• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Given the poor health quality of Americans, are you in favor of strategies to improve food quality, reduce processed foods/sugar in our society? (1 Viewer)

Are you in favor of strategies to improve food quality/reduce processed food/sugar?


  • Total voters
    36
I'm not a big salt person, but I definitely agree added and/or condensed sugar is the biggest culprit of obesity. Fat intake doesn't make people fat, even though unhealthy fats can cause other significant health problems. Excess sugar DEFINITELY gets converted to fat storage, and it's unnecessarily in so many foods. The biggest irony is all the added sugar in low/reduced fat and fat-free foods. That whole thing is so self-defeating....
I have no doubt in the fact that sugar is the biggest culprit of obesity. “Reduced fat and fat free foods” are some of the most unhealthy in our diet. Our bodies need “fat”, and to some extent they need salt. Sugar is not an important factor in our diets. We get plenty of natural sugars in our diet from fruit, and other natural food sources.
 
So…you cannot actually explain your stance. Got it.
You complained that "our food industry is very scary. We have been misled for years."

Tell me what changes you want in the US food industry.
 
If you are in favor of this but disagree with strategies that have been utilized so far, please share proposals of how we, as a society, could implement changes to improve our health through nutrition.
HFCS should definitely Not be in our food supply. It has no nutritional benefit and a lot of downside in obesity and sugar metabolism problems. However, in general, I hesitate to give federal health nuts control over everyone's diet. They are way too dumb, and think they are way too smart.
 
You complained that "our food industry is very scary. We have been misled for years."

Tell me what changes you want in the US food industry.
You need to go first. YOU said that you see an Anti USDA message. How so? I would appreciate if you could find a way to be specific in your answer.
 
HFCS should definitely Not be in our food supply. It has no nutritional benefit and a lot of downside in obesity and sugar metabolism problems. However, in general, I hesitate to give federal health nuts control over everyone's diet. They are way too dumb, and think they are way too smart.
what a conundrum.
 
You need to go first. YOU said that you see an Anti USDA message. How so? I would appreciate if you could find a way to be specific in your answer.
I already did. The USDA is the one of the primary govt agencies tasked with food safety and nutrition guidelines, so if anyone has been "misled"..or allowing misleading claims about food, it would be the responsibility of the USDA. So what do you want changed, eliminated or added by the USDA to counter the misleading?
 
Here it is I found it....not a ban
Okay, you're right and I missed that late April update. The good news is the goal is now to have it removed from foods sooner than the end of next year. I also didn't realize that just a few days before the end of his term, Biden had banned it, to be removed (in foods) by mid-January 2027 and a year later for drugs.

"The FDA will also ask food companies to remove Red No. 3 from the nation’s food supply earlier than 2027 — the Biden administration’s initial deadline. (Drug companies got an additional year.)"


"Requesting food companies to remove FD&C Red No. 3 sooner than the 2027-2028 deadline previously required.

 
How so? Doing research into what one puts on the table, and into their mouths is a good start.
And next step would be that products that are beneficial would be abundant, and products that are not would be unavailable, or at least labelled as unhealthy. Worked with cigarettes!
 
Only because your side has suddenly claimed to be in favor of healthy foods. When will you petition your Congressperson to stop subsidizing ultraprocessed foods?
You clearly haven't met me, seen me, and don't know me. I've eaten very healthy for many decades!
 
Okay, you're right and I missed that late April update. The good news is the goal is now to have it removed from foods sooner than the end of next year. I also didn't realize that just a few days before the end of his term, Biden had banned it, to be removed (in foods) by mid-January 2027 and a year later for drugs.

"The FDA will also ask food companies to remove Red No. 3 from the nation’s food supply earlier than 2027 — the Biden administration’s initial deadline. (Drug companies got an additional year.)"


"Requesting food companies to remove FD&C Red No. 3 sooner than the 2027-2028 deadline previously required.

I'll be surprised if the companies comply. Hopefully they will however, in my view, it requires legislation. Same with antibiotics and hormones in beef, pork, chicken and dairy. The industry as a whole will not do it willingly.

We , as well as GB and the EU, have strict rules on dyes, hormones , antibiotics and additives which is one of the reasons our imports from the US on those things are low. Trade is complicated .
 
Last edited:
I already did. The USDA is the one of the primary govt agencies tasked with food safety and nutrition guidelines, so if anyone has been "misled"..or allowing misleading claims about food, it would be the responsibility of the USDA. So what do you want changed, eliminated or added by the USDA to counter the misleading?
The USDA has been accurate in the representation of our Countries physical health? What I personally want are food labels that tell the actual truth about what you are putting into your mouth. Perhaps, not twenty different labels for “sugar”. It is sugar, call it sugar. Do you realize that some breakfast food companies were owned by cigarette companies?
 
And next step would be that products that are beneficial would be abundant, and products that are not would be unavailable, or at least labelled as unhealthy. Worked with cigarettes!
That would be a start. Those cigarette companies moved onto cereals. Helped to turn our Country from one addiction to another. And it was a well kept secret for many years.
 
The USDA has been accurate in the representation of our Countries physical health?
I was talking about, you were talking.....food quality....and being misled. Now you want to discuss "physical health.....fine

We have see a decline in US life expectancy, primarily due to COVID associated issues....but go on..
What I personally want are food labels that tell the actual truth about what you are putting into your mouth.
So you want IMPROVEMENTS by the USDA and the FDA......Great to read!
Perhaps, not twenty different labels for “sugar”. It is sugar, call it sugar. Do you realize that some breakfast food companies were owned by cigarette companies?
So do you want to limit who can own food companies? Thats outside of the discussion, that would be another regulatory issue, but I'm glad to see such progressive spirit!
 
That would be a start. Those cigarette companies moved onto cereals. Helped to turn our Country from one addiction to another. And it was a well kept secret for many years.
So you want stronger food oversight, GREAT!

Is that the general spirit of this admin?
 
Okay, you're right and I missed that late April update.
Just like I missed the dropping of tariffs on GB aluminum and steel but it would never dawn on me to say you had " egg on your face " for missing it. It happens.
 
You clearly haven't met me, seen me, and don't know me. I've eaten very healthy for many decades!

Has nothing to do with my point. Why did your side shit all over Michelle Obama's proposals for healthier foods?
 
No, but the greater the desire to get off of a program, the more effort most people will make to do so.

I think all subsidy programs for able bodied workers should have strings attached. there should be no free rides, except like i have repeated... the elderly and disabled.
What about the single mothers who couldn't get an abortion and have to work 2 or 3 jobs to make ends meet?
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom