intake.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.