(Thread IKs:
ZShakespeare)
|
mom and dad fight a lot posted:gently caress this. All the turbo-chud assholes were gone from my workplace. Now they'll be coming back and I'll have to listen to their loud-mouthed horseshit. It sure is amazing that protesting and being disruptive continues to only works for chuds  - I hate these shitheads so much
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2022 23:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 02:49 |
|
|
I'd be more sympathetic to the opinion of "we need to save people from their own stupidity" if we hadn't loving ran from that concept with our tails set firmly between our legs over the past two years and continuing to this miserable loving day with COVID. It's rubbish. Do you think anyone is buying a fuckin hamburger thinking "this is a wonderful health choice, this is the best and most healthful thing I could eat?" No, I order a goddamn hamburger and fries after a loving 13 hour workday because I've had two Kind bars and gently caress all else and I want dopamine and grease. I don't loving want to hear how bad it is for me. I know! I know how every goddamn thing I love is killing me, in exquisite detail, and frankly, I'd like to not have it shoved in my loving face when I make a questionable choice. Y'all can piss and moan about Doug Ford's success, and god knows he's a stupid shitsack of a person on every level, but he wins because he gets this poo poo and there's the sense that the liberals/left are joyless nags who want to make you miserable. They'd do very well to avoid leaning into that image.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2022 23:18
|
|
|
I agree about nagging in general but adding information isn't nagging. Also, the cigarette warning images were very effective in pretty much every global market that's used them. See this recent study from Thailand: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7856827/ quote:it was found that 30% of teenage smoking participants had a deterred desire to smoke due to seeing warning graphic labels on cigarette packs. Approximately 42% of non-smoking participants reported not wanting to try smoking after seeing warning graphic labels on cigarette packs. More than 30% reported gaining more knowledge about cigarettes from smoking warning labels Maybe Canada is joining the US in the stupid chud event horizon where anti-intellectualism is turning into anti-information of any kind but the warnings definitely seemed to help.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2022 00:41
|
|
|
PT6A posted:I'd be more sympathetic to the opinion of "we need to save people from their own stupidity" if we hadn't loving ran from that concept with our tails set firmly between our legs over the past two years and continuing to this miserable loving day with COVID. I think that the ground beef specifically is just a victim of the processed food definition, and there’s a good chance the ranchers will be successful in their lobbying. But it sounds like you’re more broadly against the nutrient labels so let’s address that without focusing on beef. There’s good evidence that people do in fact reduce their consumption of unhealthy food when it’s clearly labelled as such: https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.1003015 Also try to think about the broader population. My dad can’t read those tiny nutrition labels at the store, and a lot of school kids aren’t reading them either when they buy a pop. Not to mention immigrants, less educated people, etc. I brought up the Mexico example earlier, my Spanish is bad but a big stop sign saying “exceso calorias” is pretty clear even if you don’t speak the language or know what a goddamn kiloJoule is. Diabetes and heart disease are responsible for ~20% of Canadian deaths a year and cause a disproportionate burden on the healthcare system as chronic diseases, I think a little indignity is a worthwhile tradeoff if we can bring that number down.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2022 00:42
|
|
|
Starks posted:I think that the ground beef specifically is just a victim of the processed food definition, and there’s a good chance the ranchers will be successful in their lobbying. But it sounds like you’re more broadly against the nutrient labels so let’s address that without focusing on beef. There’s good evidence that people do in fact reduce their consumption of unhealthy food when it’s clearly labelled as such: https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.1003015 Agreed, to a point. We don't have calorie values labeled on restaurant food *right now* though, and other jurisdictions have. I think that's a more valuable route to go down, as opposed to labelling ground beef or ground pork in the supermarket specifically. We already have the nutrition labels on packaged foods, and, frankly, to be perfectly honest: they're gently caress useless on junk food. I'm going to eat a bag of chips if I fancy a bag of chips. I know it's not good for me already. Everyone loving knows that! No one thinks a packet of crisps is good for them! Now, where we could use legislation, is in restaurants. What is actually the calorie value of your "small fries"? How much sodium and fat is in the saffron cream sea bass entree? (Hint: I don't know the precise numbers, but I'm quite sure it's not healthy just because it's seafood rather than red meat) Maybe I'm the only person alive that actually thinks about this poo poo, but I know when I order one of these dishes, or when I order a Coke, or a beer, I'm not doing it for my health. I know it's bad for me. I don't have a problem with that, I've made peace with it. I don't think a lack of information is the problem.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2022 01:24
|
|
|
Less Fat Luke posted:I agree about nagging in general but adding information isn't nagging. Also, the cigarette warning images were very effective in pretty much every global market that's used them. See this recent study from Thailand:
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2022 01:36
|
|
|
eXXon posted:Toronto Police Services are trying to get ahead of a report to be released later today with race-based statistics on use of force and strip-searching by pivoting a full 180 degrees from "a few bad apples" to "actually the whole orchard is hosed": https://twitter.com/dasharez0ne/status/1532837424241553411
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2022 02:04
|
|
|
I resent the warnings because I know the things I'm warned against are bad for me. I don't think it's anti-intellectualism, because I don't deny that the warning labels are in fact truthful, nor do I deny that they're effective. I just don't want to see them because I'm a selfish, stubborn rear end in a top hat and I shall kill myself at the rate I see fit! Now, if you want to bring it into the political realm: the reason this is bad policy, electorally speaking, is that not everyone is as self-aware as me, and they're just going to get pissed off and vote for a populist conservative who promises cheep beer and plenty of hamburgers. We've had plenty of conversations about how modern liberal politics has essentially destroyed class consciousness amongst the working class, and frankly, this is a part of that. My lads, we aren't winning hearts and minds when we nag people about having a goddamn burger. That's not a winning strategy, I promise! EDIT: I guess the thing that really pisses me off is that the Liberals are dead fuckin set on being the worst caricature of themselves. I try to convince folks that they shouldn't simply vote Conservative, because it's against their interests. I try to defend the loving carbon tax (good policy) even when folks are struggling to pay for gas. I defend basic human rights for LGBTQ+ people, and I don't negotiate on that poo poo. But, suffering loving christ, give us a goddamn burger without getting nagged, for gently caress sake! Make life easier for those of us who want to reach out to people that aren't on board already; don't hand them ammo against us, over trivial loving nonsense like the nutritional value of loving ground beef. It's lunacy. PT6A fucked around with this message at 02:42 on Jun 15, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2022 02:05
|
|
|
PT6A posted:Y'all can piss and moan about Doug Ford's success, and god knows he's a stupid shitsack of a person on every level, but he wins because he gets this poo poo and there's the sense that the liberals/left are joyless nags who want to make you miserable. They'd do very well to avoid leaning into that image. It's possible that this is too reductive of a view of Doug Ford's electoral success, such as it is, and that the voting public - those who bother anyway - are not as motivated by this particular trivial policy or, in most cases, any policies at all. In a broad sense, yes, Ford had some success by shutting the gently caress up, keeping a relatively modest involvement in culture war bullshit, and just cruising by an indifferent public while quietly and effectively looting everything in the province that isn't nailed down. That's not because Ontarians feel like Stephen Del Duca is a joyless nag; most probably still don't know who he is or care, or that his name is spelled Steven. Similarly, most probably couldn't name a single ONDP policy, even if there are many that were at least modest incremental improvements over the status quo (like rent and vacancy control, which on their own should have been enough to convince any non-homeowner to vote). Precambrian Video Games fucked around with this message at 03:51 on Jun 15, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2022 03:48
|
|
|
Quick quiz rear end in a top hat: are rice Krispies safe for someone with celiac disease? Or are food labeling laws actually useful for some people?
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2022 04:29
|
|
|
PT6A posted:
Nothing is stopping you from eating it 
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2022 04:35
|
|
|
.
Legit Businessman fucked around with this message at 01:15 on Sep 10, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2022 04:46
|
|
|
Come on, The average Albertan Voter couldn't write 3 paragraphs. Somebody fucked around with this message at 01:37 on Sep 10, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2022 04:54
|
|
|
.
Legit Businessman fucked around with this message at 01:15 on Sep 10, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2022 04:56
|
|
|
Less Fat Luke posted:Maybe Canada is joining the US in the stupid chud event horizon where anti-intellectualism is turning into anti-information of any kind but the warnings definitely seemed to help. It's not anti-intellectualism so much as it's "do your own 'research' and draw the conclusion that suits you and therefore most likely the company, also ignore reality (and hopefully not even be nudged to acknowledging it) if it benefits you and/or the Conservative party to do so".
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2022 05:00
|
|
|
Yeah, “freedom” now seems to mean “believe whatever feels right to you no matter what anyone else says.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2022 05:03
|
|
|
B33rChiller posted:Quick quiz rear end in a top hat: are rice Krispies safe for someone with celiac disease? Or are food labeling laws actually useful for some people? You make an excellent point. Maybe a visible warning for food products not safe for people with celiac disease would be very useful. In fact, it seems like more visible labelling of allergens both in packaged foods and in prepared food in restaurants would be ideal. Maybe HC should move on that before whinging about hamburgers. I don’t object to food labelling as a concept, of course. We all have the right to know exactly what is in our food; ground meat already has a standardised nutrition label, I don’t see why anything further is necessary, especially when it involves a value judgement.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2022 05:32
|
|
|
I kind of agree with PT6A's point about fast food. A&W isn't healthy food, it's convenient food. There may have been a time 70 years ago when it was "better" for you but that was also when people were eating less meat each day than we so now. There were also considerably fewer processed additives and poo poo in food so even the shittiest food was still ok. When the government steps in and tut tuts you for enjoying your McNuggets and telling you you're eating the shittiest parts of the chicken ground into a paste and deep fried, you don't give a poo poo because it's all you can afford based off of time and resources. Those MPs and bureaucrats have the luxury of more of those resources and so can choose to eat healthier. If you want me to eat healthier, make healthier options more affordable, give me a maximum 50 hour work week with the standard full time threshold being 32 or something. Give me a reason to choose the healthier option that doesn't just feel like some privileged gently caress talking down from their soap box. Incidentally, when A&W first introduced their Beyond Meat burger I had one and I told people it did taste like a Teen burger. But when asked if I would order it over a Teen burger again I said I'd order the Teen instead. My reasons were a) the Teen burger is still cheaper and b) I didn't come to A&W to make a healthy choice, I came to A&W because I haven't eaten in 6 hours, I won't be getting home soon to make my own meal, and dammit I just want that greasy texture in my mouth to release some tension from the day. The Beyond Meat burger doesn't do any of those things, it just makes me feel like I'm being guilted into a healthier option
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2022 05:46
|
|
|
Nobody cares why you consume any particular food or beverage. Accurate and easily distinguishable* labelling in grocery stores and on restaurant menus does not impact your ability to buy whatever you want in any way. * which many grocery store labels are not, between tiny fonts, ingredient ordering shenanigans and deliberately inconsistent serving sizes.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2022 07:31
|
|
|
Aces High posted:I kind of agree with PT6A's point about fast food. A&W isn't healthy food, it's convenient food. There may have been a time 70 years ago when it was "better" for you but that was also when people were eating less meat each day than we so now. There were also considerably fewer processed additives and poo poo in food so even the shittiest food was still ok. A&W isn't promoting a Beyond Burger for your personal ethics, they're doing it for profit as more and more customers are choosing to be vegetarians. Government is telling you to not eat McNuggets because apparently people aren't capable of making healthy decisions. The government doesn't need to make healthier options more affordable; they can just tax the unhealthy options instead. That's how alcohol and tobacco duties work. And what makes them different from A&W.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2022 07:54
|
|
|
Going to A&W for anything but the onion rings is a mistake anyways
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2022 08:04
|
|
|
TheKingofSprings posted:Going to A&W for anything but the onion rings is a mistake anyways Mozza burgers are great and I won’t hear otherwise.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2022 13:09
|
|
|
eXXon posted:Toronto Police Services are trying to get ahead of a report to be released later today with race-based statistics on use of force and strip-searching by pivoting a full 180 degrees from "a few bad apples" to "actually the whole orchard is hosed": After reading The Colour of Law (I think that was the one) I've become convinced by the author that the common parlance of "systemic racism" or "structural racism" was a mistake. It's a phrase that requires more explanation than it provides to people that don't already know the meaning. It's vaguely euphemistic and gives the idea that there's this sort of ephemeral racism floating around in the "system" and that it's not really anyone's fault, it just sort of happened you know? It would've been better to just be straightforward and say what it means right off the bat. Racist policies Racist laws Racist regulations Just describing it as racist policies makes it very clear I think. And everyone knows that policies are made by people, thus those people are/were racist. There's no hiding behind it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2022 13:38
|
|
|
eXXon posted:Nobody cares why you consume any particular food or beverage. Accurate and easily distinguishable* labelling in grocery stores and on restaurant menus does not impact your ability to buy whatever you want in any way. I quite agree. Labels should be larger, serving sizes should be more consistent and reasonable, allergens should be more clearly identified, etc. None of these problems are solved by the introduction of a warning label, which has a moralistic dimension to it, especially when applied to something that's inherently an ingredient. Will boxes of table salt require a "warning: extremely high in sodium!" label? Will a bottle of olive oil require "warning: extremely high in fat!"?
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2022 13:42
|
|
|
Aces High posted:I kind of agree with PT6A's point about fast food. A&W isn't healthy food, it's convenient food. There may have been a time 70 years ago when it was "better" for you but that was also when people were eating less meat each day than we so now. There were also considerably fewer processed additives and poo poo in food so even the shittiest food was still ok. Both you and PT6A are over-relying on personal anecdote (and hypothetical anecdote at that). The article about Chile that I posted earlier shows that labels do reduce consumption of unhealthy foods, and the effect is more pronounced among lower education and lower income families. Also your example is ironic, because a beyond burger has more fat and more sodium than a teen burger, which I bet not a lot of people realize when they order it as the "healthier" option. Here's a section from a different article, a literature review (https://davidhammond.ca/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/2021-FOP-Product-Reformulation-Ann-Rev-Nutr-Roberto-et-al.pdf) that tries to explain the counterintuitive result where labelling reduces consumption even among products that everyone already knows are unhealthy: quote:Labels can also influence behavior by simply serving as a salient reminder of one’s long-term health goals. A person might already know that soda has a lot of sugar and that overconsuming it is not good for one’s health, but the label can remind them that they are trying to make healthy choices and thus should avoid it. Labels can also exert effects by inducing emotional reactions (32, 41). Seeing a red traffic-light or warning label, for example, might engender feelings of anxiety about one’s health. Food labels might also prompt discussion between friends and family, exerting further influence on decision making (82), which can also lead to broader changes in social norms (32, 79). These cognitive, emotional, and social influences can in turn affect attitudes toward foods or directly influence behavior.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2022 14:18
|
|
|
In other "People doing their own research" news, here's a group of people who have, in their pockets right now, a device that can show them everything they ever wanted to know about civics and health. https://twitter.com/Iron_Spike/status/1536871843059081222   
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2022 14:25
|
|
|
It makes a lot more sense for high calorie drinks (and yes, it should include juice, not just soft drinks), because someone might reasonably decide "hey I'm thirsty, I'll grab a soda!" but no one's going to say "hmmm, I'm hungry, time to grab a spoon and demolish that package of ground beef." As an ingredient rather than a meal in and of itself, the healthfulness depends entirely on how it's used, which is why warning labels are ridiculous.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2022 14:26
|
|
|
I wish I could get paid to work for Queen of Canada or these SovCit nuts. 'I never signed the social contract, therefore I'm not bound by it' is way more communicable and easily understood message than the ideological mess they're peddling.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2022 14:30
|
|
|
PT6A posted:It makes a lot more sense for high calorie drinks (and yes, it should include juice, not just soft drinks), because someone might reasonably decide "hey I'm thirsty, I'll grab a soda!" but no one's going to say "hmmm, I'm hungry, time to grab a spoon and demolish that package of ground beef." As an ingredient rather than a meal in and of itself, the healthfulness depends entirely on how it's used, which is why warning labels are ridiculous. Whether it's a parent serving a full 300 ml of orange juice (and 26 grams of sugar, which is already too much for one day) to a kid in the morning, or frying up some 70/30 to stir into the KD at night, a way to find out that they may not want to do either of these things on the reg is a part of the solution that becomes offensively useless without the other parts already in-place. Chiding someone for their hobson's choice is not going to accomplish anything, beyond further demonizing people who are simply not wealthy enough to make better choices. What ARE those choices? Who's promoting those? Who's subsidizing the food you should be eating, because it's a net good to society for you having done so? I can't criticize the CAQ for punishing english people for being english as a way to promote french, and then advocate punishing trash-eaters for eating trash as a way to promote salad. This is an entirely separate problem from a grownup who doesn't want to be nagged by the gubmint that they're about to consume a month's worth of lard. To that person I say, too loving bad, that government is also paying to scrape the lard back out of those arteries again, doing that means they're not helping someone with a less-preventable illness, and that entitles all involved to an silent, indignant huff on a label. My real issue with WARNING THIS WILL KILL YOU labels is exactly the one you raised about Prop 65 markings: They're on fuckin' everything, so they'd might as well not be on anything, which again leads me away from the sticker with the flashing lights on it, and back towards the nutritional label that says "Oh jsyk eating this every day will probably cost you your feet".
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2022 15:20
|
|
|
Hello mirror universe CanPol. I have minted some one of a kind rob ford NFTs in the style of disco elysium portraits and I like them a lot. So much so that I'm offering any canpol poster from any universe a chance to claim these unique images! (a free avatar) here's what's left  If you'd like one just post in the other thread since I have no power in this realm.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2022 15:42
|
|
|
My only food labeling hot take is that the “serving size” should be legally required to actually divide evenly into the package size. None of this 200g package with a 31g serving size horseshit.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2022 16:00
|
|
|
Starks posted:Both you and PT6A are over-relying on personal anecdote (and hypothetical anecdote at that). The article about Chile that I posted earlier shows that labels do reduce consumption of unhealthy foods, and the effect is more pronounced among lower education and lower income families. Also your example is ironic, because a beyond burger has more fat and more sodium than a teen burger, which I bet not a lot of people realize when they order it as the "healthier" option. I mean, I'm also just shitposting, I love that there are more labels and info available (didn't know about the thing with Beyond but that makes me laugh). Though I'm sure I'm not wrong that healthier options are not as easily gotten by everyone thanks to corporate interests wanting to have cheap production costs
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2022 16:17
|
|
|
TheKingofSprings posted:Going to A&W for anything but the onion rings is a mistake anyways Buddy burgers are unhealthy as gently caress, but goddamn if they aren't delicious after a bender. I actually had no idea that in the US, A&W was hardly around and totally poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2022 16:24
|
|
|
Entropic posted:My only food labeling hot take is that the “serving size” should be legally required to actually divide evenly into the package size. None of this 200g package with a 31g serving size horseshit. There should be for the full package and a reasonable serving size. I'm eating the whole bag of chips not your serving size of loving 6 chips.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2022 16:34
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/pressprogress/status/1536799375074250763?s=21&t=eE25aCYnibmwtEoXORW0Mw The whole thing is a banger of people you wouldn’t want to be stuck in a room with. quote:The line-up included panels titled “Gender, Biology and the Woke Revolution,” “How to make Canada the Most Pro-Family Country in the World” and “The Abject Failure of our Institutions in the Covid Era,” which is listed as moderated by UCP leadership candidate Danielle Smith.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2022 16:37
|
|
|
Christ I eat so much A&W it's a little embarrassing. But a teen burger and onion rings is so good when I'm working evenings. I think the difference between labelling food and labelling other stuff like smokes and alcohol is that how unhealthy food is can be dependent on the individual. It's recommended babies and toddlers who drink milk get whole milk because they need fats for brain development and growth. But if you're an adult trying to lose weight you should probably drink skim. I like labels that say "hey this product has a lot of sugar/fat/fibre/whatever" I don't like parts going "so it's bad for you"
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2022 16:41
|
|
|
"This product was sold by a corporation whose anti-union stance and countermeasures are notorious, even as fast food companies go"
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2022 16:45
|
|
|
Solenna posted:It's recommended babies and toddlers who drink milk get whole milk because they need fats for brain development and growth. But if you're an adult trying to lose weight you should probably drink skim. It's all about calories in calories out, drinking fat isn't going to make you fat inherently. To add something meaningful to the discussion, I think that more labels and nutritional information definitely help demystify food choices for kids and adults, while I don't know what the specific thing people are talking about with regards to ground beef. I know it can be stressful to consider what you eat, but it can also let you feel like you're in control when you have more knowledge about your habits.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2022 16:59
|
|
|
Aces High posted:I kind of agree with PT6A's point about fast food. A&W isn't healthy food, it's convenient food. There may have been a time 70 years ago when it was "better" for you but that was also when people were eating less meat each day than we so now. There were also considerably fewer processed additives and poo poo in food so even the shittiest food was still ok. This is a stupid take. No one in the government is wagging their finger at you for eating like a dummy. If food labelling gives you the feels, eat better.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2022 17:52
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 02:49 |
|
|
Adding nutrition information to fast food would put pressure on fast food companies to provide healthy and affordable alternatives
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2022 18:13
|
|