« Obama Still Telling Americans "Be Like Republicans" | Main | Intelligence and War »

Champions can eat any kind of cereal they want!

So right now, Michael Phelps is America's golden boy (and rightfully so). He's the American hero of the Olympics, and what do Olympic heroes get? Endorsement deals! But uh-oh, Michael Phelps didn't stick with the approved Wheaties brand, and he's angered the obesity police.

You better eat your . . . Frosted Flakes?

Olympic legend Michael Phelps will appear on boxes of the Kellogg's brand sugar cereal, drawing sharp criticism from health experts worried about the message he'll be sending to children across America.

"I would not consider Frosted Flakes the food of an Olympian," said nutritionist Rebecca Solomon of Mount Sinai Medical Center.

"I would rather see him promoting Fiber One. I would rather see him promoting oatmeal. I would even rather see him promoting Cheerios."

The announcement yesterday that Phelps, 23, winner of a record eight gold medals at the Beijing Olympics, would grace Frosted Flakes and Corn Flakes boxes instead of the traditional athlete's choice of Wheaties left many perplexed.

Frosted Flakes has three times the amount of sugar as Wheaties and 1/3rd the fiber.

This doesn't matter much to a virtuoso swimmer who consumes 12,000 calories a day.

Still, in a country where childhood obesity is an alarming issue, Phelps' iconic image sharing space with Tony the Tiger sends the wrong message, experts say.

"For a guy like Michael Phelps who isn't worried about obesity because he's burning thousands of calories as an athlete...eating Corn Flakes and Frosted Flakes every so often is not an issue," Solomon said.

The Phelps-emblazoned cereal boxes hit supermarket shelves in mid-September.


This lady has so hit the nail on the head. The problem is not about how kids are too often sitting around playing video games all day, piling junk food into their mouths and getting zero exercise. The problem is that people like Michael Phelps and Tony the Tiger are luring these poor, innocent kids into these bad decisions! Doesn't Michael Phelps realize he has a responsibility to the children?!

Look, I'm all for celebrities and famous athletes being good role models. But criticizing them over something as inane as which brand of cereal they choose to hawk is beyond ridiculous. Are these people really so stupid as to think that Michael Phelps will make normally thin kids stampede to the cereal aisles and gulp down bowl after bowl of Frosted Flakes, causing them to be suddenly obese? When I was a kid, my favorite cereals were not Fiber One or Wheaties (and especially not Wheaties), no matter who was on the box. I always heard about some famous athlete being on the Wheaties box, but it never made me actually want to eat Wheaties. I think the closest I got to something like that was when Cheerios came out with some kind of promotional "Olympic Team Cheerios", with like... different kinds of Cheerios in there. Or something. But in any case, as a kid, I liked the sugary cereals best. You know... Cookie Crisp, and Count Chocula, and Fruit Loops, and stuff that would make this Rebecca Soloman have a heart attack. It didn't matter to me one bit who was on the cover. And in any case, I'd have one bowl. What does she think is going to happen? That the Frosted Flakes is sprinkled with crack, making the kids greedily gulp down fifteen bowls at a time? Come on.

And since when do kids buy their own cereal anyway? It's the parents who buy the food for their household, so if your little darling is breaking the scale in your bathroom, maybe you should try using that magic word no. Maybe you should try telling them to go do something active. Playing on their Wii does not count as active. I guess I don't see the big deal, because while, yes, Frosted Flakes probably has tons of empty calories, if your kids are active and getting plenty of exercise, then it won't matter. An Olympic champion can eat any kind of cereal they want, because they work their butts off (literally!). So you tell your kid that. "Yes, sweetie, Michael Phelps can eat Frosted Flakes, because he works really, really hard. If you work really, really hard, you can eat whatever you want, too." And that would be because their going into a pool and swimming, or playing baseball, or ballet, or whatever, will be burning off those empty calories. What a novel idea!

And did the nutrition nazis ever stop the think that maybe endorsing a popular cereal with the kiddos might inspire more kids to be active than endorsing a cereal that kids don't want to touch with a ten-foot pole? I mean, forcing your kids to eat Fiber One is like punishment. Going with Frosted Flakes gets Michael Phelps into the mainstream a lot more, very possibly inspiring more kids.

What these complaining idiots need to realize more than anything is that, ultimately, it isn't Michael Phelps' responsibility to ensure the proper eating and exercise habits of children. It's up to the parents to make sure their kids are eating right and getting proper exercise. The obesity epidemic isn't as complicated as a lot of people like to pretend it is. It's really quite simple. Stop overanalyzing, and tell your kids to shut their mouths and get some exercise. The end.

Hat Tip: Melissa Clouthier


TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
/cgi-bin/mt-tb.cgi/31079.

Comments (49)

They should lay off Michael... (Below threshold)
Tammy:

They should lay off Michael Phelps. He's earned the right to eat whatever and endorse whatever food he chooses. If he can consume 12,000 calories a day and remain that lean and mean, leave him alone, I say. I am a little envious he gets to scarf so much pizza, but then again, I'm not swimming like I've got a great white chasing me.

A great marketing coup of K... (Below threshold)
rodney dill:

A great marketing coup of Kellogg's over General Mills. I wonder how much Kellogg's had to pay to usurp Phelps for their brand over Wheaties.

1) You're right: too many f... (Below threshold)
hyperbolist:

1) You're right: too many fat kids are the result of too many negligent parents; but
2) Athlete endorsements do have an effect on consumers' behaviour, especially kids'.

Still, he should take Kellogg's money and do whatever he wants with it, and parents should figure out that keeping kids healthy includes keeping them the hell away from the soft drinks and cereal aisles in the grocery store.

Rodney, it's hardly a *coup... (Below threshold)
hyperbolist:

Rodney, it's hardly a *coup* when Kellogg's dominates the cereal category. It's like saying it's a coup when Nike inked Tiger Woods to a quadrillion dollar endorsement deal instead of Callaway or Titleist.

...b-b-b-b-ut, *sniff!* b-b... (Below threshold)
Chris:

...b-b-b-b-ut, *sniff!* b-b-but, *snivvle, snort* how's a nose-in-everyone-else's-business, control-freak Nanny-Stater supposed to earn an honest living if people take personal and parental responsbility seriously? *wimper.....*

Yeah, Chris, schools should... (Below threshold)
hyperbolist:

Yeah, Chris, schools should totally let Coca-Cola main-line high fructose corn syrup right into the veins of 6 year old children. Parents aren't around their kids 24 hours a day, and kids aren't bright enough to understand words like "diabetes" and "obesity". They do respond to advertising, and they do like sweet things, so it should behoove school boards to remove poison from the clutches of impressionable kids before they begin to shorten their life span by compulsively consuming it. Let Coca-Cola sell Five Alive and Minute Maid; no need to allow them to peddle poison, though. Do you also have a problem with restricting the marketing of tobacco products to children?

Wow, hyper, so to you a bow... (Below threshold)
DJ Drummond:

Wow, hyper, so to you a bowl of Frosted Flakes is "poison" (your word) which should be compared to "tobacco products"?

Nice way to ignore the point, anyway, which is that effective parenting has more than a little to do with how a kid turns out. Cheez dude, did you completely skip the classes where they read books by Orwell or Ayn Rand?

Your comment in this thread is easily the most stupid and ill-considered thing I have read today, including some legal briefs I have to review at work and the Houston Chronicle, which seems to prohibit anyone with an IQ over 80 from writing columns.

Then again, I know you will work hard to top it.

No, DJ, pay attention. I wa... (Below threshold)
hyperbolist:

No, DJ, pay attention. I was referring to Chris' blanket condemnation of "nanny statism". Frosted Flakes have nutritional value, and as kids aren't going to eat plain Corn Flakes without a gun to their head, I think they're okay. And mom doesn't have to buy them if she doesn't want to!

I do think schools should restrict things like Oreos and Coca-Cola, as they are poison, and they do harm children. We restrict the choices children can make all the time (e.g. tobacco, firearms); why we shouldn't in this case is beyond me. And I fail to see how the most effective parent in the world can coach their child to avoid "high fructose corn syrup" when the kid can barely read and enjoys sweet things. You, and my parents, had the luxury of growing up with candy and soda that had cane sugar in it--the kind our bodies can process properly. This shit is different, we're not good at processing it, and it needs to be kept away from young children. Parents should cultivate that mentality in their kids, but until they have, schools should make it impossible for soft drink and confectionary companies to get young children hooked on their product. Why, by the way, do you object to the use of the word poison in this case? If products with high fructose corn syrup and trans fat are directly to blame for an epidemic of obesity, what's wrong with using the word poison?

Teachers get fired for teaching Ayn Rand in Canada. (Just kidding, unfortunately.) My grade 12 English teacher skipped that harpy and took us right to Thus Spake Zarathustra, to the intellectual betterment of all.

If you want to find the stupidest comment left on this blog today, go have a look at Rev. Whateverhisnameis' remark in JT's Abortion post.

I do think schools... (Below threshold)
I do think schools should restrict things like Oreos and Coca-Cola, as they are poison, and they do harm children

How are they poison and how do they harm children? Do they beat them up?

This shielding of kids from being kids has done more harm than good.

Let kids eat Oreos, play dodgeball, play tag and encourage them to play outside. That's what they need.

hyperbolist is hysterical, ... (Below threshold)
John Irving:

hyperbolist is hysterical, in both major meanings of the word.

But... but --- if they play... (Below threshold)
JLawson:

But... but --- if they play dodgeball they might get hurt! If they play tag, someone might get their feelings hurt or they might run into each other! If they play outside - some might get sunburn or insect bites, or be snatched by a child molestor... or... well, ANYTHING might happen!

Wrap 'em in bubble wrap, chain 'em in front of the TV. It's the only way to keep 'em safe.

Going with Frosted... (Below threshold)
Going with Frosted Flakes gets Michael Phelps into the mainstream a lot more, very possibly inspiring more kids.

Well gosh Cassy, you mean like, inspiring more kids to swim? The food Nazis can't have it both ways here. You can't praise Phelps for what he accomplished and then damn the way he trained. In that bizzaro world, they would cheer that he got 8 bronze medals and was on the box of All-Bran.

Coup- 1. a highly successf... (Below threshold)
rodney dill:

Coup- 1. a highly successful, unexpected stroke, act, or move; a clever action or accomplishment.


After the long run of Wheaties with pictures of champions, I'd call the Frosted Flakes pic of Phelps a coup. I guess it doesn't mean what you thought it meant, hyperbolist.

Yes, it's a coup if you thi... (Below threshold)
hyperbolist:

Yes, it's a coup if you think the largest cereal manufacturer getting the most famous athlete in the world (today) to pose for a cereal box rather than their rival. It's a coup for Michael Phelps to go for a bigger paycheque (assuming GM even offered?) rather than preserving the super-important legacy of Wheaties' athlete endorsements. Whatever.

Playing tag and dodge ball are not making people fat and putting an enormous strain on the health care system. Trans fats (they stay in your body) and high fructose corn syrup (how much sugar/calories in can of candy-soda?) make kids fat, fat kids suffer social alienation, fat kids become diabetics, and diabetics die young. But go on, let the kids be (fat) kids!

I guess having him endorse ... (Below threshold)
rodney dill:

I guess having him endorse these are out of the question then?

Still sticking to your guns... (Below threshold)
DJ Drummond:

Still sticking to your guns I see, hyper. But no, "poison" is not an accurate word in this case. People eat, drink and smoke all sorts of things that are not really good for them (my wife's from Hong Kong, and nothing from the Coca-Cola or Nabisco companies comes close to some of the popular snacks available in Asia for negative health effects), and it's their own business for the most part if they want to eat something they like that someone else thinks is a bad idea.

I know some Marines, come to that, who think the world of Oreos and Cokes. Such things represent the end of a strenuous training regime, you see, and in any case, a stack of Oreos is smarter than a pack of Camels and a six pack of Coke is much better for you than a six pack of Miller. That's kind of why no one gets a ticket from the cops for having an open cola in the car ... but anyway.

I could have worded it nicer, but you are hurting the credibility of your position in selling the idea that cookies and soda should be counted as basically the same as tobacco. You are effectively supporting the contention that the Nannystate is a better way to go than having parents be responsible for their kids. I simply cannot agree with that contention, and I think many here also have problems with the Nannystate-as-solution hypothesis.

Focus, DJ:Marines ... (Below threshold)
hyperbolist:

Focus, DJ:

Marines eating Oreos ≠children eating Oreos
Marines drinking Coke ≠ children drinking Coke

We allow adults to do stupid things. I smoke, for instance. I poison myself. But I have a serious problem, morally and pratically speaking, with allowing children to become addicted to (or habitually dependent on) caffeine, high-fructose corn syrup, and trans fats. Unless you know of a way for parents to prevent their children from eating toxic shit (and as far as I'm concerned, if it causes diabetes, osteoporosis, and heart failure, it IS toxic shit) when they're at school, then I think the solution is to not make it available for purchase.

If that's nanny statism, so be it. I don't want to have fat children with breathing problems and diabetes by the time they're 10 years old, and short of developing Jedi mind control, I cannot personally prevent a child from eating garbage when they aren't in my presence. Can you? If so, you are the greatest parent in the world.

Yes focus, hyper. C... (Below threshold)
DJ Drummond:

Yes focus, hyper. Children tend to have a much higher metabolism rate than adults, so in actual fact kids burn off the sugar faster than the soldiers do.

Now, if you don't want to chow on corn syrup products, knock yourself out. But you and your health-fascist mob can go chase yourselves, if you want to harass my kid for an after-school snack. I raised one kid and am a good way through the next without the slightest worry about their sugar level or blood pressure. The first kid was into Lacrosse and dancing, the second is into ballet and Shao Lin.

Sugar does not CAUSE the things you claim, and I think you know that very well, but are pushing the lie for your own arrogance. Diabetes, heart problems, obesity and the rest are caused by a combination of conditions and behavioral choices. Michael Phelps, after all, eats five times the amount of calories and processed sugar that most adults are supposed to eat, and he's in, well, olympic condition. You would have to lie to pretend that the food is the problem, and that removing it solves the problem.

We do not need a nanny state.
We do not want a nanny state.

Good for you, DJ. (Or, more... (Below threshold)
hyperbolist:

Good for you, DJ. (Or, more to the point, good for your kids.) Two of my cousins (a year apart from one another) play football and hockey but are both diabetic and massively overweight because they eat junk food. Nice boys, smart as hell, but they haven't got any friends because kids are mean and petty. Their mother, a single parent, told me that they eat shit all the time at school, and whine about the lack of shit to eat when at home. (She doesn't buy junk food because it's disgusting and bad for people.) So their lives have been effectively ruined to a certain degree by their school board's permissive attitude towards deep fried foods and garbage dispensed out of vending machines. My aunt is unable to control what they eat as she leaves before they go to school and gets home at dinner time. She has them hooked on sports, but junk food companies and their school cafeteria have them hooked on toxic shit.

Comparing Michael Phelps to your typical kid is fair. Sharks also eat a lot more than your average 6 year old, why not give them a mention?

Diabetes! Asthma! Freedom!

So personal responsibility ... (Below threshold)
DJ Drummond:

So personal responsibility and choice do not exist in your universe. That's truly tragic, hyper.

I work with patients with b... (Below threshold)
SarahConnor2:

I work with patients with binge eating disorder and other eating disorders. Any time you make a food forbidden, it becomes more enticing. We allow our kids sweets in moderation and they have a choice as to what they may have. We also educate them about the impact of various foods on their systems. Even before the food nazis hit our school, my kids were foregoing junk food at school because it wasn't a big deal to have it and they knew what was bad for them. When their friends who are not allowed any sweets "ever" come over, I have to practically put an armed guard around my pantry.

Simply put, if you 1) don't allow people contact with certain foods and 2) educate them about the impact of various choices but don't give them a chance to practice making choices, they will lose control when the limits are removed. Anyone else remember people's eating habits the first week freshman year of college.

hyperbolist:What a... (Below threshold)

hyperbolist:

What about those skinny people who eat whole grains and fruits yet still get diabetes and heart disease?

What about those fat people in their 80s who have no problem with their blood sugar?

And your cousins are "massively overweight" and still play hockey and football? Moderately overweight and still play I might believe, but I call BS on "massively".

Besides, if they are "smart as hell" why are they doing this? Can they not learn? Seems they are bit to old to not be able to read ingredient labels.

I think you're making stuff up.

P.S.I'd rather hav... (Below threshold)
SarahConnor2:

P.S.

I'd rather have my kids eat Frosted Flakes for a snack than a lot of other sugary foods, given the vitamin content. And most kids won't eat Wheaties or Cheerios, even if it is the only thing available.

"If products with high f... (Below threshold)

"If products with high fructose corn syrup and trans fat are directly to blame for an epidemic of obesity, what's wrong with using the word poison?"

Wrong. Obesity is directly related to overeating. You can overeat nutritious food and still be overweight, depending on the number of total calories taken in versus the number of calories burned. Eating too much of any one thing is unhealthy, every type of food has it's own toxins included, so you might as well call all food poison if you're going to call Frosted Flakes poison. Let's back away from the overkill button, shall we?

If you want to dispute this, take it up with Nutritioniss\ts. After all, it's what I was in my Nutrition class over the spring quarter this year.

These spastic, knee-jerk reactions to Phelps promoting Frosted Flakes is humorous, though.

That reminds me, I used to ... (Below threshold)
DJ Drummond:

That reminds me, I used to know a coach who had a nasty way of getting his players off fast food; he'd have them eat some right before pre-season practice, the ones with full pads in the 90+ degree Texas heat.

Wasn't long before the boys figured out that the ones who ate burgers and pizza hurled. Stay off the fast food, stay off the heaving.

Sports not only burns off calories, it gets you hungry for better food. Unfortunately, playing "Madden" on the Playstation is not really playing football ... just sayin'.

hyperbolist is just a miser... (Below threshold)
Piso Mojado:

hyperbolist is just a miserable libtard who wants everyone else to be just as miserable as he is.

Nanny state BS.

"Nutritioniss\ts"</p... (Below threshold)

"Nutritioniss\ts"

Oops. Typing impediment, I guess. Let's try, "Nutritionists."

Teachers get fired... (Below threshold)
Teachers get fired for teaching Ayn Rand in Canada.

Maybe not, but you can get in trouble with the authorities for writing articles critical of Islam.

Just ask Ezra Levant.

Dear Sirs,I stoppe... (Below threshold)
Roy Lofquist Author Profile Page:

Dear Sirs,

I stopped paying attention to "nutritionists" and other assorted nuts well before most of you were born. For each new claim made there are an equal number of "oh, never mind"s. People are omnivores. We've survived and flourished for a long time. As long as life expectancy keeps increasing you really shouldn't pay much attention to the snake oil crowd.

Regards,
Roy

Hyper said" Parents ... (Below threshold)
retired military:

Hyper said
" Parents aren't around their kids 24 hours a day, and kids aren't bright enough to understand words like "diabetes" and "obesity".

But umm they are bright enough to understand abortion and should be allowed to have the procedure without their parents knowledge correct?

"They do respond to advertising,"

Like umm condoms given out by school staff??


" and they do like sweet things, so it should behoove school boards to remove poison from the clutches of impressionable kids"

Who in your mind are free to have as much sex as they want as long as abortion is available but cant make up their mind to have a twinkie correct?


" before they begin to shorten their life span by compulsively consuming it"

But getting medical procedures which have been shown to probably result in higher risk of depression and suicide is just fine and dandy isnt that right Hyper?

DJ, no, I don't think 6 yea... (Below threshold)
hyperbolist:

DJ, no, I don't think 6 year old children can take responsibility for their diet when out of their parents' spheres of influence. You do?

Donna B.: they're both 200 pounds, and under 13 years of age. Tall, but porky as hell.

Who said not to feed kids sweets? Some chocolate is good for people, and there are lots of sweet beverages that don't have high fructose corn syrup in them. Ever try mango juice? How about iced tea, made with cane sugar? It's no loss not to eat garbage. It would dramatically lower rates of expensive-to-treat illnesses in your country if certain brands of beverages and snacks were prohibited for sale in schools; and it would be no great loss to the companies who sell those products, as every single one of them has healthier alternatives, some of which they tack a higher mark-up onto.

I guess I must be old fashi... (Below threshold)
engineer:

I guess I must be old fashioned. The Christian school that some of my children attain has a soda machine. We have a rule, they don't by it. It's called discipline, something that is sorrowfully lacking with today's parents.

(Sigh) I miss Wheaties...an... (Below threshold)
Tammy:

(Sigh) I miss Wheaties...and Cheerios. Actually, I was brought up eating them all of my life, Wheaties being my cereal of choice all through adolescence. Unfortunately, I have a gluten allergy. I love cereal, but the only the only ones I can have are corn or rice-based. Rice Chex aren't so bad, but they don't have staying power. I eat lots of peanut butter.

Donna B.: they're ... (Below threshold)
Donna B.: they're both 200 pounds, and under 13 years of age. Tall, but porky as hell.

And so the obvious solution for this one family's personal problems is for the nanny state food police to crack down on sweets and junk food. Yes, I see the light! Hallelujah!

I'm so progressive...

That would be part of the s... (Below threshold)
hyperbolist:

That would be part of the solution, yes, OM. No child should drink Coca-Cola, but if a parent is stupid enough to stock their pantry with it, that's their business. However, as schools and their staff are responsible for the welfare of children who are clearly incapable of making rational decisions up to a certain age (12? 13? I'm not a developmental psychologist, ask them if you want a specific threshold), it falls upon the school to limit the choices that young (unreasoanble) children can make to healthy ones. I'm not saying take away sugar and sweets--juice has lots of sugar in it--I'm saying get rid of garbage that harms people who don't know better than to consume it. I'm not talking about middle schools, but primary schools (or however they're referred to in the States). Some school boards and private schools are already doing so, much to the delight of associations of medical professionals and dieticians.

The Thatcherite pejorative "nanny state" is ridiculous, by the way. Nannies are great--when you aren't around to look after your young children, a nanny is an excellent solution. They needn't be there when you are. Why this term is meant to send shivers up the spine of freedom-loving people is beyond me. Nobody's suggesting that McDonald's stop selling crap to those foolish enough to eat it.

" However, as schools and t... (Below threshold)
retired military:

" However, as schools and their staff are responsible for the welfare of children who are clearly incapable of making rational decisions up to a certain age (12? 13? I'm not a developmental psychologist, ask them if you want a specific threshold), it falls upon the school to limit the choices that young (unreasoanble) children can make to healthy ones. '

In short it takes a village - How quaint. I guess those teachers that weigh 300+ pound teachers are great role models.

The school is there to do one thing. Provide an opportunity for a student to get an education not provide social engineering. Unfortunately, for the most part, they are doing a lousy job of the first and following the liberal agenda for the second.

As I said before. Hypberol... (Below threshold)
retired military:

As I said before. Hypberoli thinks underage children should be able choose to have an abortion withouth parental knowledge but not a twinkie.

Another example of "It's their bodies they should be able to do with it what they want" only applying in case of wanting to get an abortion and circumstantial for other situations.

No, they aren't foll... (Below threshold)
hyperbolist:

No, they aren't following the liberal agenda for the second, as most schools still allow children who are too young to know better to stuff their faces with Oreos and chase it with Coca-Cola and greatly increase their chances of getting diabetes. Freedom!

By the way, can you cite one example of a 7 year old child going to a clinic to have an abortion? Your schtick is tiresome, though I understand your insistence. I'd be upset if I held a firm belief that has a zero percent chance of ever being actualized in policy.

By the way, if schools were... (Below threshold)
hyperbolist:

By the way, if schools were to only offer milk, juice, or other beverages with some positive health benefits, that might be the only nutrition that some kids get all day, as many parents (especially those with lower incomes) either cannot afford or do not care about healthy food for their households.

Apart from not being able to choose something unhealthy, what exactly is the problem with giving kids a narrower (healthier) set of choices in cafeterias and vending machines? What is the benefit of letting a child eat five Twinkies per day? I'm all for letting kids learn from their mistakes (playing on a jungle gym without a helmet, for instance), but if you're an obese 12 year old with a perma-hankering for shitty food, how exactly have you benefitted from your mistakes?

Had I had my way as a child, I would have eaten junk food until I exploded. My parents only bought it in small quantities and had to hide it so we wouldn't eat it all. They never bought pre-sweetened cereal, so we'd eat Cheerios with brown sugar. I never got pocket money for vending machines, and on hot dog and pizza days, I was given exact change so that I could only purchase hot dogs and pizza and not whatever shitty dessert came with it. By the time I got to high school, I really liked yogurt and fruit. I was thin, had lots of energy, and a good complexion. Ditto for my brothers. The kids who were given pocket money for vending machines, junk food on their lunches, and access to a pantry full of garbage when they got home often had weight issues and horrible complexions. My parents are short but my brothers and I are all over 6'2" (I'm 6'5") and under 190 lbs. But aren't those stocky diabetics fortunate that they had the option of setting a course for themselves to be unhealthy and unattractive adults!

If every kid in my school board had had the same limited access to junk food as my brothers and I, think about the net benefit for the health care providers in that region, and think about how much happier they'd be as young adults (healthier = healthier looking = more attractive = way better time in college = more confidence as an adult = more successful career).

Of course some people eat healthily and are still unhealthy (glands, lifestyle, whatever). Of course some people eat unhealthily and are incredibly healthy (like Phelps) depending on their lifestyle. But encouraging people at a young age through mildly coercive dietary policy in schools will only benefit the individuals and society as a whole. Hell, if you're such a fan of Coke and Oreos for kids, pack it in their lunch! Just don't be too upset if school boards vote to take certain indisputably harmful products off cafeteria menus and out of vending machines.

If that's too much of an infringement on your liberty, then I can only imagine how smoking restrictions and seat belt laws make you feel.

Hyper, you are a bit dising... (Below threshold)
DJ Drummond:

Hyper, you are a bit disingenuous, to demand verification of claims when your own are, well, just a bit over the top.

As to 'nanny state', we're talking about the government making laws on the basis of what they think is good for someone, rather than protecting rights and observing constitutional limits. For example, I personally think that sexually oriented businesses damage marriages and increase the risk of disease and crime. However, I do not consider it the proper role of government to prohibit such businesses except where they violate voter-approved statutes (will of the people) or demonstrate a clear threat to the population. The regulation of foods simply because in some cases they contribute to a problem largely brought about by personal decision, is - to my mind - similarly unacceptable, 'mission creep' by a government which forgets that no government has rights, only people do, and that unless a power is specifically granted in the state or federal constitiution to a government, then that power does not in fact exist at all.

Holy shit, that's long, esp... (Below threshold)
hyperbolist:

Holy shit, that's long, especially for something I'm really not all that personally involved in--apologies to anybody who bothered to read it.

Next I'll be buying a motor scooter and an eye patch... (Okay, I just imagined the eye patch bit, but it fits.)

And I do resent seat belt l... (Below threshold)
DJ Drummond:

And I do resent seat belt laws, by the way. I agree that seat belts save lives, and that everyone in a car should wear them. However, making that law is out of bounds, without a doubt.

Hyperboli said'By ... (Below threshold)
retired military:

Hyperboli said

'By the way, can you cite one example of a 7 year old child going to a clinic to have an abortion?

WHERE AS I STATED IN THIS THREAD

"As I said before. Hypberoli thinks underage children should be able choose to have an abortion withouth parental knowledge but not a twinkie."

and also

"But umm they are bright enough to understand abortion and should be allowed to have the procedure without their parents knowledge correct?"

Shall I go back and quote you numrous times stating that children should have abortions without parental knowledge? Just answer yes or no on that one. In fact you stated that parents shouldnt be notified due to their possibly believing the child may be a sinner and that abortion was murder and they would force their child to have a baby and that that would be a punishment.

Youngest mother in history
http://bubo.brynmawr.edu/~dblank/woi.brynmawr.edu/node/530.html

5 years 7 months when she gave birth.

http://www.monnatandspurrier.com/Eagle%20News%20Articles/2006%20Archives/news_12_31_06.htm

" document filed by Attorney General Phill Kline says 12 girls who received abortions from George Tiller were ages 10 to 16 -- raising the question of whether possible sex crimes related to the pregnancies are being investigated."

Not quite 7. Is 10 young enough for you?

Yet you said that women (and girls) should have control over their own reproductive organs, bodies, and organs (depending upon which spin you were putting on your statement at the time).

Cant quite find one for 7 years old. But answer me this question.

Should the 5 year old have an abortion if she wanted one? ANSWER YES OR NO!!!! (Hey you asked for a yes or no answer from me about doctors getting the death penalty and I GAVE IT).

Dont give me drivel about consulting health experts, etc etc (after all her parents shouldnt be taken into consideration according to you). You have stated that females should have control over their own bodies, reproductive organs and organs and that the state should have no control over them.

As I have stated several times. You state above the schools should do this and that, the govt should do this and that, the parents should do this and that when you are talking about what people are putting into their bodies. Yet you have stated numerous times HAVE YOU NOT that underage girls should be allowed to get abortions if that is what they want to do with their reproductive organs / bodies / organs. In other words, FOR ABORTION EVERYTHING GOES, and for other things it is CONDITIONAL.

BE.CONSISTENT AND BE HONEST.

Bets on getting a yes or no answer out of him?

And although I cant find in... (Below threshold)
retired military:

And although I cant find in my 5 min google search any cases of girls as young as 7 getting an abortion answer this.

DO YOU THINK GIRLS AS YOUNG AS 7 SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO GET ABORTIONS IF THEY WANT?

Answer yes or no please.

You can't call it a pers... (Below threshold)
hyperbolist:

You can't call it a personal decision--in the informed sense--when the person making the decision is not legally competent.

Again, I'm not talking about a spinach-and-tofu Atkins diet for toddlers, DJ. It's a pretty innocuous suggestion that soft drinks wtih high fructose corn syrup not be sold on primary school property, and not marketed either.

What does the constitution say about marketing cigarettes to children, by the way?

You're opposed to seat belt laws? Alright, this chasm of opinion won't soon close. Off to replace a stolen bicycle, have a nice weekend.

In other words he refuses t... (Below threshold)
retired military:

In other words he refuses to answer a simple yes or no question and refuses to be consistent except that abortion must always be an option no matter what else.

Didnt think I would get a straight answer out of a liberal.


"Your schtick is tiresome" Yes hyperboli it is.


Holy shit, that's ... (Below threshold)
Holy shit, that's long, especially for something I'm really not all that personally involved in--apologies to anybody who bothered to read it.

Whew! For a minute there, I thought you were Paul Hooson.

The Thatcherite pe... (Below threshold)
The Thatcherite pejorative "nanny state" is ridiculous, by the way. Nannies are great--when you aren't around to look after your young children, a nanny is an excellent solution.

The idea behind the phrase "nanny state" has to do with the relationship between the citizens of a country and their government; namely, we are not young children and the government is not our nanny. And the purpose of government is not to make sure that every last nose is blown and every last bottom is wiped, nor should it be a dispenser of unearned goodies and benefits. Rather, the purpose of government is to provide the freedom and external security so that citicens can pursue their own lives in peace and take care of these things themselves.

Jefferson said it best:

A wise and frugal government which shall restrain men from injuring one another, which shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government.
"Nobody's suggesting tha... (Below threshold)

"Nobody's suggesting that McDonald's stop selling crap to those foolish enough to eat it."

Really? Could've fooled me. Once again, there's nothing wrong or foolish about eating junk food every once in a while. The human body can easily tolerate that.

This is coming from someone (me) who is an exercise and nutritious food junkie. If everyone would use common sense with eating and exercise there wouldn't be an obesity epidemic.

I'd definitely agree with your statement in italics above if you added the words, "...every day." to it.




Advertisements









rightads.gif

beltwaybloggers.gif

insiderslogo.jpg

mba_blue.gif

Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile

Contact

Send e-mail tips to us:

[email protected]

Fresh Links

Credits

Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login



Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy