Salt: Part Deux.
 

that is the most retarded fucking shit ever. people should be responsible for themselves. what's with all this government parenting? FUCKKKKK that. if you eat fat and you eat salt and you smoke and you DIE... well that's your fucking problem. it's not like that food is at a food kitchen or a school cafeteria.. people are PAYING for it.

speaking of school cafeteria food... JESUS FUCK it's so awful. my kid's lunch consists of 4 high carb items and a small container of whole milk.

ew, whole milk.

I absolutely agree with girlgun.

The theory is 1) virtually all preproduced food (soups, tv dinners etc) has a shitload of salt so, even if you wanted to reduce your salt intake, its pretty much impossible. And 2) no food company is going to voluntarily reduce salt in their foods because it would make their food taste, comparatively, worse.

Idealy, sure, make your own foods from raw ingredients. But that really isn't an option for some people.

Bear in mind that this story comes from the Mail so it has a 90+% chance of not being true (or a 99% chance of being only the partial truth).

that is actually good news.

still... SO? the govt is not my momma.

milk should be against the law.

mmmmm farty fatty cow sweat.

lap it up, you sick fucks. taste the teat of Satan.

I can make myself wretch if I allow my mind the actually think of all the pus and blood that you're about to gulp down.

my mind is far removed, so I'm able to type these words.

glargghgghl

I hope most people would agree that a function of government is to keep its citizens safe. Thus we have things like an army to fight enemies, the FDA to (theoretically) keep crap out of meat, labor laws to keep 10 year old kids from working 80 hours a week. As I understand it, the Tea Party wants to do away with those last two so ymmv.

As people learn about what contributes and prevents disease, shouldn't the government change its rules about what is and isn't safe to eat?

Where do you draw that line about a nanny state? Dunno, beats me.

the less govt the better, imo. i'm pretty sure they don't need to tell me what i can do to my own body... unless what i'm doing to my body becomes a threat to someone else. so NO. as an adult, i can make those decisions myself. don't tell me i can't have salt (if they're even saying that... i know the part about taxing sugary bevs is true), don't tell me i can't have an abortion and on and on. the children part is irrelevant. because they're children and they need protecting if someone isn't already protecting them. if people want crap in their meat... they should be able to have crap in their meat, but they should be entitled to know what they're getting.

Well, if a significant portion of the population has heart disease, due to salt intake, the whole population has to pay for their treatment. That's the way insurance works, the healthy pay to take care of the sick.

We need gov't because people are too stupid to make good decisions about themselves.

I understand that not all people know how, but with the exception of someone living off the street who either has food or not food, good simple food is not difficult to make. The education is just not there.. Which is a schooling / home life experience thing.

Anyway.. Die of salt or die of starvation. Is that what yot say when you mean people have no choice?

I do believe in food addiction to do with sugars salts additives etc anyway.. So perhaps people grow to think they have no choice.

... I use salt when i cook. When i buy anything in a can i try and buy the option with the lowest sodium stats, but really i don't watch too much. Though i don't eat a whole lot of pre packed food... Bread is probably the biggest one, and tinned chick peas, borlotti beans etc.

Actually i think individuals would stand more of a chance to make far better choices for themselves if the kind of companies that send out awfully unhealthy products were not so sheltered by govt money and vote interests.

apparently, this is more than half true. And apparently, Jamie Oliver has something to do with it (if so, he's back on my shitlist). why would you eat anything without salt? tastes liek crap. I'd rather have a heart attack than eat bland food for a life time, what would I need to live longer for? more bland food?

wait. you're talking about private insurance? i'd be way more concerned about how private health insurance works than changing people's diets. private insurance companies? as if they need to make any more money?

big bag of bs. what about personal freedom and the etcs.

i'm no longer allowed to sue tobacco industries when i get sick, because they make an effort to tell me in EVERY pack how bad it is for me. Once I have that information, it is my choice.

mind you, the goverment is not exactly interested in seeing people live longer (unless their assets are going to be taken somehow).

Going by pookie's fatuous reply, he clearly reads bolshy rags which very few people read, like The Guardian, so his reply has a 100% chance of being spiteful drivel.