[NittanyLion]

There is no reason why a person should have to read the ingrediants in prepared foods to see if they can survive the meal.

First, I'm sorry about your angioplasty.

As far as your comment, why should anyone other than you be responsible for your health? It seems to me it's our own responsibility to know and understand what we put in our body - that's not the government's role.

[Shooter 2.5]

I understand what you mean but let's say for instance there's an amount of people who are allergic to peanuts.

That would mean you would know not to eat a peanut right?

So what happens if you eat a chocolate chip cookie and two hours later, you're in the hospital with no idea how you got there. Did it mean you're allergic to Chocolate Chip cookies too?
Two weeks later, you find a report that the cookie company used peanut oil in their process. Who's to blame? Guess what? "You are." Simple because it's all your fault for not reading the fine print.


My health should not depend on reading the fine print on a food package. If that's true, I could write a contract for a house, car or any high dollar item and somewhere in the mountains of paperwork say that no matter how much you pay me, the item reverts back to me in two months. Tell me how ethical that is and who would be to blame?

[P_A_I]

There is no reason why a person should have to read the ingrediants in prepared foods to see if they can survive the meal.

As far as your comment, why should anyone other than you be responsible for your health? It seems to me it's our own responsibility to know and understand what we put in our body - that's not the government's role. -- NL

My health should not depend on reading the fine print on a food package.
If that's true, I could write a contract for a house, car or any high dollar item and somewhere in the mountains of paperwork say that no matter how much you pay me, the item reverts back to me in two months. Tell me how ethical that is and who would be to blame? 66

Lion makes a valid point, which you totally ignored. The Government is not responsible for your inability to read about or understand facts about diet or about contract law.
A 'meeting of the minds' is necessary to validate a contract. Your 'high dollar' example is clearly fraud which invalidates such contracts. The state would not enforce.

Show such an intent to defraud in fine print mandatory food labeling.
In fact, the state could even be partly liable to see that the mandated label is correct.