11
   

The Dietary Control Zealots Strike Again

 
 
JTT
 
  2  
Reply Thu 4 Nov, 2010 12:54 pm
@High Seas,
Quote:
Polite discourse being evidently waaaay beyond the synaptic capabilities of your malformed brain,


then, then

GOT THAT, DIMWITTIE??

then,

Quote:
by the massive quantities of illustrated drivel posted by creepy "sugar-daddy".




0 Replies
 
JTT
 
  3  
Reply Thu 4 Nov, 2010 12:57 pm
@High Seas,
Quote:
and I have a question: don't natural herbivores has several stomachs? Cows do. Aren't they designed to eat only grass?


Nope, had they been they would have puked up all the animal protein fed to them and we wouldn't have had any problems with BSE.
0 Replies
 
failures art
 
  1  
Reply Thu 4 Nov, 2010 05:38 pm
@Setanta,
I was addressing Mame, Set. Hardly the thread for this. I for one, am not interested in talking about vegetarianism in a thread titled "The Dietary Control Zealots Strike Again." The association is offensive to me. Additionally, this is one of hawkeye's "poor me" threads.

A
R
T
hawkeye10
 
  2  
Reply Thu 4 Nov, 2010 09:52 pm
@failures art,
Quote:
Additionally, this is one of hawkeye's "poor me" threads
No, this is one of my "the government is scum" threads....
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Fri 5 Nov, 2010 02:06 am
Well, Fart, believe it or not, people are not obliged to consult your interests when carrying on a conversation.
JTT
 
  -1  
Reply Fri 5 Nov, 2010 11:26 am
@Setanta,
Quote:
people are not obliged to consult your interests when carrying on a conversation.


There a word that describes this, what is it, ... might it be hypocrisy?

Odd, that's exactly what you suggested I had to do in the Pet Peeves thread. It was your favorite theme, Set. Of course, you developed that "argument" when you found yourself completely unable to defend any of your nonsensical notions on language.

failures art
 
  1  
Reply Fri 5 Nov, 2010 12:31 pm
@Setanta,
Setanta wrote:

Well, Fart, believe it or not, people are not obliged to consult your interests when carrying on a conversation.

I'd never dream of distracting people from the burdensome task of not stepping on any of your eggshells, Set. You're far more sensitive than I am. Then again, it's not my objective to make every thread into a fight. In that way you and hawk are very much alike.

Well, enjoy your thread kids.

Au revoir
R
T
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Fri 5 Nov, 2010 12:33 pm
@failures art,
You're hilarious, Bubba. You come in here to pick another fight, while annoucing that you're the resident vegetarian Queen, and then flounce off in a snit, calling the others in here children.

You crack me up!
JTT
 
  -1  
Reply Fri 5 Nov, 2010 10:55 pm
@Setanta,
Quote:
You're hilarious, Bubba. You come in here to ...


Has this American got its head up its ass, or what?
0 Replies
 
Miss L Toad
 
  1  
Reply Fri 5 Nov, 2010 11:11 pm
@JTT,
Quote:
nonsensical notions on


Consonance and dissonance, a rare dietary treat.
0 Replies
 
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Fri 12 Nov, 2010 07:00 pm
Quote:
CNN) -- San Francisco, California, Mayor Gavin Newsom vetoed Friday the city's ban on most McDonald's Happy Meals with toys.

In making the veto, the mayor released a new report on how a public-private partnership is combating childhood obesity and how San Francisco's more than 55,000 public school students are now eating fresher and healthier foods.

"Parents, not politicians, should decide what their children eat, especially when it comes to spending their own money," said Newsom. "Despite its good intentions, I cannot support this unwise and unprecedented governmental intrusion into parental responsibilities and private choices."
Under a partnership with the private sector, the local government has been remedying the root causes of obesity, Newsom said.

Since the city launched its "Shape Up San Francisco" program in 2006, the city has received state funds to expand physical exercise for schoolchildren, put gardens in schools, delineate safe school routes to walk and bike to school, and educate kids about making healthy choices, Newsom said.

His spokesman added the mayor is looking for the Board of Supervisors not to override his veto, even though eight of its 11 members had voted for the ban.


"He hopes some members will reconsider should it be put up for an override," said spokesman Tony Winnicker. "One of the eight is not entirely comfortable with it and some of them are getting heat as this thing is being mocked around the world
http://www.cnn.com/2010/US/11/12/california.fast.food.ban/index.html?hpt=T1

A rare moment of sanity in loony tunes San Francisco...one the almost certainly will not stand.
High Seas
 
  1  
Reply Sat 13 Nov, 2010 04:49 pm
@hawkeye10,
Quote:
Since the city launched its "Shape Up San Francisco" program in 2006, the city has received state funds to expand physical exercise for schoolchildren, put gardens in schools, delineate safe school routes to walk and bike to school, and educate kids about making healthy choices, Newsom said.

The kids got fatter every year since this program started. Isn't there some profitability calculation for state funds?
http://www.notmytribe.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/gahan-wilson-1976-zoko-clown-addictive.jpg
0 Replies
 
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Wed 30 Nov, 2011 11:12 pm
McD's voids San Francisco's Happy Meal Law

Quote:
San Francisco's so-called "Happy Meal ban" goes into effect Thursday, but McDonald's has already found a way around it.
The ordinance prohibits fast-food restaurants from including free toys with children's meals that don't comply with nutritional standards. McDonald's answer? It will charge 10 cents for the toy. The proceeds will be donated to Ronald McDonald House, the company's charity for children with cancer.
Samantha Graff, a senior staff attorney with Public Health Law & Policy, which drew up the law that was eventually adopted by San Francisco, told SF Weekly — which first reported the novel strategy — that McDonald's response "allows them to continue marketing this unhealthful food to children in the midst of an obesity crisis."
Eric Mar, the member of the Board of Supervisors who led adoption of the law, called the 10-cent charge a "marketing ploy," but he told The Associated Press that he didn't plan to seek any changes to address the tactic.
Ashlee Yingling, a spokeswoman for McDonald's, said all of the company's U.S. stores would offer Happy Meals with apples and smaller servings of french fries by March.


http://bottomline.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/11/30/9124870-mcdonalds-finds-a-way-around-san-franciscos-happy-meal-ban

That was easy.......Maybe the busy-bodies will go stew for awhile and leave everyone alone.
0 Replies
 
terry0
 
  0  
Reply Thu 25 Oct, 2012 03:52 am
@hawkeye10,
The "food pyramid" is why we're so fat - we never evolved to eat grains, the agricultural revolution being only a few thousand years old. It's also why our animals have to be fed gigantic amounts of antibiotics; they didn't evolve to eat grains either; not to mention they're are being tortured in "factory farms" - sentient beings monstrously treated like machinery.
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Thu 25 Oct, 2012 09:53 am
@terry0,
Idk...but that is in line with new evidence that humans became spectacularly unhealthy when we started farming. On the other hand the veg people say that we could cure world hunger if we would all agree to not eat meat.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Sat 27 Oct, 2012 03:07 am
@terry0,
Ah-hahahahahahahahahahaha , , ,

Agriculture is at least 10,000 years old, more than enough time for humans to have evolved to eat grains. Humans ate grains well before they began to practice agriculture. Feedlot animals are doped up with antibiotics because they are packed together in feedlots, which is unnatural, so diseases can spread like wildfire--it has nothing to do with eating grain. What the hell do you think those animals eat in their natural state?

Come on, 'fess up--you just make your **** up as you go along, right?
0 Replies
 
MilonJones
 
  1  
Reply Thu 28 Mar, 2013 08:04 pm
@hawkeye10,
Hello Friends,

If you want to lose weight you must achieve a caloric deficit. That is, you have to take in less energy than your body requires so that it is forced to use its energy reserves to make up the difference. For those who know Metabolic Effect, this statement may seem shocking. After all, we are the ones who go out of calories countour way to challenge the calorie counting zealots and diet pushers. People assume a caloric deficit means fat is lost exclusively. This is probably the most overlooked and obvious blind spot the calorie counting zealots have regarding body change.
If you achieve a caloric deficit, fat will definitely be lost, but people forget that sugar reserves (glycogen in the liver and muscle) and protein reserves (amino acids in the muscle) can also be lost. These too can be used for energy and often are, usually taking a ton of excess water with them (in the case of glycogen).

Thanks and Regards,
Milon Jones
ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Thu 28 Mar, 2013 08:15 pm
@MilonJones,
copy bot
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Immortality and Doctor Volkov - Discussion by edgarblythe
Sleep Paralysis - Discussion by Nick Ashley
On the edge and toppling off.... - Discussion by Izzie
Surgery--Again - Discussion by Roberta
PTSD, is it caused by a blow to the head? - Question by Rickoshay75
THE GIRL IS ILL - Discussion by Setanta
 
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.05 seconds on 09/17/2021 at 02:06:28