SuzukiSavage.com - Print Page

SuzukiSavage.com
/cgi-bin/YaBB.pl
General Category >> Politics, Religion (Tall Table) >> Why the differences?
/cgi-bin/YaBB.pl?num=1556411928

Message started by justin_o_guy2 on 04/27/19 at 17:38:48

Title: Why the differences?
Post by justin_o_guy2 on 04/27/19 at 17:38:48

https://foodbabe.com/food-in-america-compared-to-the-u-k-why-is-it-so-different/

Title: Re: Why the differences?
Post by pg on 04/28/19 at 09:23:53

And they produce better music as well...

Best regards,

Title: Re: Why the differences?
Post by justin_o_guy2 on 04/28/19 at 14:05:16

Did my post fail to make it clear that
A Corporation
Produces toxic crap
For Americans
And the same product
From the same corporation
Is much different for the European consumers.

Europeans aren't making the products in the article.
The article shows how different the food is that they Feed us.
The F.D.A. is complicit in America's crappy health.

Title: Re: Why the differences?
Post by Eegore on 04/28/19 at 15:12:17

Yet when NY makes a law against hydrogenated components in food people explode saying its their "right" to be able to eat that stuff.

It is true our government is allowing for less healthy food to be processed here, but it's not like anyone is out there fighting to stop it.

It's my right to smoke, drink and eat sh!tty food, the government needs to stay out of it, unless its not convenient for me to make that point at the time.

Title: Re: Why the differences?
Post by justin_o_guy2 on 04/28/19 at 16:08:55

I'm okay with abolishing the fda.
But I don't see arguments against regulations to remove toxic substances from food.

Title: Re: Why the differences?
Post by Eegore on 04/28/19 at 16:39:12

I think abolishing the FDA will lead to a lot of food poisoning and deaths. Making food a free-for-all will certainly kill a lot of elderly that can't grow their own.

Blood transfusions would go back to pre-inspection levels of the 80's killing people or infecting them with new diseases.

Medications would be deemed safe by the manufacturer only. Worked for Oxy and nobody got hurt right?

I think there should be some accountability on the FDA, some reform, but pulling it entirely and letting each company establish its own safety guidelines would reduce healthy options, not increase them.

Title: Re: Why the differences?
Post by justin_o_guy2 on 04/28/19 at 17:31:14

States can regulate.

Title: Re: Why the differences?
Post by Eegore on 04/28/19 at 17:44:19

Individual state guidelines for prescription medical care and blood transfusions would limit cross-state administering of care. HIPPA would be a nightmare.

Colorado doesn't allow for single lab tested transfusion but NM does, yet CO has the closest trauma center. NM patients on a flight for life could not receive a blood transfusion until they land in CO and get the State Approved blood.

Every pharmaceutical company would have to have a lab, production facility and distribution center in each state, ramping up cost due to 50 separate State regulated facilities.

Food no longer crosses state lines without proper inspection. Food costs grow as packaged food is made 50 different ways to accommodate separate State health standards.

I do wonder however how State politicians are somehow less greedy than Federal ones. Seems like State regulation would cause 50 smaller problems and not one big one.

Title: Re: Why the differences?
Post by justin_o_guy2 on 04/28/19 at 17:48:56

The system is not our friend.
It's screwed up.
You see reasons to not.
I only see opportunity.

Title: Re: Why the differences?
Post by Eegore on 04/28/19 at 18:53:00

"You see reasons to not."

Incorrect. I agree to reform, I do not think abolishment is an answer as it would completely destabilize multiple industries at once. You think healthcare is expensive now, start having drug companies have to develop 50 different versions of a drug. Explain how that's better for the consumer.

Food will somehow be safer and more affordable if each state has it's own method of approval for distribution, how?

No more food recalls, no more tracking meat production and movement, E.coli can no longer be traced to a source if that source crossed state lines.

I am concerned about implementation and the ridiculous amount of work involved with completely shutting down a huge government agency that will literally give power to the companies with minimal oversight.

It's the equivalent of firing every employee at Wal-mart globally instead of retraining staff in accordance to new laws.

I'd rather see a nationwide removal of certain chemicals used in food and preservatives instead of letting each State decide what ones are ok. Make FDA funding more transparent, limit corporate incentives, tax the cr@p out of proven unhealthy components in production of food.

Someone doesn't want to have to stir their peanut butter so they choose to buy the hydrogenated vegetable oil version, fine but it will cost $2 more than the version with peanuts and salt.

Title: Re: Why the differences?
Post by raydawg on 04/28/19 at 21:11:35

What about shaving armpits....?

Title: Re: Why the differences?
Post by justin_o_guy2 on 04/28/19 at 21:31:33

rather see a nationwide removal of certain chemicals used in food and preservatives instead of letting each State decide what on

I really thought you said the people would rebel against that. That's exactly what I want. If nobody can use food dyes to hide the real appearance of the crap they are selling, then the consumer wins. Read the article. It's very informative. It's an eye opener.
Somehow Their government is able to force corporations to offer higher quality products than ours. I'm just not surprised.

Title: Re: Why the differences?
Post by Eegore on 04/29/19 at 04:21:03

I read the article.

"I really thought you said the people would rebel against that."

They did. In NY when they banned trans-fat people protested, restaurants protested, people said it was an overreach of government authority. (Its proven that strokes, clots and heart-attacks were reduced in counties with trans-fat bans, which lead to a national ban.)

The exact same thing happened again when they proposed a soda drink size ban for certain sales locations. Government overreach!

I really don't know enough about how effective lobbying is in the EU, or how influential voters are over their version of the FDA, but it seems to me their food governance works about the same as healthcare. Comparing their healthcare system and ours is apples and oranges.

In any case I think the US is way too big, and the FDA runs way too many health improving processes like enforcing severe pesticide use, blood transfusions, pharmaceutical testing, to just take it away. It could be greatly improved for sure.

Title: Re: Why the differences?
Post by WebsterMark on 04/29/19 at 04:54:27

The food industry is my job, I work in it every day. I'm participating in a couple of committees with the FDA to update standards and the influence of what the Europeans view as food safety requirements are making their way over here. The ground is shifting in US food and we're bringing some of the smarter techniques over from Europe. The FDA has flaws like any organization and its true different standards (higher) exist in Europe as opposed to the US.

But abolishing the FDA or USDA is not an answer. That's the ultimate cutting off your nose to spite your face. There are power grabs in the FDA attempting to expand even more federal control but they're meeting serious opposition. Eegore is right, 50 different food safety regulations would be a disaster. Food is different than many other industries in that all of us involve ourselves in this industry 3 times a day. The food you eat comes from all over the country, all over the world. In that sense, its. flat earth.

Title: Re: Why the differences?
Post by T And T Garage on 04/30/19 at 08:15:02

How very appropriate!!

http://i.redd.it/924r197o6wq21.jpg