Food of the United States is a sheer and utter disgrace

Well, well. It seems we have ground where liberal and conserv can finally agree.
Yay.

It is PITIFUL what our food contains. Do you know that one can of Campbell's soup contains around 90% of your recommended maximum daily salt intake? One can of 15 oz. soup.

"Eat your vegetables, Timmy." Even though these days a regular size, 15 oz can of vegetables contains about the same amount of salt as the the soup above.

Corn syrup is almost everywhere.

Some ingredient lists are so long that I'd rather try and locate nutrition information through all the added Spanish language than I would to read the ingredients.

Have you noticed in the frozen dinners that what used to be for example, turkey and gravy is now called gravy and turkey? That's because there is more gravy by weight than there is turkey.

You notice that a half gallon of ice cream has not only gone to 1.75 quarts, but now even lower than that? (while it's greedy, that's not a bad deal for people who tend to eat the entire container of ice cream, like me )

The govt. should be stepping in here on the ingredients. BOTH parties are at fault. I know that Michelle Obama seems to be aware, but I think that removing the salt and corn syrup would mean a lot more than inspecting school lunches or making illegal large sodas.

 

WRONG! Healthy natural food is MORE PALATABLE than salty diseased chemical food.

Have you NEVER tasted the protein content of fresh French cream and packets of milk? You freeze the packet and it lasts forever, you can heat it on the stove to your perfect consistency. MILK IS A PROTEIN DRINK. YOU CAN TASTE THE PROTEIN IN TRUE MILK.

Have you NEVER tasted the lean splendor of a dearly raised calf or a well fed animal? have you NEVER enjoyed the dense moist cake of healthy bread, as it lasts forever before drying out and goes dry without becoming stale or mouldy. It is fit to chop into soup or salads.

Have you NEVER tasted the crisp bite of a fresh healthily grown cucumber lightly pickled in a gently acidic wash of herbs and vinegar.

You my friend are DEPRIVED of the products built of a vibrant local society, and your Frankenstein food creations have overwhelmed your choice.

YOU EAT WHAT IS IN FRONT OF YOU. The US system has sacrificed the nutritional splendor of natural food for the GREED. GREEEED of selfish profit. It is not about can, or cannot. It is about WILL, and WILL NOT.

Packages of wonderful rich food do exist. Pick up a box of Carr's whole wheat "crackers". Pick up a pack of Chèvre real French goat's cheese. Partake in a culinary adventure worthy of your heritage, when men were men, and the population healthy!

And ask WHY. WHHHY has your population been deprived of normal, natural, healthy food!

 

It's already illegal to sell raw milk and young cheeses. The FDA overlords know what's best for us.

 

Yet in their year-on-year application of selfish greed, the apparent effect is vehemently beholden.

 

I can get it here in California. Whole Foods and a few health stores offer raw milk in my area. I've also been getting Trader Joe's cream top organic whole milk. It's pastuerized, but not homogenized. However, were it to become more common and less expensive, I have no doubt that the corporate dairy machine in California would move quickly to shut it down. They have already tried to push through a few bills.

2 years ago my wife and I made a conscious choice to forgo almost all processed foods, grains, and sugars, and vegetable oils and went to an ancestral diet. She can't drink cow's milk, but I have no problem with it. We get her goat's milk and sometimes coconut milk. The change was dramatic, particularly for me. I dropped 75 pounds inside 6 months and the belly I've had since a kid is now shaping into a nice 6 pack as I packed on muscle and my bones increased in density. I eat a lot of high fat, high protein foods, and maybe 25-50 grams of carbs in a day most days.

It costs us about $200 a month more, on average, in food bills, but I could probably do it for less than I was spending before if I cut some of the frills (steak and high end fish) and focused more on veggies and eggs. I'd rather be in the health that I am than have what $200/month could buy me.

In'N'Out is our one weekly splurge. The protein style burgers are great, and the little bit of vegetable oil in the fries isn't going to hurt.

 

No doubt, it's amazing how strong of a grasp agricultural organizations still have on the governing body. The US sugar industry is one of the biggest protectionist disgraces on the planet, but we all know buying sugar from abroad would be a severe national security risk.

No raw milk can be sold commercially here in Ga, I have some friends who have both cows and goats, they can give away the milk, but aren't allowed to sell it.

 

I'm not one for conspiracy theories, but it seems odd that such a simple protectionist system that costs so much money to the state to maintain has not been dismantled by now. It's not like it would cost a huge number of jobs. Yet, the use of HFCS has become prevalent and is directly correlated with obesity. Fat, sick people are also a drain on the state, but they also become dependent on the state for healthcare, which empowers the state. From the perspective of a politician, it's a good thing and enhances your prestige by "solving" problems by giving out more benefits, whereas it doesn't help you gain prestige by eliminating protections on an industry, except among libertarians and we are just a bunch of ungrateful cranks.

 

Are you kidding, look at what the filth did to Michelle Obama when she tried to talk to the nation about eating healthy...







You see, they hate this family. They hate them because they are smart, attractive, mature, charismatic, successful (in spite of a society that favors white men) and they occupy the White House, you can see the rage in their eyes when they click on this post and look at this picture, right now righty after righty on this board looking at this picture is becoming violently angry, trust me.

 

Skinnier cattle means more cattle per enclosure, correct?

If a rancher can't stay in business using virtually free grazing land (thanks to us taxpayers, btw) and not having to buy hormones or supplements, he should get into another line of work.

 

I've admittedly not done a lot of research on the subject, but what I have seen are a lot of mixed results. The Mayo clinic is still holding out judgement on HFCS, so I'm going to for now as well.

Indeed we ought to be thankful that our government loves us so much that it wants to protect me from myself.

 

http://www.jackinthebox.com/nutrition/

http://www.mcdonalds.com/us/en/food...re_made_of/your_questions_answered/meats.html

Above please find the links to 2 large fast food companies. As you can see (if you care to go there) your claims are nothing but puffed up hyperbole.

 

I do have a choice. I don't buy food from Walmart. I KNOW where my food comes from. Having said that I agree with the sentiments expressed about Monsanto. I blacklisted them from my investment portfolio years ago.

 

Right, Michelle 'broad-beam' telling US how to eat...We need to send her and her hubby packing in November. I don't hate the family, they look like decent folks but mostly inept at running the country.

 

No, it's because they don't practice what they preach:





If some Christian pastor was preaching how gay sex was unnatural and unhealthy, but got caught flirting with young dudes at a gay bar, you guys would be having a conniption.

 

LOL. You don't think the store would ever lie to us about what's in their food, do ya?

It's 100% beef so long as this stuff fits into your definition of beef

 

I don't know about "righties, but I see a nice looking family. I also see a devout liberal who seems hellbent on spending my grandchildren into oblivion.

 

So basically, it's okay for a Democrat to say one thing and do another I guess.

 

There's a huge difference between saying that people shouldn't eat too much junk food, and that junk food should at least be produced with some kind of quality and health standards in mind, and saying that people should never eat junk food. I enjoy McDonalds food, and I eat McDonalds food, but I don't eat it all the time, or recommend that anybody else eats it all the time.

It doesn't have to be 'all or nothing'.

 

Well Americans are stupid and won't vote for you unless you shove 50 hot dogs down your throat like they do. Kinda sad that some people still consider this to be the greatest nation on earth........The only thing we are #1 is is how many people are in prison for things that should not be illegal in the first place, people who are unhealthy and fat because they eat nothing but deep fried lard (while blaming mcdonalds for them being fat lazy bums and sueing them), and how much food we waste every single day.

 

Aye, however I think it's petty to chastise and Olympic athlete simply for eating a fast food burger like Michelle did - if the person is fit enough to run in the Olympics then obviously they're pretty healthy, so it sounds like Michelle is promoting an "all or nothing" view, but not living it herself.

 

Contrary to what you think the so called fat cats are suppling what most Americans want. You can not sell anything if there is no demand. I agree that we are clueless on what we should eat but process food is what we want and they supply it. Start a garden, go in with someone and buy a cow and have it fattened up on a farm. We can and need to improve out food supply but start by not buying the crap and they will stop making it. It is not their fault it is ours.

 

Both mutually - the "fat cats" are catering to people who don't care what goes into their mouth, therefore making it harder and more expensive for other Americans to find foods that are healthy. So they're aiding the lazy at the expense of the smart - I don't like that.

 

To a large extent that is true, but there are things that can be done, and the key to it is making sure that people are educated about what's in their food, and that food labelling is a true and honest reflection of food contents. The problem with that is that the companies with the power that are profiting from the rubbish will try their best to stop that from happening, because it can effect their profits if they have to stop putting the cheap and nasty stuff in. In order for people to stop buying crap, they need to know what is crap, what foods contain crap, and they also need to have a viable (cost effective, palatable and easily available) alternative to the crap.

That education is what has happened much more in the UK than the US - the government helping to educate people, raise awareness, and encouraging companies to respond to public demand. Yes, I know it's that big 'G' word, but it can actually have its uses sometimes to enhance freedom by helping people to be more informed when they make their choices, both through public awareness campaigns and through ensuring honest labelling of foods. Education, not regulation (although there's nothing wrong with regulating in certain instances like honest food packaging, obviously). Once that happens, it has an effect, and the government can then respond to public pressure about things like the high salt content of processed food by putting pressure on producers to sign up to voluntary codes and targets for reducing salt (again, that enhances freedom of choice for the consumer - it's alot easier to add salt to food if you want more than to take it out if you want less - that's where the 'viable alternative' bit comes in).

It shouldn't be about government having no role to play in simply supply and demand in the food market, but about government working for the people to allow them to exercise their free choice (and in an informed way), not working for the corporations in allowing them to be free to pull the wool over their eyes in the cause of maximum profit at all costs.

 

That's always where the biggest profits are to be made, so that is what they will always do if nothing is done both to make more people smarter and to stop them just trying to fool the people who are at least trying to be smart.

 

Regardless of whether it has dangers that are beyond sugar, it is an extremely concentrated form of sugar. The ingestion of sugar, along with other carbohydrates, leads to insulin spiking and, eventually, insulin resistance. Insulin resistance leads to Type 2 Diabetes in those prone to it. It also increases the storage of fat, leading to obesity. HFCS is used in just about every processed food that you'll find in your supermarket these days. It creates a sense of satiation, and then greater hunger later. While not necessarily worse than sugar, it's a replacement for the more expensive, and more healthy, fats that use to be in the American diet. It makes bland food taste good and keeps you coming back for more.

Regardless of whether the FDA or the Mayo Clinic approves of it, I would avoid the use of it. Since I'm not into banning things, I don't wait for there to be a ton of research to stop eating fake food and stick with the real stuff.

What are you, some sort of terrorist? It's a good thing the NDAA is now approved!