I don't even drink soda and this is fucking retarded
[QUOTE=Zeke129;28098220]Yes it's only a nanny state that bans companies from using cancer-causing ingredients[/QUOTE]
Yeah, it [b]is[/b] you fucking dolt. If people want to take substances which are dangerous to their health they should be allowed to do it. Cigarettes, drugs, soda, it's [b]their fucking body, not yours[/b]. I'm tired of this smug attitude about other people's diets and habits, that isn't to say you shouldn't educate people on the dangers of such things, that is fine, but banning it is fucking retarded.
If you don't want to catch cancer then maintain a steady died of vitamins and gruel, lock yourself in a closet away from the sun rays and technology and enjoy an empty fucking useless shell of a life.
The rest of us have lives to live, shit we enjoy and don't need you telling us what we can't do with our bodies.
I thought you were pro-choice bro.
[QUOTE=s0beit;28123903]I don't even drink soda and this is fucking retarded
Yeah, it [b]is[/b] you fucking dolt. If people want to take substances which are dangerous to their health they should be allowed to do it. Cigarettes, drugs, soda, it's [b]their fucking body, not yours[/b]. I'm tired of this smug attitude about other people's diets and habits, that isn't to say you shouldn't educate people on the dangers of such things, that is fine, but banning it is fucking retarded.
If you don't want to catch cancer then maintain a steady died of vitamins and gruel, lock yourself in a closet away from the sun rays and technology and enjoy an empty fucking useless shell of a life.
The rest of us have lives to live, shit we enjoy and don't need you telling us what we can't do with our bodies.
I thought you were pro-choice bro.[/QUOTE]
This isn't so much that the FDA is deciding what you aren't allowed to consume, so much as it's controlling what companies put into their products. The FDA prevents them from using a chemical with increased risk of whatever just because it's cheaper. To the consumer, they're probably unlikely to notice any change in taste and the price might increase by a cent if anything.
If an organisation wants to make it harder for companies to poison me then that's ok with me. If you want to actively shorten your life span then you'll just need to work a bit harder to do so.
[QUOTE=Jabberwocky;28124162]This isn't so much that the FDA is deciding what you aren't allowed to consume, so much as it's controlling what companies put into their products. The FDA prevents them from using a chemical with increased risk of whatever just because it's cheaper. To the consumer, they're probably unlikely to notice any change in taste and the price might increase by a cent if anything.
If an organisation wants to make it harder for companies to poison me then that's ok with me. If you want to actively shorten your life span then you'll just need to work a bit harder to do so.[/QUOTE]
It's only poisoning you if you willingly ingest their products, nobody is force feeding you cola. There's also thousands of factors in what actually causes cancer, you've probably come into contact with nearly all of them. Proceed to wear your tinfoil anti-corporation hat and cry yourself to sleep.
[QUOTE=Fycix;28102464]Ya know I never understood why the default colour of soda is shit brown anyway.[/QUOTE]
It's actually dark red when you look through it
[QUOTE=s0beit;28123903]
Yeah, it [b]is[/b] you fucking dolt. If people want to take substances which are dangerous to their health they should be allowed to do it. Cigarettes, drugs, soda, it's [b]their fucking body, not yours[/b]. I'm tired of this smug attitude about other people's diets and habits, that isn't to say you shouldn't educate people on the dangers of such things, that is fine, but banning it is fucking retarded.[/QUOTE]
So, let's say that this chemical is shown to be carcinogenic. If they ban this coloring, you would literally never be able to tell the difference, but you would be less likely to get cancer. Why would you not want that?
This isn't like smoking or any other drug, where it makes you feel good, which is a benefit. There is literally no advantage to using this chemical. I don't see how the government shouldn't be able to make an call like that.
[QUOTE=Glitch360;28097982]God damn, what doesn't cause cancer these days?[/QUOTE]
I don't cause cancer. At least I don't think I do :(
[QUOTE=fenwick;28124617]So, let's say that this chemical is shown to be carcinogenic. If they ban this coloring, you would literally never be able to tell the difference, but you would be less likely to get cancer. Why would you not want that?
This isn't like smoking or any other drug, where it makes you feel good, which is a benefit. There is literally no advantage to using this chemical. I don't see how the government shouldn't be able to make an call like that.[/QUOTE]
There is no advantage. If this chemical were to suddenly be replaced by a safer mix of colourings in every cola drink in the world, you wouldn't notice a fucking thing. The only reason he can come up with is some bullshit spiel about 'freedom of choice'.
No, this isn't about your personal choice to derive no benefit from something and have an obscure cancer causing chemical in your sugary (or fake-sugary) drink. This isn't like smoking or alcohol where everyone knows it's bad for you; this is like a pharmaceutical that causes liver failure. This is about protecting the consumer's rights to not be damaged by company's greed.
Of course, you wouldn't understand any of that, would you, s0beit? In your twisted and fucked up Randian world, wealth makes everything right. Power makes anything moral, and self-interest wins over all else.
Fuck you. (Not you, fenwick)
Why do they ban it? It is OUR choice if we consume it or not, not theirs.
[QUOTE=Maximo13;28124902]Why do they ban it? It is OUR choice if we consume it or not, not theirs.[/QUOTE]
Because there is no benefit to using a carcinogenic dye over a non-carcinogenic dye, except for may a slight fucking profit margin. Do you really want consumer safety to fall behind in precedence to a 0.1% profit margin for a company the size of Coke or Pepsi?
[QUOTE=s0beit;28124230]It's only poisoning you if you willingly ingest their products, nobody is force feeding you cola. There's also thousands of factors in what actually causes cancer, you've probably come into contact with nearly all of them. Proceed to wear your tinfoil anti-corporation hat and cry yourself to sleep.[/QUOTE]
Unfortunately I'm not versed with all of them nor am I familiar with what their respective risks are. I'm at the mercy of whatever organisation is in charge of food and drug safety to warn me if such and such thing increases my risk of cancer significantly; which I'm sure they do to the best of their ability. Sometimes I just want other people to deal with obvious things like keeping dangerous chemicals out of my pie.
I'll put on my tinfoil hat when it comes to light that the FDA is keeping the waters from the fountain of youth from me by claiming it causes AIDS.
I'm not against this if it leads to real caramel in soda.
Is this another test where the DEFINITIVE PROOF OF CANCER is how they fed a rat 10x their body weight in pure ingredients?
[QUOTE=kaze4159;28125857]Is this another test where the DEFINITIVE PROOF OF CANCER is how they fed a rat 10x their body weight in pure ingredients?[/QUOTE]
Possibly, but that doesn't make the test any less legit. It's all statistics.
Fucking government.
[QUOTE=Roque Vandress;28125988]Fucking government.[/QUOTE]
Good work; your first post is thoughtless, idiotic, without substance, and shows a lack of reading comprehension. You're off to such a wonderful start.
People are allergic to Sunlight, ban.
People are allergic to Grass, ban.
Am I doing it right? :confused:
[QUOTE=imadaman;28126170]People are allergic to Sunlight, ban.
People are allergic to Grass, ban.
Am I doing it right? :confused:[/QUOTE]
No and you're frankly an idiot if you think banning grass is analogous to removing from our foods a potential carcinogen that has absolutely no nutritional, preservational or practical value.
never going to happen
why? ciggarettes
I would be for this, if they legalized weed.
And banned alchohol and cigarettes. Now THOSE cause some serious cancer.
[QUOTE=HeadshotDCS;28127026]I would be for this, if they legalized weed.
And banned alchohol and cigarettes. Now THOSE cause some serious cancer.[/QUOTE]
Learn to read. This chemical produces absolutely no substantive benefit for anyone. People aren't going to notice if these chemicals are replaced with a different form of coloring.
[QUOTE=s0beit;28123903]I don't even drink soda and this is fucking retarded
Yeah, it [b]is[/b] you fucking dolt. If people want to take substances which are dangerous to their health they should be allowed to do it. Cigarettes, drugs, soda, it's [b]their fucking body, not yours[/b]. I'm tired of this smug attitude about other people's diets and habits, that isn't to say you shouldn't educate people on the dangers of such things, that is fine, but banning it is fucking retarded.
If you don't want to catch cancer then maintain a steady died of vitamins and gruel, lock yourself in a closet away from the sun rays and technology and enjoy an empty fucking useless shell of a life.
The rest of us have lives to live, shit we enjoy and don't need you telling us what we can't do with our bodies.
I thought you were pro-choice bro.[/QUOTE]
This chemical they want to ban isn't like cigarettes or drugs in that soda is inherently harmful. This is like finding out that all of the carcinogenic properties of cigarettes are due to one chemical and the government choosing to ban that chemical only.
[QUOTE=kaze4159;28125857]Is this another test where the DEFINITIVE PROOF OF CANCER is how they fed a rat 10x their body weight in pure ingredients?[/QUOTE]
If you mean the amount needed to actually cause cancer in a human is way more that what someone could actually drink, then yes.
Why don't we do what s0beit says? Lets just deregulate all industry, i know it'll work out for my own interest in the long run.
Not dr.pepper !!!
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;28132183]Why don't we do what s0beit says? Lets just deregulate all industry, i know it'll work out for my own interest in the long run.[/QUOTE]
the founding fathers intended for me to have the freedom to get salmonella if I so choose
They're not pushing to ban Coca Cola or Dr Pepper, only a specific type colouring that can be replaced without you even noticing.
No one is restricting your ability to consume soda, they're only making it harder for you to die of cancer while doing so.
[QUOTE=Kagrenak;28127097]Learn to read. This chemical produces absolutely no substantive benefit for anyone. People aren't going to notice if these chemicals are replaced with a different form of coloring.[/QUOTE]
It's called a joke, and no, don't use "It's called 'you're stupid'", or some shit like that in a rebuttal.
I was merely saying that there are plenty of other substances that cause cancer, that the FDA has not banned in consumable products. It was me riffing on the status quo of legal cancer-causing substances.
If you couldn't understand that, then you either didn't try, or are unable to try because of lack of brain power.
no but he already made the qualification duder, any other product you'd list as a legal cancer-causing product would likely be either not in widespread enough use to warrant floor-time or would have some function larger than "coloring to make our drink look all a-pretty"
but darn it you told me not to call you stupid so you fuckin put a brick wall in my path man, all acme-painted up to look like a tunnel, my advances just boom: FUCKED, DEAD
So they just add the color for no reason?
[QUOTE=Ohforf;28143319]Oh, cancer eh?
What about smokes then? Everybody knows they cause cancer yet they're widely available. Just put up warnings and all that, don't be touchin' that coke[/QUOTE]
Except it's just the coloring so they have all the right to touch that shit, i prefer to drink a clear and colorless coke than having a health risk just for the drink to have a nice color on it.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
