| THIS IS A READ-ONLY ARCHIVE FROM THE SORABJI.COM MESSAGE BOARDS (1995-2016). |
|---|
Health officials have suggested that it be made illegal to sell junk food to children. They want a ban written into a new health law to meet concerns about child obesity. A minimum legal age for being able to eat such food is one of a number of ideas floated in a Ministry of Health discussion document that aims to restrict children's access to food considered unhealthy. Other possibilities include restrictions on the number, size and location of outlets selling certain types of food. One group wants soft drinks, pies, sweets and chocolate included in the controlled category. Submissions on the discussion paper have now closed, and any proposals the Government adopts are likely to be included in the Public Health Bill which will replace the 1956 Health Act. A study in Auckland two years ago found that one in seven primary school age children was obese. Experts say the figure will now be higher. The Herald has examined the child obesity problem this week in a three-part series. The ministry's discussion document called for submissions on how food should be advertised and marketed to children, and on how awareness of healthy food options can be improved. More than 400 submissions were received including those from Fight the Obesity Epidemic, a diabetes and obesity prevention group. Spokeswoman Robyn Toomath, a consultant endocrinologist at Wellington Hospital and president of the Society for the Study of Diabetes, said the group believed regulation and legislation was urgently needed. "We have to stop the kids from gaining weight. We have to take a deep breath and say what are the significant factors influencing our children in this epidemic." Her group's main aims were to stop advertising directed at children and stop schools selling junk food. The group also wants controls on the quality of food sold within 1km of a school. "What the heck are we doing selling soft drinks, fruit drinks, chips and pies, sweets and chocolates in schools?" said Dr Toomath. "These are the foods that are contributing to obesity because they are calorie dense and nutrient poor. "Its about time we started getting serious about it and stopped promoting them to children in schools. "We want to regulate the school environment so these things are not able to be sold in schools any more than we would be able to sell alcohol or cigarettes. "These things are not far-fetched. "In the long term, they are what will be required." Restaurant Brands, the company that operates KFC, Pizza Hut and Starbucks in New Zealand, is fighting the proposals. Chief executive Jim Collier said obesity was a lifestyle disease and needed to be addressed as such. "We don't think restricting access will address the issue that it is a lifestyle disease." The company hired public law consultants Chen Palmer and Partners to help prepare submissions on the discussion paper. Director of Public Health Colin Tukuitonga said the ministry's ideas were put forward for discussion and might not be passed into law. "But what's important is that these ideas are openly discussed and debated, so everyone including interest groups and the public has the opportunity to provide comments and responses," he said. The discussion document prompted the Advertising Standards Authority to hold a symposium on obesity. Executive director Glen Wiggs said the authority did not believe there was a link between advertising of food and obesity. The symposium was boycotted by health groups, such as the Cancer Society, the Heart Foundation, and Diabetes NZ because they believed it was being used to lobby the Government against imposing regulations on fast-food advertising. ***WHERE WILL IT END?*** |
|
They messed up the DNS server, I cannot get to many pages. I am suprised I can get to this one. |
what the fuck is wrong with people... cant we all just live our lives? fuck i hate it when do-gooder busy- bodies try to "fix" things for the world. Fuck OFF!!! I want to be overweight! I want to get lung cancer, and skin cancer. leave your fucking morals and values and perceptions away from me/my body!!!!!!! who the fuck are you to tell me how to live?? didn't your teenage child (who you ignore so you can try to force stupid fucking laws through) just shoot up his high school?? well accept the blame its your fault, you ignored them to piss me off.... now go fuck yourself, and cry yourself to sleep for the rest of you r life, because you suck..... jackass |
this was just published yesterday. but anyone with half a brain knows that SUVs and pollution reduction have no connection. thats just silly. |
I love how the government tries to tell you how to raise your child, what to feed your child, how to punish your child for negative behavior, etc. Fucktards. I do what I want!!! |
They have their sources on the site. Most of your environment stuff is all bunk, my friend. Let me put it to you this way: I am starting to come to the realization that terrorism is used the same way as environmentalism. Control the world through at least exaggerated data created to scare you. |
"Junk science" is faulty scientific data and analysis used to used to further a special agenda. The junk science "mob" includes: The MEDIA may use junk science for sensational headlines and programming. Some members of the media use junk science to advance their and their employers' social and political agendas. PERSONAL INJURY LAWYERS may use junk science to bamboozle juries into awarding huge verdicts. Large verdicts may then be used to extort even greater sums from deep-pocket businesses that may be fearful of future jury verdicts. SOCIAL ACTIVISTS, such as the "food police," environmental extremists, and gun-control advocates, may use junk science to achieve social and political change. GOVERNMENT REGULATORS may use junk science to expand their authority and to increase their budgets. BUSINESSES may use junk science to bad-mouth competitors' products or to make bogus claims about their own products. POLITICIANS may use junk science to curry favor with special interest groups or to be "politically correct." INDIVIDUAL SCIENTISTS may use junk science to achieve fame and fortune. INDIVIDUALS who are ill (real or imagined) may use junk science to blame others for causing their illness. |
|
cars pollute? agree? bigger cars who use more gas pollute more? agree? or do you think bigger cars have a magic converter in them that turn the extra exhaust from the fuel (i.e. energy spent) into magic pix molecules which actually eat pollution? its basic physics spunk. mass needs more energy to make it go. the more mass, the more energy required. energy comes in fuel form. auto engines have exhaust which is biproduct of their fuel consumption. jesus christ you'll believe anything if has a "source". |
Yes. "jesus christ you'll believe anything if has a "source"." I don't think I am alone in that. |
the pixie part was important. |
In my best Mike Meyers Voice I say: Yes, their agenda is: Individual Liberty (**GASP***) Limited Government (***EEEEK!***) Free Markets (***FAINT***) The horrors |
Then again, you all know how I feel about SUV's. If you have a need for them, great, but if you have one for status or to keep up with the Jones', then you are being wasteful, and selfish. I am not going to tell anyone what to do but that doesn't mean I like it. Spunky and I often agree on environmental issues. Like every time we talk about environmental issues. |
Distortion is easy. |
ok........ So you think those goals are bad? Individual Liberty can mean a lot of things, i guess I guess it can mean I have the liberty to shoot someone between the eyes... That is why you need to READ the documents they put out before calling them conservative fucktanks |
It appears that the conservatives have begun to move away from smaller government and individual liberty. |
individual interpretations and different ideas as to how to attain them can be. you understand that those goals are entirely subjective... i don't really know the stated aims of the KKK other than the obvious and thats beside my point. However, the CATO Institutes idea of "Individual Liberty" or "Limited Government" may not be the XXXX groups interpretation. It aint so black and white spunky. |
Did you see my post earlier? "I am starting to come to the realization that terrorism is used the same way as environmentalism. Control the world through at least exaggerated data created to scare you." |
|
|
terrorism is used the same way as environmentalism." Just starting? See how bias can blind you? Ditch the blinders and look for lies in everything. And the difference between the lies behind terrorism and environmentalism is that the terrorism lies will be used to control every aspect of our lives. The environmentalism lies, while still lies, are not used for such dark ends. |
Limited Government - World Domination Free Markets - Unchecked Exploitation *Tunnel Vision* Free to eat junk food, but speak out against the government and you're a traitor. Our government should let us live our lives the way we want, but needs to police the world to keep us safe. Anyone is entitled to amass as much wealth as they are capable without restriction, even at the expense of economy, environment, and consumer choice. The same tired fluff... Rearrange the words and you have the opposing argument. Rightious indignation on both sides can be maintained as long as everyone sticks to the script. Meanwhile, the net effect of change in the world makes nobody happy. |
|
|
|
This is a many-layered offense -- to the traditions and integrity (such that remains) of the American political process, to the firefighters and police officers who did not give their lives so that Bush could later use their deaths to get a bounce in the polls, to every American citizen who doesn't drink Karl Rove's Kool-Aid, and to plain decency. Source |
Understand this: When a government starts taking one thing away for you, IT WILL NOT STOP. |
|
social security numbers were originally designed to ensure payment of retirement or unemployment benefits. now those numbers are used to track our banking and credit and countless other aspects of our lives. "When a government starts taking one thing away for you, IT WILL NOT STOP." you think about that big boy when you support the war on terror or homeland security or vote for politicians who support them. "Environmentalism IS also being used to get into your wallet." so is the war on terror. so what. |
Patriot Act I and II? Operation Iraqi Freedom? |
While that is no where near as important as right to privacy, once they start making some cars illegal, they are not going to stop at cars. |
Yes, exactly. So, why are you so ready to give it your freedom? |
get it? |
|
Would you rather live a) under martial law, but get to drive any car you want, or b) a free society, but only able to drive fuel cell cars? |
So you're never supportive of anything that reduces our freedoms? Think carefully. |
There is plenty of sham environmentalism, but a whole lot of environmentalism is centered on the "consume less" mantra. Not a great way to make money. |
I mean, who needs clean air and water, anyway? And the Cuyahoga River looked sort of festive when it was on fire. |
