IT'S TIME FOR UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE

The limited regulation of trans fat may be appropriate. For instance, it probably serves a good purpose relative to the food served in school cafeterias. We can't expect children to be cognizant of the need to limit trans fat. Also, restaurants and stores should be required to inform customers of the levels of trans fat in the food served or sold. The informed decision then rests with the consumer.

BTW, a valid argument for universal healthcare is that this would drive out ads for erectile dysfunction.

0 Replies

I think that government certainly must protect its citizens against known dangers (like no telephone use when driving, seat belts in coaches, helmets on bikes ...).

But - like others - I don't think that this is related to health insurances and/or universal healthcare.

The - 253 - compulsory health insurance companies do, however, a lot of preventional work (e.g. seminars et. al. for their members) and, of course all, are enaged in rehabilitation as well (= e.g. three weeks in a rehabilitation clinic after severe operations).

0 Replies

Advocate wrote:

The limited regulation of trans fat may be appropriate.

It doesn't look like the regulation of trans-fat is going to be limited.

0 Replies

Coolwhip wrote:

Miller wrote:
Walter Hinteler wrote:

But what has this to do with universal health?

We were discussing governmental regulation of an individual's health and you stated that you were against the German government regulating your means to achieve health. That's why I asked about smoking and trans-fat. You then brought up the role of Hitler in the smoking prohibition.

Why isn't trans-fat intake regulated in Germany, while smoking apparently is?

In Norway, smoking is prohibited indoors in public places. Restaurants risk being fined if they allow smoking inside their premises. The reason for this, which is in my mind quite obvious, is that second hand smoking can be hazardous for the employees that tend the bars etc. Trans-fat does not harm anyone but the person who eats it. So, it does not become a question of the government regulating the health of the individual, rather the government protecting the environment of the workplace.

Trans fat is a major contributor to coronary artery disease and as such, has an indirect effect on health insurance rates, not to mention patient mortaliy and morbidy issues.

0 Replies

Miller wrote:

It doesn't look like the regulation of trans-fat is going to be limited.

Miller wrote:

Trans fat is a major contributor to coronary artery disease and as such, has an indirect effect on health insurance rates, not to mention patient mortaliy and morbidy issues.

So, Miller, are you in favour or opposed to laws regulating/banning trans fat?

0 Replies

old europe wrote:

Miller wrote:
It doesn't look like the regulation of trans-fat is going to be limited.

Miller wrote:
Trans fat is a major contributor to coronary artery disease and as such, has an indirect effect on health insurance rates, not to mention patient mortaliy and morbidy issues.

So, Miller, are you in favour or opposed to laws regulating/banning trans fat?

I'm in favor of informed consent. Let the restaurants print the trans-fat content on their menues and have manufactuers label their food products with trans-fat content and then...let the consumer make up his/her own mind and
be willing to accept the consequences of their actions, be they poor health and/or loss of health insurance .

0 Replies

Yes, I'm not giving up butter I occassionally use for recipes that depend on it for flavor and texture (specifically French cooking) but I balance this decadence out by eating a lot of other healthy food like fruits, vegetable, nuts and whole wheat bread. (with one of the healthy spreads as I can do without butter on bread). It's the salt and corn syrup that food manufacturers inject into their product that'll kill you just as fast as the trans-fat. If people can't take the time to read the label and poison themselves with bad food, that's their problem. Or bad drugs, or bad pot or anything else.

BTW, sourdough bread with olive oil and pesto dip is one of my favorites and there's no shortening in sourdough.

0 Replies

miller wrote :

Quote:

I'm in favor of informed consent.

imo "informed consent" means that the customer must be informed BY THE PRODUCER about the dangers /problems when purchsing goods and services .
just printing a bunch of numbers and names such as : niacinamide , pyridoxine etc. doesn't give the consumer any REAL information .
btw those names appear on a box labelled "original instant oatmeal" - one of my favourites Shocked

hbg

0 Replies

hbg, You are absolutely right! The majority of Americans are not informed about what ingredients in prepared food products are harmful. It's not only the sugars and the salts, but all those artificial flavorings, colors, and sweeteners. When you mention "trans fat," their eyes glaze over.

I'll betcha most people don't know how many grams of sugar a 12 oz container has, or how much sodium/salt there is in a can of soup - or the soup served up in restaurants. Diabetes and blood pressure are killers.

0 Replies

Lightwizard wrote:

Yes, I'm not giving up butter ......that'll kill you just as fast as the trans-fat.

Just FYI....natual butter doesn't have any trans-fat.

Trans-fat is mostly man-made.

0 Replies

The FDA has stiffened up the rules on what they must have on the description of the contents of a food products. I don't know if those preservative additives or whatever are so dangerous unless you were to consume twenty pounds of the product per week for a year or not. I shop a lot at Wild Oats, now owned and operated by the Whole Foods chain. They really aren't that much more expensive for the quality.

The numbers are another story -- I read them very carefully about the sodium, sugar and fat level, as well as what kind of fat. The serving sizes are often absurd. If you ate the whole package you could often be over the daily limit.

That you will ever see anything like what is on cigarettes and booze on any labels is probably not going to happen. I Google these ingredients that are obviously not natural and can easily find out how much it is safe to consume to even get a tummy ache.

0 Replies

Miller wrote:

I'm in favor of informed consent. Let the restaurants print the trans-fat content on their menues and have manufactuers label their food products with trans-fat content

Sure. That would be nice. Not that there's anything that prevents people from getting information today (except maybe dubious business practices, and misleading marketing).... But in general you'd expect people to know that smoking, too much sugar or trans fat is not particularly healthy.

Miller wrote:

and then...let the consumer make up his/her own mind and
be willing to accept the consequences of their actions, be they poor health and/or loss of health insurance .

Poor health - well, okay, that's what you risk. Loss of health insurance - no.

My problem with that would be that there's no reliable way to measure the healthiness of a particular lifestyle. You might be a chain smoking couch potato, and have just the same risks for needing health care as a young, athletic free climber/apnoea diver/paraglider. How would you possibly measure that? And should a police officer have to pay more for his health insurance than an office worker? Should a fire-fighter pay a higher premium than book store owner? Or should an ambulance driver pay more than a pharmacist?

And quite apart from that, your health might be deteriorating even though you're doing everything to lead a healthy life.

You might end up having people paying into their health insurance as long as they are young and healthy, and having them kicked out once their health starts deteriorating. That'd certainly be diametrically opposed to my understanding of "universal healthcare".

Sure, you want people lead healthy lives. And in terms of health care, it's certainly a cost factor, too. But you also want to have affordable access to health care for everyone, not just for the wealthy or the rich.

0 Replies

LW, Where are those sites you use to get info on food ingredients and daily recommended portions?

0 Replies

The best site is Dr. Andrew Weil, but I also Google those chemical preservative and thousands of hits come up. webmd.com is also good.

Okay, but unless one is a moron living on the planet Mars, one knows the good fats from the bad, that a lot of sugar and salt is bad. Those people don't want to know. That's really whats makes them morons.

0 Replies

Lightwizard wrote:

Okay, but unless one is a moron living on the planet Mars, one knows the good fats from the bad, that a lot of sugar and salt is bad. Those people don't want to know. That's really whats makes them morons.

That and the "Sure, but that won't happen to me"-attitude.

0 Replies

That's denial -- sure as shootin' just as much denial as an alcoholic over their liquor consumption.

That's why there's a 12 step program for those in trouble with their eating habits.

0 Replies

http://www.drweil.com/drw/ecs/index.html

If you go to each manufacturer's website, you'll find more detail on their food products. If you haven't got time and want labels that reach out and grip you by the throat shouting, "This has some unhealthy ingredients in it," I suggest you are badly in need of cognitive therapy. Frankly, I would like it if those people didn't drive, either.

Incidentally, the government's health "wheel" is a load of crap also. Anyone eating that many carbs with a perchance of gaining weight is going to blow up like a baloon.

0 Replies

Lightwizard wrote:

Incidentally, the government's health "wheel" is a load of crap also. Anyone eating that many carbs with a perchance of gaining weight is going to blow up like a baloon.

Not necessarily. It's all about moderation. The problem is the American's have this warped perception of what a portion is.

Carbs only have 4 calories per gram, same as protein. Weight is all about calories, from a weight standpoint Carbs = Protein in a calorie/gram standpoint.

0 Replies

Quote:

It's all about moderation.

It's primarily about insulin resistance and the resultant metabolism.

0 Replies

Miller wrote:

Quote:
It's all about moderation.

It's primarily about insulin resistance and the resultant metabolism.

No, it's about moderation and it's about excercise.

0 Replies

IT'S TIME FOR UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know