FDA proposition-

Discussion in 'Political Talk, Alternative World Theories' started by Blossom, Mar 6, 2014.

  1. Blossom

    Blossom Moderator

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2013
    Messages:
    8,437
    Gender:
    Female
    The FDA is proposing new food labeling guidelines with updated sodium recommendations. The plan is to further decrease the recommended sodium intake to 1500 mg :shock: There is also going to be a stronger focus on total calories consumed especially from sugar. A decrease is warranted in sugar as well according to their researchers. :x http://broadcaster.medpagetoday.com/t?r ... id=&email=
     
  2. jyb

    jyb Member

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2012
    Messages:
    2,769
    Location:
    UK
    That's weird, I thought the fact that sodium is not evil had gone almost mainstream in recent years.
     
  3. j.

    j. Guest

    We are talking about the government here.
     
  4. OP
    Blossom

    Blossom Moderator

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2013
    Messages:
    8,437
    Gender:
    Female
    I don't know what going on with that, I guess they just change with the breeze because there is no real science backing that nonsense. It's a cheap way to ensure the masses can't function well and need obamacare I guess!
     
  5. OP
    Blossom

    Blossom Moderator

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2013
    Messages:
    8,437
    Gender:
    Female
    It speaks volumes when the very things that help save lives literally in an emergency crisis are villified for common everyday use. Does the FDA really think people are so dumb that they can't figure out how to feed themselves? Yes they do. People will go to the ER and get saline and glucose, amazingly recover and go home to deprive themselves again in preparation for the next round. When the 'patient' returns for more saline and glucose some convenient excuse will be made or diagnosis given. It couldn't be that they need more salt and sugar! That's bad for you unless we(medical providers) are giving it. (Sarcasm)
     
  6. haidut

    haidut Member

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2013
    Messages:
    17,198
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    USA / Europe
  7. j.

    j. Guest

    I'm pretty sure there is a positive correlation between New York Times readership and stupidity.
     
  8. haidut

    haidut Member

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2013
    Messages:
    17,198
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    USA / Europe

    Right, but I was hoping since the masses get their stupidity-infused news from places like NYT, if NYT says salt is not bad than the masses (and by extension FDA) would accept it at face value. I think FDA has an agenda to combat individual substances one by one (as long as their is no lobby behind a specific substance) to give the appearance that they are trying to find the reason behind multi-fold increases in heart attacks, cancers, neurological conditions, etc. Salt is currently on the agenda. I wonder what's next? Maybe protein, but certainly not vegetable oils given their powerful lobbies.
     
  9. j.

    j. Guest

    NYT is stupider than the masses. It's a hardcore left elitist busybody newspaper. They're way below the average person.
     
  10. OP
    Blossom

    Blossom Moderator

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2013
    Messages:
    8,437
    Gender:
    Female
    I liked the part where the author talks about how brave this person was to tackle such an issue as salt! I'm thinking come off it, really. Even if I believed that propaganda I still wouldn't think it involved bravery! It's salt for goodness sake. They aren't deactivating bombs!
     
  11. freal

    freal Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2013
    Messages:
    209
    Is that the new nutrition labeling devised by Michelle Obama, buhaha? Judging by the school lunches put forward by her program the nutrition labeling will be awfull.

    On the other hand she did approve Mcdonalds, but only if you eat it with fruit and vegetables.

    Joke aside, its kind of good to know what the saturated fat content is, to know which oil was used, since a lot of times it says only vegetable fat on the ingedients list. It would be really nice if the food was actually tested like lard, to know what the PUFA % is, not just slapping a USDA standard label on it. But thats not their goal.
     
  12. OP
    Blossom

    Blossom Moderator

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2013
    Messages:
    8,437
    Gender:
    Female
    I have noticed that the PUFA information on labels is very limited. Luckily I don't eat much packaged food but it would still be good to know.
    I have a real sore spot with the government and 'medical' authorities when it comes to the horrifically low sodium recommendations. In the mid 80's I pretty much stopped salting my food as a teen because I believed all propaganda in the media and I wanted to be healthy. When I think back on all the damage that could have been prevented if I hadn't followed that ridiculous dogma. I used to pass out all the time and once I finally started salting my food again that all went away. Some seemingly small things have major consequences.
     
Loading...