Interesting Links for 06-01-2013

[andrewducker]

• Labour wants legal limits on sugar, salt and fat in foods. They can fuck right off.
  (tags: politics uk labour food )
• Three viewpoints on fracking
  (tags: uk energy gas fracking )
• The 14 kinds of sexist commenters
  (tags: discussion internet sexism )

Original post on Dreamwidth - there are

Comments

[gonzo21]

I don't know what the fuck is wrong with Labour, the day after the Tories suggest maybe obliging fat people to go to gyms or they lose their benefits, they come running out with 'BUT WE CAN BE EVEN BIGGER FASCIST AND RIGHT-WING REACTIONARY NUTJOBS THAN THE CONSERVATIVES!' There is something very wrong in the Labour party's planning wing where their default reaction to everything is to keep trying to place themselves further to the right on everything.

[tobyaw]

I don’t think that it is placing themselves to the right when Labour are authoritarian - they have always had a nanny-state mindset which comes directly from their socialist central-planning-can-solve-every-problem ethos.

[tobyaw]

The Tories seemed more liberal in opposition that they are now that they are in government. Maybe all parties become more authoritarian as they run a government, or ministers become more authoritarian as they start dealing with their departments. With that in mind, it worries me that Labour are so authoritarian in opposition.

[hirez]

I don't know which is more crap - create an environment where Big Agro can (and do) peddle all sorts of strange Food Substitutes, then consider taxing people for becoming unaccountably fat on same, or enact laws such that Big Agro is forced to take the piss less. (Not forgetting that B-A is there, more or less, through central planning and needing to feed a country w/o imports.)

[hirez]

Indeed not. However, the great mechanisation of farming and development of the agro-chemical business was driven by the requirement to do just that in the 40s.

[errolwi]

I've been watching 'Wartime Farm' from the BBC. Very interesting.

[cairmen]

Hmm. Actually, when it comes to foods meant for children and prepared by corporations, I'm not 100% sure I'm entirely against these ideas. The amount of sugar in many ready meals is just horrifying, and I'm fairly sure - from the number of people I've surprised by quoting statistics on same - that most people preparing and eating them aren't aware of that.

Then again, of course, I'm speaking from the position of being the person who prepares most of my food from raw ingredients, so I may be missing a nuance here that heavier pre-prepared food users would spot immediately.

[andrewducker]

I'm fine with enforced labelling of food. And when it comes to kids I'm prepared to compromise somewhat. But banning adults from eating whatever they want is something I'm 100% against.

If it's costing the NHS then work out how much and stick a tax on it to cover the excess, so that people are paying for their extra costs. Beyond that, it's none of the government's business what I put into my body.

[cairmen]

Yeah, I think there's a line. We treat advertising for children differently from advertising for adults - I think food can be considered analogous.

I wish we could find a more effective enforced labeling system, though. The current one just isn't working.

[andrewducker]

Isn't working in what sense?

If people are choosing to make decisions that you wouldn't, even when you both have good information, then the issue may well be that they have different goals to you, or that other parts of their worldview are significantly different.

[apostle_of_eris]

Here in the U.S., there's decent mandatory food labeling, but it still takes searching for it and doing mental arithmetic. It's ordinary for 2000 calories of Product to contain 200% or 300% of daily salt, for instance. I wouldn't mind a cap on that.

[andrewducker]

Sainsbury's over here has something like this on each packet:

[steer]

I wonder why 23.4% GDA of sugar is green but 15% of fat amber?

[andrewducker]

Oooh, good question!

I mostly just look at the pack to make sure that people haven't been slipping sugar into things like shepherd's pie. Which, sometimes, they do. I've seen everything from 3g to 15g of sugar in what should be meat, tomato, carrot, and potato. 3g is understandable (tomato has sugar in it, after all), but 15g? WTF?