Harbinger Posted April 11, 2012 Share Posted April 11, 2012 They do it for cigarette packaging. Is it time we now start doing it for extremely unhealthy foods as well? Should a tub of margarine have a picture of a persons heart with heart disease? Should a bag of potato chips have a picture of a dead person on a gurney on it? I look around and see a lot of people who are engaging in this dangerous practice of eating badly. It is done with cigarettes which are also known to be dangerous. Should we not go further and take it to certain foods? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MariWanna Posted April 11, 2012 Share Posted April 11, 2012 I don`t think it really curbs people from smoking a/o eating, rather it simply grosses them out. No real point imo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Satan's Evil Twin Posted April 11, 2012 Share Posted April 11, 2012 They do it for cigarette packaging. Is it time we now start doing it for extremely unhealthy foods as well? Should a tub of margarine have a picture of a persons heart with heart disease? Should a bag of potato chips have a picture of a dead person on a gurney on it? I look around and see a lot of people who are engaging in this dangerous practice of eating badly. It is done with cigarettes which are also known to be dangerous. Should we not go further and take it to certain foods? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamesTW Posted April 11, 2012 Share Posted April 11, 2012 Cigarettes serve no purpose, and are not healthy in any amount. A tub of margarine could last someone healthy a very long time. I could agree with labeling unhealthy fast foods with such though. You could have a salad with pictures of summer, or a quarter pounder with a picture of a diseased heart. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stark Posted April 11, 2012 Share Posted April 11, 2012 I can just imagine how pissed people would be if they started doing that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrsCanuck Posted April 11, 2012 Share Posted April 11, 2012 Eating a little junk food now and then doesn't compare to the vastly detrimental health effects of smoking a single cigarette. Not to mention smoking cigarette's also affect those around you. Posting pictures of those things is a little extreme in this case, in my opinion, although I can see where you're coming from. I think the best way to curb poor eating habits is to educate the public on the long term health effects of consuming a diet full of unhealthy foods. I would say make nutrition a bigger concern in schools and tell kids WHY eating healthy foods is beneficial. Most people know what to eat but don't really understand the implications their diet has on their life. If more people were aware of the long term effects of obesity and nutrient inefficiency, it would probably make everyone a little more concious of what they consume. I for sure eat my fair share of junk food but being aware of all the different things my body needs and how different foods (with specific vitamins, minerals, anti-oxidants etc.) can seriously reduce my risk for some diseases, it does affect my dietary choices. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GLASSJAW Posted April 11, 2012 Share Posted April 11, 2012 The dietary information is almost always available. There should be a push to educate people on what the information means. Not put a picture of a fat encrusted heart under the doritos label. edit: However, I would be all for certain companies being restricted from putting misleading information on their packaging. Like when sugar cereals put "part of a complete breakfast!" on their box or something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miss Korea Bob.Loblaw Posted April 11, 2012 Share Posted April 11, 2012 They do it for cigarette packaging. Is it time we now start doing it for extremely unhealthy foods as well? Should a tub of margarine have a picture of a persons heart with heart disease? Should a bag of potato chips have a picture of a dead person on a gurney on it? I look around and see a lot of people who are engaging in this dangerous practice of eating badly. It is done with cigarettes which are also known to be dangerous. Should we not go further and take it to certain foods? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amish Rake Fighter Posted April 11, 2012 Share Posted April 11, 2012 If you're concerned about our food system, this is worth a watch. It's Joel Salatin giving a short lecture at the Google campus followed by a question and answer period. Interesting perspective on Monsanto. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nucklehead Posted April 11, 2012 Share Posted April 11, 2012 Sure right after we figure a way to label idiot internet posters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Situation Posted April 11, 2012 Share Posted April 11, 2012 What they need to do is a have some kind of a reward/punishment system for a healthy and unhealthy foods. The consequences of your eating is not something immediate like painting a wall. Having pictures of fat people on unhealthy foods would be hilarious though but I don't think it would change a lot of eating habits. Eating a little junk food now and then doesn't compare to the vastly detrimental health effects of smoking a single cigarette. Not to mention smoking cigarette's also affect those around you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shift-4 Posted April 11, 2012 Share Posted April 11, 2012 Shouldn't we actually start with taxation first Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Wizard of AZ Posted April 11, 2012 Share Posted April 11, 2012 Shouldn't we actually start with taxation first Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buggernut Posted April 11, 2012 Share Posted April 11, 2012 As long as there's no second hand fat/cholesterol/salt/sugar blowing around, I could care less if it kills the willing consumer 1000000000x over. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wtpasc Posted April 11, 2012 Share Posted April 11, 2012 Shouldn't we actually start with taxation first Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wtpasc Posted April 11, 2012 Share Posted April 11, 2012 As long as there's no second hand fat/cholesterol/salt/sugar blowing around, I could care less if it kills the willing consumer 1000000000x over. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MariWanna Posted April 11, 2012 Share Posted April 11, 2012 Honestly, there is already a lot being done. Schools have begun banning unhealthy foods, and provide viable alternatives that children are still willing to eat, although we do occasionally miss those delicious foods we once had. Also, hasn't BC made it so that you can not have any transfat in food products sold here? I may be mistaken, or only partially right, I'm not quite sure. Besides that, a lot of these foods people are mentioning aren't that bad for you. When you are eating a Quarter Pounder for example, you are getting a valuable amount of protein, as well as fat. Obviously you do not want to eat these in excess, but they're not as detrimental to one's health as people perceive them to be. Fries can be said to have a decent amount of carbohydrates, just ask for them with no/less salt. The only thing I strongly would advise, is to not drink much pop. I personally feel all the chemicals and sugars are far worse for you than any 'greasy' burger. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Ambien Posted April 11, 2012 Share Posted April 11, 2012 Putting all these extra nonsensical warnings just adds to the cost of making a product, another bureaucratic hoop to jump through, which in turn makes it more expensive, which in turn causes less transactions, which is bad for business. Unless the goal is to inch-by-inch head toward a dystopian-like health food czar that allocates food for you, let people frack themselves over in their junk-laden sedentary way of life if they so choose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buggernut Posted April 11, 2012 Share Posted April 11, 2012 but but but what about the impact on the health care system!? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Satan's Evil Twin Posted April 11, 2012 Share Posted April 11, 2012 Putting all these extra nonsensical warnings just adds to the cost of making a product, another bureaucratic hoop to jump through, which in turn makes it more expensive, which in turn causes less transactions, which is bad for business. Unless the goal is to inch-by-inch head toward a dystopian-like health food czar that allocates food for you, let people frack themselves over in their junk-laden sedentary way of life if they so choose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.