Note Tommy Thompson's weight loss method...

Science - Reuters

Health Czar Warns Fast-Food Joints to Shape Up
Thu May 8, 3:16 PM ET

By Randy Fabi

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Fast food joints may soon get singled out by U.S. health czar Tommy Thompson if they don't shape up and stop feeding the country's obesity problem.



U.S. Health and Human Services (news - web sites) Secretary Tommy Thompson on Thursday said public pressure may do far more than lawsuits and legislation to curb the junk food explosion that costs the government $117 billion each year in obesity-related health care costs.


'I'm going to start giving out awards and singling out ones that are doing good and the ones that aren't,' he told reporters at a food policy conference. 'If I get in trouble, I get in trouble.'


Thompson specified PepsiCo Inc., Coca-Cola Co., McDonald's, Wendy's and Taco Bell as companies that could offer consumers healthier options and promote more sensible diets.


Thompson made his remarks as lawyers were preparing to file new lawsuits that accuse McDonald's Corp., Burger King and other drive-through chains for the rising obesity rate in the United States.


Thompson, who has recently lost 15 pounds by eating less rice, potatoes and bread, said he prefers government programs that offer cities and food companies incentives to promote healthier lifestyles.


'It is important to pressure the food industry, the fast food industry, the soft drink society ... getting them to offer healthier foods and put more things on the menu dealing with fruits and vegetables,' he said. 'I don't support lawsuits. I think we can do this as a society.'


At the conference attorney John Banzhaf, whose 1970s crusades against the tobacco industry helped get cigarette commercials off the air, presented the National Restaurant Association with a notice of possible legal action against the industry.


Banzhaf and other lawyers claim that food companies, just like cigarette producers in the past, are not properly warning consumers that their products may be addictive.


The National Restaurant Association, which represents the fast-food giants and some 870,000 other U.S. restaurants, has countered that those claims are frivolous.


The first major obesity case, filed against McDonald's, was dismissed in January. At least two other cases have been dropped.


Nearly 2 out of every 3 adult Americans and 15 percent of children are overweight or obese, Thompson said.


Thompson said Americans can drastically reduce the amount of obesity-related health care costs by making simple lifestyle changes like walking 30 minutes a day.

Here's a link:

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tm...food_obesity_dc

Wa'il

I was just about to post this. I think it's sad that Americans blame other people for what they shove in their mouths. If these companies had low sales of the foods that cause obesity, then they wouldn't sell them or they would go out of business.

Just like when I get a call from a parent at the ISP I work for that blames us when their kid sees porn online. No one wants to take responsibility for themselves.

Although I believe in individual responsibility, I also believe that society -- through its businesses, governmental, and civic institutions -- can either make it easier or much more difficult to pursue our goals. To date, the fast food industry has worked against health. I think it's a responsible action for such a high-ranking official to jawbone the industry to support the pursuit of health.

Oh please...in the US we live in a free society. I don't want ANYTHING censored, banned or highly taxed just because someone else thinks it's bad for me. If you really think about it, neither do you.

Since our government thinks high-carb foods are good for us, then what you are asking for is to have the government put pressure on those companies hawking high-fat and protien foods. How would you like it if they did that?

In this day and age, all the information needed for good health is out there, for free, to anyone interested. The operative word here is "interested."

As I reiterate what I say above, if society showed these companies that they actually did not want the foods they sell, they would find out through their own sales figures amd adjust their products accordingly.

On a sad note, alot of kids are basically raising themselves due to lack of parental involvement. I can say this because I was a neglegant parent. In what way you ask? Well I used to give an extra $1 so my kids could pick up a snack at the local Rite Aid after school, while I was at work. So they bought cheap candy or snacks, high in carbs. I wouldn't see it unless I found a wrapper. One day I came home early and found them with a box of donuts, two bags of twizzlers, and a can of Pringles. All had "discontinued" on them.
Then it hit me. I sat down and explained how bad these foods were for them. The next week I bought fruit, carrots, celery, cheap pieces of meat (My daughter likes cooking on the George Forman) and cheese for snacks (Cost: $10 same as giving them a $1 a day) I had to keep the fruit in my room and leave some out but by not giving them the money, less candy was eaten.
The reason for this story is this, for the uneducated or young, temptation by fast food or convient stores constantly bombard their choices. I think they do have some responsiblity after all you don't see smoking ads (or should I say, shouldn't see) that might impress teens. How do we help the teens and kids whos parents don't intercept the junk food? Should we help? That's the thoughts I'm thinking...

" please...in the US we live in a free society. I don't want ANYTHING censored, banned or highly taxed just because someone else thinks it's bad for me. If you really think about it, neither do you.

Since our government thinks high-carb foods are good for us, then what you are asking for is to have the government put pressure on those companies hawking high-fat and protein foods. How would you like it if they did that?

In this day and age, all the information needed for good health is out there, for free, to anyone interested. The operative word here is "interested."

As I reiterate what I say above, if society showed these companies that they actually did not want the foods they sell, they would find out through their own sales figures and adjust their products accordingly."


I am quoting this in its entirety as I agree wholeheartedly!!!

We do not need government censors! Just boycott the things you disagree with. Teach your kids to do so as well. And I know that is not easy. Lessara has a good point when she offers her children appealing alternate choices. No one said life was going to be easy.


"Live free or die" as they say in New Hampshire.

Kay



































































" please...in the US we live in a free society. I don't want ANYTHING censored, banned or highly taxed just because someone else thinks it's bad for me. If you really think about it, neither do you.

Since our government thinks high-carb foods are good for us, then what you are asking for is to have the government put pressure on those companies hawking high-fat and protien foods. How would you like it if they did that?

In this day and age, all the information needed for good health is out there, for free, to anyone interested. The operative word here is "interested."

As I reiterate what I say above, if society showed these companies that they actually did not want the foods they sell, they would find out through their own sales figures amd adjust their products accordingly."


I am quoting this in its entirety as I agree wholeheartedly!!!

I smoke, and I am fully aware of the dangers of doing so.


















Oh please...in the US we live in a free society. I don't want ANYTHING censored, banned or highly taxed just because someone else thinks it's bad for me. If you really think about it, neither do you.

Since our government thinks high-carb foods are good for us, then what you are asking for is to have the government put pressure on those companies hawking high-fat and protien foods. How would you like it if they did that?

In this day and age, all the information needed for good health is out there, for free, to anyone interested. The operative word here is "interested."

As I reiterate what I say above, if society showed these companies that they actually did not want the foods they sell, they would find out through their own sales figures amd adjust their products accordingly

Alleine...I agree with you to a degree. I don't think going after McDonalds is going to solve the problem. They need to revise the food pyramid and quit giving bad nutritional advice...

I don't blame the spaghetti, bread, and rice companies for my weight. I blame the dietician who told me (12/1996) that I should eat that way to be healthy. I blame those who pass off bread and other hi-carb junk as "healthy." At least McDonalds doesn't have people believing their food is healthy.

That reminds me of a sad thing I heard once...I was in a restraunt and this little girl was ordering food a few booths away. She said she wanted the hamburger, but without the meat...just the bun and toppings. The USDA/AHA have convinced this generation that meat is bad for them and bread is good for them. It is no wonder that people are so fat...

I believed it for too long myself. For 6 years, I thought that ordering pasta instead of a steak and baked potato without Butter instead of french fries. You could order a "healhy hi-carb" side of pasta with your meal instead of those "unhealthy fatty" french fries. I took this option more than once. I never used butter on my bread, because I thought butter was bad for me...when in fact, it was the bread.

Here is how to solve the Obesity epidemic:

1) Flip the damned food pyramid.
2) Approve Stevia as a sweetener.
3) Quit hiding sugar in everything.
4) Quit putting Aspartame in all diet foods.
5) Replace Hi-Carb school lunches with nutritious green veggies, fresh fruits, and unprocessed meats. Heck, you can't make them taste much worse.

We need to stop telling people to load up on bread to get their nutrients. Many green vegetables have more fiber, folic acid, etc...than whole grains. But, alot of people think you have to have bread to get your nutrients.

In japan, where stevia is approved as a sweetener...it controls the majority of the sweetener market...far surpassing even sugar. If we can give people a natural, safe alternative to sugar...we can get them off sugar, which is the single most damaging (health-wise) food out there.

Sugar adds nothing to the taste of Bacon, Hot Dogs, etc...so, why keep adding it. We even add sugar to steak and eggs in the form of steak sauces and milk. meat, eggs, etc...do not need sugar to taste good. In fact, I ordered a steak a while back and it came out slathered in sauce so thick that I couldn't even taste the damned steak. I probably should have sent it back. Why do we as a nation insist on adding sugary sauces to EVERYTHING ???

The number one reason many people drink regular cola over diet is Aspartame. It tastes horrible and people such as myself knew from the getgo that it is bad for you and would never drink it. My parents drank Crystal Lite all the time after it first came out...and they both got migraines, dizziness, etc...which went away when they stopped drinking it. I wasn't even aware they made soda with anything other than Sugar or Aspartame until I went on Atkins and discovered Diet Rite.

Here is an example of a "nutritious" school day:

Breakfast --

Low-Fat Milk
Sugar-Laden Cereal (Fruit Loops were Especially Popular)
White Bread

They served eggs when I first started school (1980s)...but, they seemed to replace them with sugary cereal and white bread about the late 80s/early 90s or so.

Lunch --

Pizza, Hamburger, Corn Dogs, Spaghetti, Sloppy Joe, Jamaican Beef Patty, Chicken Nuggets, etc...None of which actually tasted like real meat.
Mashed Potatoes or Tater Tots.
Overcooked, soggy vegetables and only a few tablespoons worth at that.
Sugar-Laden Juice Bar

Snack (Younger Children) -- Something Laden with sugar such as fruit juice or yogurt.

On top of that, they rewarded students who spent the entire summer indoors reading rather than out getting exercise...with coupons for free Personal Pan Pizzas. Now, there's a good way to encourage healthy living...

I almost forgot...we need to stop thickening everything with flour or corn starch. I've always preferred unthickened gravy. But, I ate chicken soup (even after going on Atkins) figuring it was ok to eat until I discovered it caused weight gain. I looked it up and it had 20 something grams of carbs. Since it is nothing but water, carrots (very few), artificial chemicals, and chicken...the only possible source of that many carbs is the thickening agent. They may have also added sugar for all I know.

I completely agree with Alliene. There is no excuse for not thnking for ourselves. I'm sorry if there are poor moms out there.....It does not mean that everyone else can say what their children should or should not do. The question of kids being raised by inadequate mothers is an age old one. And not best dealt with by government regulations about diets. The really inadequate moms pay no attention to what they are told about nutrition. I have a friend who is a retired pediatrician who can tell you that in the south, many poor mothers feed their kids Pepsi and Nabs for breakfast .

And they have been told many, many times, that this is not good.

But we cannot always be our brothers' children's keepers.

Kay

VERY SORRY! I just seem to be posting duplicate replies. .Over and over. Yikes. I do apologize. I'm geting the heck out of here befor I mess things up even more!

Kay

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Alleine
[B]Oh please...in the US we live in a free society. I don't want ANYTHING censored, banned or highly taxed just because someone else thinks it's bad for me. If you really think about it, neither do you. [B]

Okay...along those lines of thinking, we should make all drugs legal, remove taxes on cigarettes and alcohol and declare helmet, seat belt, and infant car seat laws unconstitutional. While we're at it, let's get rid of speed limits and remove the minimum age for sales of alcohol and cigarettes to minors.

My point here is that because humans will not always voluntarily choose what is best for them, the government has already passed laws regarding what is good or not good for us in some cases and in many cases, those laws have been shown to have saved thousands of lives (seat belt and helmet laws, for example).

I don't honestly think that lawsuits are the answer, but since the government is already in the business of recommending what is and is not healthy to eat, why not reward those that are offering healthier choices and penalize those who are not by not giving them rewards?
The fact is, when the government recommends, the public pays attention. They may not always follow those recommendations, but at least they've heard the message. Look how common low fat products became once the government jumped on the low fat wagon. Companies produced hundreds of low fat products and consumers spent millions of dollars on them.
With obesity-related health problems costing the government (and therefore the taxpayers...US) millions of dollars per year, something needs to be done. Legislation? Nah. Lawsuits? Nope. Pressure and rewards, both from the government and from the public. Money talks. If people stop buying products, producers will take note and if they're looking to stay in business, they will start coming up with products that the public wants.
Goodness! Look at the fuss that the wheat producers are making over the drop in consumption and the sugar producers are making over WHO's recommendations to make sugar no more than 10% of daily caloric intake!

Actually, except for things pertaining to minors, I beleive that everyone should make decisions for themselves.

- I beleive that drugs should be legalized. People who don't do them now are not going to start because they are legal. Legalizing drugs would allow them to be taxed as well as regulated. It would eliminate a violent black market and the funds from taxes could be re-siphoned into medical services necessary for for the drug addicts. This is money spent out of your pocket now. Drug abuse is a non-violent crime that is victimless except for the person abusing, who would be doing so anyway. Jails would be less crowded and thus less public spending - less of your money.

- I have the same opinion about prostitution as above. Legalize, tax it, regulate it, require mandatory health exams and eliminate the criminal/violent aspect.

- I beleive helmet laws are ridiculous. If someone wants to take the chance and not wear a helmet, so be it. Who are you to stop them? Who are they hurting except themselves.

Basically, what I am getting at is I am a firm believer in survival of the fittest. Those who are not smart enough to preserve their own life, will be thus elimated from the gene pool. This eventually makes our species stronger and more intelligent. Our own laws are making us a weaker species.

This is a harsh thing to say, but as I said in a previous post, I will not have my options reduced because someone else will not watch what their child does, eats, sees, smokes, talks to, reads, listens to...etc.

The responsibility of this child it ONLY the parents. Not me. Not society.

Maybe I missed something in that article. I did not get the impression that the government is trying to ban anything or limit options. What I got out of the article is the fact that the U.S.'s health leader wants fast food to give people more healthy options and is willing to use his position to publicize which ones do and which do not.

This is not preventing any restaurant from continuing to serve anything they want or people from buying and eating it. It will provide publicity for healthier eating habits -- something we probably all want. It sounds as though Tommy was eating low carb -- less potatoes, rice and bread -- and we should be glad that he is promoting healthier eating and asking fast food restaurants to provide us with more low carb options. Maybe other people take the time to phone and write companies and managers asking for more low carb products and options, but I confess that I do not take the time to do that and am grateful that someone with more political clout than I have is willing to do it for me.

You've got to be kidding! The drug abuser's family, friends and employers are all victimized and suffer a great deal of heartache and expense as a result of drug abuse. The drug addict doesn't care if their family has food, clothes or a roof over their heads...procuring drugs is the priority. Drug abusers will beg, borrow or steal to get the money for their next fix. Physical abuse of others while under the influence is common and let's not forget about lost hours and lost production from work because the drug abuser doesn't give a crap whether they show up to work on time (or even at all) or not because they are high on drugs and if they do happen to show up, they aren't likely to be the most productive employee there.



I disagree. Making drugs legal removes any deterrent for someone to try them who might not have before out of fear of being caught and jailed or fined as a result.



and more money would be spend on public assistance and unemployment...more of my money because more than one person is now involved.