Who bears responsibility for SAD? (was: Supplements a Sham?)

[Guest guest]

Rod: I agree completely. Most people don't give a crap. OTOH after a

" Bill Clinton " like attack, sometimes they wake up and smell the coffee (so

to speak). And sometimes that's too late to rescue their health.

BUT I do feel that these big companies do everything they can to fool the

public in many ways. They advertise to young kids (so that their parents

will buy sugary cereals and candy for example), trick the public with their

labeling that their product is " healthy " , put the worst and most unhealthy

things (like trans-fats and corn syrup) in their products so that they'll

taste good, and otherwise do all they can for the almighty dollar. The

tobacco companies and their chicanery were the perfect example.

That does not absolve the individual of course. Both are responsible. And

in America, the system of " lobbyists " as pointed out in the book (which kept

the tobacco info under wraps for a few decades and no doubt cost thousands

of people's lives) is the awful.

But most of us knew that already even before this book was brought to our

attention.

Rodney wrote:

>> Hi Al:

>>

>> Thanks for that link and text. It is easy to agree with pretty much

>> all of the text posted, in isolation, as it was stated. I certainly

>> do, and I imagine most of us here do also. But behind it all is a

>> fundamental assumption, which for me disqualifies Nestle's entire

>> thesis.

>>

>> The assumption seems to be that never, in any circumstances, should

>> any individual ever be required to make any effort to determine for

>> him/her self what and how much they should eat (or smoke, or drink,

>> or whatever else, for that matter) to be healthy. Someone else

>> apparently, often the government, but perhaps more accurately

>> EVERYONE BUT THEMSELVES, is supposed to do it for them. In this

>> particular case under discussion the blame is placed squarely on the

>> food companies. They are supposed to put only the very healthiest

>> ingredients in their foods even when/if their competitors are selling

>> junk and the consumers (all brainless sheep apparently) prefer to eat

>> the junk instead and let the company marketing healthy food go broke

>> from lack of sales. A nice utopian dream perhaps, but ridiculous in

>> the real world.

>>