I just can't believe this!

[globaldesigns]

Originally Posted by plutoniumJoe

I am all for personal freedom and individual rights. But where do one's individual rights stop and mine begin? I don't think that a ban is effective but I think that a substantial tax is warranted. We have other sin taxes for things that have far less social and health risks associated with them than obesity. Here in Canada it will be all of our responsibilities to care for children that have developed poor eating habits because they get hooked on high sodium, high fat, high fructose diets before they became old enough to distinguish for themsleves the benefits of a healthy diet. If unhealthy food cost the user Moore rather than the whole of society maybe people would think about what they were choosing rather than an inexpensive default to not preparing something healthy for their children.

I do not to claim to be without sin but my wife and I make sure that McDs is a rare "treat" and our kids don't crave it.

That is what I like to hear, "RARE Treat"

I am a believer of you can have anything, as long as you don't over indulge in it. Just common sense.

[lorenz0]

Umm, and drugs are illegal why?

Kids shouldn't be fat because their parents choose to feed them rotten ronnies instead of something healthy. Be smart with your kids, end story

[ksalt]

Originally Posted by lorenz0

Umm, and drugs are illegal why?

Because of our relationship with the U.S.A. and they are fighting a war with drugs..

[sitandwatch]

For my kids its all about the toy, I have to force them to eat that crap.

I just get one happy meal and buy the second toy (note: second toy is pricey).

Now the double down is great just make sure go get gravy to dip it into... I personally feel the sodium content was extreme really extreme that would be my only issue with it.

[StirCrazy]

Originally Posted by lorenz0

Umm, and drugs are illegal why?

cuz they screw you up.

Steve

[Zoaelite]

Originally Posted by StirCrazy

cuz they screw you up.

Steve

If that's true why isn't alcohol, cigarettes, prescription drugs and not educating your children illegal?

[StirCrazy]

Originally Posted by zoaElite

If that's true why isn't alcohol, cigarettes, prescription drugs illegal?

ok so percription drugs are a perscribed item that is regulated, and if you want to die from common infections or such don't take them. if they are a drug that impares you, you are actualy told not to drive or operate ect.. bla bla bla.. that one was a pretty silly one to put in your list.

cigaretts. different debate altogeather, lets just say there realy wasn';t much research befor the 70's as to the effect and they were highly sociably acceptable. now that there is more research on them and there effects they are making getting them more difficult. also there is a catch 22 here. cigerette companies give tarifs to the canadian medical system and alot of the goverment tax on smokes goes directly into health care. such alarge amount comes from cigerette sales that if they banned them tomorrow the health care system would be severly rocked. so they are doing a slower controled phase out to reduce the amount of people who start smoking through education. so far it is working great.. in the 70's there were survays that showed in excess of 70% of all canadians over ther age of 16 smoked, I think that number is down to the 40's now.

just think in Japan you can have a smoke while you eat your big mac

Alcohol is another tricky one. used responcible it is actualy no problem and infact a helth benifit, this is another one that has been around from the dark ages and is sociably acceptable so to just take it away would be suicide for any goverment. there is nothing wrong with consuming alcohol persay but rather the abuse of it.

in any rates there is no way you can compare drugs to any of these, the primary purpose of manufactured illicid drugs is to get you screwed up and to get you back for more. no benifit at all here for the person taking them. as for canibus and suchg.. there is no helth benifit from smoking it and its self is non adivctive, but people get addicted to the high (mental adiction instead of physical) but it comes down to why leagalize a mind altering substance which has no real benifit.

Steve

[Zoaelite]

Alcohol is another tricky one. used responcible it is actualy no problem and infact a benifit

I would love to discuss every point you just made but I have 2 mid terms on Wed. and don't feel like wasting my time trying to correct your highly thought out statements.

[kien]

[Slick Fork]

@ Diver-Dude: Giving up Civil Liberties is a slippery slope, todays happy meal might very well be tomorrows "appropriate literature" and next weeks freedom of expression. Governments prove time and again that they do NOT know what's best for us.

@ Global Designs: Not too long ago I read an article (can't remember where) that suggested that the reason 7 year old girls are hitting puberty is higher body fat percentage. The study focused on children whose diet was similar but activity levels were different. They found that early puberty was hit most often by the less active children. There was also a CBC documentary which set out to justify or dispel the higher cost and health benefits of organic food. Short version is lab tests found no difference in the chemical levels of supermarket meat and "organic" meat. Consumers also couldn't taste a difference if they weren't told which was the organic and which was implanted beef.

As a note on the smoking debate, what the anti-smoking lobby doesn't want people to know is that smokers cost the health care system less. Non-smokers live longer and the costs to keep them alive into their nineties is astronomical compared to a smoker who dies at 70. Plus, the gov makes a nice tax revenue off of smokers. I am completely in favour of non-smoking legislation in buildings, pubs, restauraunts etc. But if someone wants to puff away and kick off early... that's their business.