Lobster found with Pepsi logo 'tattoo' fuels fears over ocean litter - Sensationalist Headlines

[QUOTE=Chaohord;52935950]i mean like, if anything you can just drink diet soda and not fuck yourself over with 1000 extra calories and diabetes?[/QUOTE] The benefits of growing up with two diabetic parents is I can't tolerate the sugar content in regular sodas. :v: Even a single can of normal Dr Pepper, if I drink it in less than an hour, upsets my stomach. I try to restrict myself to no more than two cans of soda a day - one during the afternoons when I work (I work from home), and one during the evenings as I watch an episode of Netflix before bed. And then it's always diet / zero.

pepsiman really let himself go ever since kendall jenner took his job

[QUOTE=Mister Sandman;52935871]Yes and no. Not for me because I have an addiction. Not being able to just 'not drink so much' is kind of the point. And one soda is rarely enough for me. Trying to maintain a 'decent' soda intake just results in me drinking a minimum of 6 a day, or using it frequently as stress relief. (This by the way results in an extra 960 calories and 246 grams of sugar daily which is virtually fucking impossible to leverage with the rest of your diet without some serious exercise). But there are people that stick to '1 a day'. Same as there are people that only smoke on certain occasions. That doesn't make it fine however as this will still affect your teeth, health, metabolism, and you will still be around 20 percent more likely to develop type 2 diabetes. And again, this would require children with access to soda be capable of making the judgement call to only have 1 a day as a means of lessening it's affect on their teeth, health, waistline, and risk for diabetes, which they are entirely unfit to reliably make. I'm very curious to know the exact numbers on how soda influences child obesity.[/QUOTE] 1 a day is still too much. Soda should be a rare treat. I used to drink one small can of Sprite every day in my lunch in high school, and sometimes at dinner. I got bad acne that barely went away after I applied lotion on my face and shoulders that made the top of my sleeping shirts look bleached. But once I stopped and switched to Iced Tea and sparkling water, my acne went away in months. I still have a somewhat dry skin as a side effect of the lotion, and slightly yellow teeth because of the soda. Nothing anyone would notice but I do. Now I only drink a small glass of juice in the morning, then tea, sparkling water, and water. My stomach doesn't even want Soda anymore, I'm tired of it after a few sips.

you're eating 60% of a hershey's bar every time you drink a soda can if you're addicted just force yourself to drink an entire can of flat soda (leave it open overnight), the next time you want a can you'll remember what the flat can felt like and you'll realise what you're doing to your body each time you drink up. [editline]30th November 2017[/editline] the carbonation masks the sugar and suppresses the sensation you feel when you eat too much raw cake icing

[QUOTE=Mister Sandman;52935871]Yes and no. Not for me because I have an addiction. Not being able to just 'not drink so much' is kind of the point. And one soda is rarely enough for me. Trying to maintain a 'decent' soda intake just results in me drinking a minimum of 6 a day, or using it frequently as stress relief. (This by the way results in an extra 960 calories and 246 grams of sugar daily which is virtually fucking impossible to leverage with the rest of your diet without some serious exercise). But there are people that stick to '1 a day'. Same as there are people that only smoke on certain occasions. That doesn't make it fine however as this will still affect your teeth, health, metabolism, and you will still be around 20 percent more likely to develop type 2 diabetes. And again, this would require children with access to soda be capable of making the judgement call to only have 1 a day as a means of lessening it's affect on their teeth, health, waistline, and risk for diabetes, which they are entirely unfit to reliably make. I'm very curious to know the exact numbers on how soda influences child obesity.[/QUOTE] You lacking that self control is just you though. I drank pop frequently as a kid, too frequently. As an adult I don't. It's self control, yes it's addictive but it's not comparable to smoking at all.

[QUOTE=RenegadeCop;52936115]Addictions are addictions, regardless of how strong. Kids on soda is a pretty shit thing to do to them.[/QUOTE] Sure I'm not arguing that but "addiction is addiction" is a stupid line IMO. I've been an addict before. Heroin and pop aren't similar levels of addiction. So yes it's an addiction but it isn't one that controls you like that does. You have many options to avoid it. Basically I just disagree with "ban pop" because somebody people got addicted. So did I, it's not that I was addicted that mattered. It was what I did to change that that mattered.

[QUOTE=Mister Sandman;52935871]Yes and no. Not for me because I have an addiction. Not being able to just 'not drink so much' is kind of the point. And one soda is rarely enough for me. Trying to maintain a 'decent' soda intake just results in me drinking a minimum of 6 a day, or using it frequently as stress relief. (This by the way results in an extra 960 calories and 246 grams of sugar daily which is virtually fucking impossible to leverage with the rest of your diet without some serious exercise). But there are people that stick to '1 a day'. Same as there are people that only smoke on certain occasions. That doesn't make it fine however as this will still affect your teeth, health, metabolism, and you will still be around 20 percent more likely to develop type 2 diabetes. And again, this would require children with access to soda be capable of making the judgement call to only have 1 a day as a means of lessening it's affect on their teeth, health, waistline, and risk for diabetes, which they are entirely unfit to reliably make. I'm very curious to know the exact numbers on how soda influences child obesity.[/QUOTE] I drink a lot of soda myself, but six a day is ludicrous, and it's even worse that you're drinking the fully-sweetened stuff. And don't tell me the diet versions are worse because I've dealt with that garbage pseudo-science on FP before and I'll quote myself if I have to. But regardless of how much of a problem this must be for you, calling for soda to be turned into a controlled substance for everyone because [I]you[/I] can't control yourself is selfish and laughable. People have vices and do things that harm themselves. Imagine if you couldn't purchase a cheeseburger without government approval because some people overeat. :bullshit:

[QUOTE=Mister Sandman;52935703]words[/QUOTE] yeah but more soda means more money for soda companies and healthcare companies, there is no incentive to be moral when youre a corporation [editline]30th November 2017[/editline] [QUOTE=Sega Saturn;52936126]words[/QUOTE] yeah imagine if we had a healthy population, what a sad thing that would be.

[QUOTE=Chaohord;52935950]i mean like, if anything you can just drink diet soda and not fuck yourself over with 1000 extra calories and diabetes?[/QUOTE] Diet soda is still awful for you and is by no means a replacement for regular soda. [QUOTE=HumanAbyss;52936100]You lacking that self control is just you though. I drank pop frequently as a kid, too frequently. As an adult I don't. It's self control, yes it's addictive but it's not comparable to smoking at all.[/QUOTE] It is [I]now.[/I] I'm an adult so continuing to be addicted to soda is entirely my own fault, and I try my damn hardest to break it. But it's fucking hard. When you're [I]not[/I] addicted to something it can be easy to say hey, just, y'know, stop? But it's not that simple. When I try to stop drinking soda my body screams at me to have one. In public when I see a soda machine I can feel my whole body pulling me towards it. I get headaches when I don't have one. I get panic attacks and depression or some crazy shit will happen, and when that happens my brain tells me I need just one nice thing, so just have a soda and hold on to that as your nice thing. My mind is constantly trying to rationale it to me. Hey you're doing great, you're feeling good, you're losing weight, celebrate, [I]have a soda.[/I] You're not doing great, have a soda. You're going to change, mark the change by drinking one last soda. It tries to sneak that shit by me CONSTANTLY. I try, I'm trying right now, I've been trying for around 6 years, but breaking an addiction is a long road wrought with failure after failure after failure. It is a [I]very[/I] real addiction. And it's not one that I can be held responsible for having in the first place. If I started when I was 18 or even 16, oh absolutely, hold me accountable. But I started when I was around 6 or 7. I can't remember a time in my life I wasn't drinking soda. And 7 year olds aren't exactly famous for being able to have self control and handle things responsibly while keeping the long term consequences of their actions in mind. The decision to drink loads of soda to such an extent that I got addicted was made by a version of myself incapable of making that decision fairly. I shouldn't have been legally allowed (or allowed by my parents) to decide that for myself the same way we don't let a toddler decide whether or not he wants to smoke, or drink, or anything like that. Imagine if you had to [I]start[/I] being an adult with a smoking addiction, because kid you was allowed to smoke all he wanted and didn't appreciate how bad that is. Just because you can have a healthy relationship with an addictive substance doesn't diminish that it is in fact addictive and people are addicted to it. I'm not and never was a big eater; I struggle to eat enough to even meet my calorie budgets for a day. I can safely say that in my own case if I wasn't allowed to guzzle soda like water as a small child I probably wouldn't be obese today. And I can get thin but the damage 6-12 sodas a day for 14 years has done is done, and it wont' go away. My teeth will never be perfect again. Who knows what long lasting effects it's had on my metabolism and my ability to defend against diabetes. The stretch marks don't go away. And I don't think I'm even an uncommon occurrence, it's just that society is so trained to think sodas are 'just another treat' that people don't pay attention to the effect soda has on themselves and others. I haven't so far heard many real arguments. Most of what I'm getting here and elsewhere is "just don't", which is a (bullshit) argument that can made against any addict to anything, "well [I]I[/I] didn't happen to end up addicted to soda as a 8 year old", "yeah well that's, dumb" and "it's JUST soda", which isn't a real argument. Just because you're predisposed to thinking or wanting to think it's not a problem doesn't make it not a problem. I'm not saying adults shouldn't be allowed to have it, either. I'm saying little kids shouldn't be allowed to guzzle 12 sodas in a day. How is that unreasonable? Why [I]should[/I] kids have completely unfiltered access to addictive substances as long as their parents are cool with it?

That's why I drink seltzer water (club soda), I only liked soda for the fizz, not really the sweetness. All the carbonation I like with none of the sugar or calories.

our society would flourish if companies were forced to make the healthiest foods and drinks they possibly can, not just focusing on lessening their food supply's price just above the legal quality limit. [editline]30th November 2017[/editline] [QUOTE=HumanAbyss;52936100]You lacking that self control is just you though. I drank pop frequently as a kid, too frequently. As an adult I don't. It's self control, yes it's addictive but it's not comparable to smoking at all.[/QUOTE] lots of people lack self control in some facets of their life, so if its basically their fault why do we let them get victimized for money when we could try and drive down health related mortality and obesity? because you got tricked into thinking freedom = freedom for corporations to seek money.

[QUOTE=Tetracycline;52936141]yeah but more soda means more money for soda companies and healthcare companies, there is no incentive to be moral when youre a corporation [editline]30th November 2017[/editline] yeah imagine if we had a healthy population, what a sad thing that would be.[/QUOTE] Yes of course, by not advocating government regulation of every unhealthy food/drink option, I'm clearly in [I]support[/I] of making everyone unhealthy. You sound just like those anti-abortion folks who accuse pro-choice people of being pro-baby-murder. But I don't know man, maybe I'm just a shill in bed with the soda/pharmaceutical/insurance conspiracy triangle and your vapid strawman is actually valid.

[QUOTE=Sega Saturn;52936185]Yes of course, by not advocating government regulation of every unhealthy food/drink option, I'm clearly in [I]support[/I] of making everyone unhealthy. You sound just like those anti-abortion folks who accuse pro-choice people of being pro-baby-murder. But I don't know man, maybe I'm just a shill in bed with the soda/pharmaceutical/insurance conspiracy triangle and your vapid strawman is actually valid.[/QUOTE] The complacency that you exhibit is the exact reason our society is basically 100% unhealthy processed garbage and why so many billions need to go to fight preventable diseases and millions die yearly. Yes, it's cool that we've been able to go to McD's for our whole lives and buy a nice fat cheeseburger and large coke whenever we feel like, but there are more important things than invented corporate attractions intentionally designed to keep you coming back.

[QUOTE=Sega Saturn;52936126]I drink a lot of soda myself, but six a day is ludicrous, and it's even worse that you're drinking the fully-sweetened stuff. And don't tell me the diet versions are worse because I've dealt with that garbage pseudo-science on FP before and I'll quote myself if I have to. But regardless of how much of a problem this must be for you, calling for soda to be turned into a controlled substance for everyone because [I]you[/I] can't control yourself is selfish and laughable. People have vices and do things that harm themselves. Imagine if you couldn't purchase a cheeseburger without government approval because some people overeat. :bullshit:[/QUOTE] Diet sodas aren't worse, but they aren't good either. If I were an isolated incident then yeah, that would suck for me, but I don't think I am. A ton of members of my family struggle with the same shit. I hear my family regularly talk about [I]quitting[/I] soda the same way you'd talk about quitting any other addictive substance, and yet nobody sees the problem with that. I think a lot of children right now drink ludicrous amounts of soda and are causing quantifiable harm to their future selves without even thinking about it. I think a lot of adults walking around right now are addicted to soda, got started as children, and don't even think of it as a problem because they've been conditioned not to by the lax way we treat soda. Adults have vices and do things that harm themselves, sure. We can make those decisions precisely because we're adults. But should children? [I]Should[/I] children be allowed to have chemically addictive substances and vices? If so, why don't we let kids smoke and drink liquor?

[QUOTE=Tetracycline;52936169]lots of people lack self control in some facets of their life, so if its basically their fault why do we let them get victimized for money when we could try and drive down health related mortality and obesity? because you got tricked into thinking freedom = freedom for corporations to seek money.[/QUOTE] Because people should be free to do whatever the hell they want as long as they aren't hurting anyone else. It isn't your job to tell people that they can't drink a slightly unhealthy drink that they like.

[QUOTE=Mister Sandman;52936161] It is [I]now.[/I] I'm an adult so continuing to be addicted to soda is entirely my own fault, and I try my damn hardest to break it. But it's fucking hard. When you're [I]not[/I] addicted to something it can be easy to say hey, just, y'know, stop? But it's not that simple. When I try to stop drinking soda my body screams at me to have one. In public when I see a soda machine I can feel my whole body pulling me towards it. I get headaches when I don't have one. I get panic attacks and depression or some crazy shit will happen, and when that happens my brain tells me I need just one nice thing, so just have a soda and hold on to that as your nice thing. My mind is constantly trying to rationale it to me. Hey you're doing great, you're feeling good, you're losing weight, celebrate, [I]have a soda.[/I] You're not doing great, have a soda. You're going to change, mark the change by drinking one last soda. It tries to sneak that shit by me CONSTANTLY. I try, I'm trying right now, I've been trying for around 6 years, but breaking an addiction is a long road wrought with failure after failure after failure.[/QUOTE] That's terrible, i'm sorry to hear that. But because you go through that, I shouldn't be allowed to drink soda? It should be a controlled substance? What does "Regulating it somehow" mean? What does that entail? I ask because if you want to suggest that as a solution, I want to know why you think that's a good idea from the start. [QUOTE] It is a [I]very[/I] real addiction. And it's not one that I can be held responsible for having in the first place. If I started when I was 18 or even 16, oh absolutely, hold me accountable. But I started when I was around 6 or 7. I can't remember a time in my life I wasn't drinking soda. And 7 year olds aren't exactly famous for being able to have self control and handle things responsibly while keeping the long term consequences of their actions in mind. The decision to drink loads of soda to such an extent that I got addicted was made by a version of myself incapable of making that decision fairly. [/QUOTE] It's a real addiction, sure. it's quite literally a physical dependency you developed. But it's not like smoking. It's not like heroin. It's not like those things that I have experience with. I have experience with pop addiction as well, but I wouldn't consider them to be similar. When I was a kid, I drank so much pop that if I went a day without one, i got a migraine headache, so I always had a pop a day. Is that okay? No. That shouldn't be the scenario, but you can't say "regulate this" with wild abandon and not have even worse shit happen. [QUOTE] I shouldn't have been legally allowed (or allowed by my parents) to decide that for myself the same way we don't let a toddler decide whether or not he wants to smoke, or drink, or anything like that. Imagine if you had to [I]start[/I] being an adult with a smoking addiction, because kid you was allowed to smoke all he wanted and didn't appreciate how bad that is.[/QUOTE] I don't, and won't argue for the right for parents to make kids drink pop. They shouldn't be drinking pop. But that's education. Not regulation. What are you suggesting? Total violation of privacy, rights, homes, everything. [QUOTE]Just because you can have a healthy relationship with an addictive substance doesn't diminish that it is in fact addictive and people are addicted to it. I'm not and never was a big eater; I struggle to eat enough to even meet my calorie budgets for a day. [/QUOTE] And just because you can't we all have to be treated like that? Like fuck dude. I over came my addictions. I've fought hard and struggled for a long fucking time to get to where I am. I absolutely DO NOT WANT what you suggest as a solution. [QUOTE]I can safely say that in my own case if I wasn't allowed to guzzle soda like water as a small child I probably wouldn't be obese today. And I can get thin but the damage 6-12 sodas a day for 14 years has done is done, and it wont' go away. My teeth will never be perfect again. Who knows what long lasting effects it's had on my metabolism and my ability to defend against diabetes. The stretch marks don't go away. And I don't think I'm even an uncommon occurrence, it's just that society is so trained to think sodas are 'just another treat' that people don't pay attention to the effect soda has on themselves and others.[/QUOTE] I don't think society is trained that way, but there's a lot of misinformation bout food and diet out in the world. That should be rectified. But again, how does legislation and regulation help here? [QUOTE] haven't so far heard many real arguments. Most of what I'm getting here and elsewhere is "just don't", which is a (bullshit) argument that can made against any addict to anything, "well [I]I[/I] didn't happen to end up addicted to soda as a 8 year old", "yeah well that's, dumb" and "it's JUST soda", which isn't a real argument. Just because you're predisposed to thinking or wanting to think it's not a problem doesn't make it not a problem. I'm not saying adults shouldn't be allowed to have it, either. I'm saying little kids shouldn't be allowed to guzzle 12 sodas in a day. How is that unreasonable? Why [I]should[/I] kids have completely unfiltered access to addictive substances as long as their parents are cool with it?[/QUOTE] And no offense, I haven't heard anything but an emotional plea for change based on personal experiences. I don't think kids shave unfettered access to soda. I NEVER SAID THAT. Implying that is straight up horseshit and you know it. I'm asking what is the "regulation" you're going to enact to prevent kids from getting soda? Anything less than just banning the substance isn't going to do it, so what do you want? [editline]30th November 2017[/editline] [QUOTE=Tetracycline;52936169]our society would flourish if companies were forced to make the healthiest foods and drinks they possibly can, not just focusing on lessening their food supply's price just above the legal quality limit. [editline]30th November 2017[/editline] lots of people lack self control in some facets of their life, so if its basically their fault why do we let them get victimized for money when we could try and drive down health related mortality and obesity? because you got tricked into thinking freedom = freedom for corporations to seek money.[/QUOTE] Sure if everyone was able to eat well things would be better. But it isn't a cure all. It isn't a fix all. There are other societal issues and ills at hand that this kind of ignorant band aid like thinking doesn't help. [editline]30th November 2017[/editline] [QUOTE=Mister Sandman;52936191]Diet sodas aren't worse, but they aren't good either. If I were an isolated incident then yeah, that would suck for me, but I don't think I am. A ton of members of my family struggle with the same shit. I hear my family regularly talk about [I]quitting[/I] soda the same way you'd talk about quitting any other addictive substance, and yet nobody sees the problem with that. I think a lot of children right now drink ludicrous amounts of soda and are causing quantifiable harm to their future selves without even thinking about it. I think a lot of adults walking around right now are addicted to soda, got started as children, and don't even think of it as a problem because they've been conditioned not to by the lax way we treat soda. [B][U]Adults have vices and do things that harm themselves, sure. We can make those decisions precisely because we're adults. But should children? [I]Should[/I] children be allowed to have chemically addictive substances and vices? If so, why don't we let kids smoke and drink liquor?[/U][/B][/QUOTE] Unless you can specifically point out where people are saying this, you're creating a strawman to get angry at. I don't believe that. I don't think anyone here believes that. They're just asking you for how the fuck you plan to ban soda from one particular group of people. Educate people, yes, I'm 100% for that. But you want to legislate and regulate into peoples personal lives. I'm not big on that. Might as well slap a government issued iWatch to your wrist to monitor how much you sit, sleep, walk, everything. I genuinely feel like the world people like you and Tetra want has no room in it for people like me. I feel threatened and annoyed by the very concept of "Well lets just throw laws, and government at this very personal issue and THAT'LL FIX IT". No it won't [editline]30th November 2017[/editline] As someone who has over come the shit you're complaining about, I GET how hard it is. What I don't like is how I'm basically being discounted by you as you don't think I have had similar experiences despite stating that I have in fact. The option you suggest seems highly wrong to me. I think parents should be educated as to the right choices to make, you think they should be legislated into that. I think the result of what you want is dangerous and scary and I don't want any part of it.

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;52936227]That's terrible, i'm sorry to hear that. But because you go through that, I shouldn't be allowed to drink soda? It should be a controlled substance? What does "Regulating it somehow" mean? What does that entail? I ask because if you want to suggest that as a solution, I want to know why you think that's a good idea from the start. It's a real addiction, sure. it's quite literally a physical dependency you developed. But it's not like smoking. It's not like heroin. It's not like those things that I have experience with. I have experience with pop addiction as well, but I wouldn't consider them to be similar. When I was a kid, I drank so much pop that if I went a day without one, i got a migraine headache, so I always had a pop a day. Is that okay? No. That shouldn't be the scenario, but you can't say "regulate this" with wild abandon and not have even worse shit happen. I don't, and won't argue for the right for parents to make kids drink pop. They shouldn't be drinking pop. But that's education. Not regulation. What are you suggesting? Total violation of privacy, rights, homes, everything. And just because you can't we all have to be treated like that? Like fuck dude. I over came my addictions. I've fought hard and struggled for a long fucking time to get to where I am. I absolutely DO NOT WANT what you suggest as a solution. I don't think society is trained that way, but there's a lot of misinformation bout food and diet out in the world. That should be rectified. But again, how does legislation and regulation help here? And no offense, I haven't heard anything but an emotional plea for change based on personal experiences. I don't think kids shave unfettered access to soda. I NEVER SAID THAT. Implying that is straight up horseshit and you know it. I'm asking what is the "regulation" you're going to enact to prevent kids from getting soda? Anything less than just banning the substance isn't going to do it, so what do you want?[/QUOTE] I'm not interesting in banning soda, no. I don't think because I struggle with addiction, you shouldn't have soda. Unless you're like 12, and I don't think you're 12. If you're interested in knowing what I actually want to happen, I think soda should be reserved for those old enough to handle it. In the US that would likely mean the same age as when you're allowed to buy cigs, which is 18 in MOST states. Though frankly I think a 16 year old is capable of making that decision. On it's own, that wouldn't [I]necessarily[/I] do much. Sure, kids couldn't walk in to a store and buy a 12 pack for themselves the way I did as a kid. Parents would just buy the 12 packs and let their kids have all the sodas they want, the same way right now you can buy cigarettes and hand them off to your kids. But most people don't do that and that's because we now recognize smoking for what it is. Hence why I think there should be more campaigns and education to make people appreciate just how bad soda really is for you and your children [I]first.[/I] Like, [I]really[/I] push it. It would be hard, because for some reason people are really resistant to the idea that soda is super bad for you, but at one point in this country smoking was the most normal thing in the world; we've all seen the antiquated shit that's horrifying by today's standards. If we could get society to a point where it's commonly considered that soda is not an acceptable thing to let a child have then that might even be enough. That said I wish I could say we could do that and not fuck it up but it seems like the organizations that do push for children's health seem to not understand how to do it properly.

[QUOTE=Tetracycline;52936189]The complacency that you exhibit is the exact reason our society is basically 100% unhealthy processed garbage and why so many billions need to go to fight preventable diseases and millions die yearly. Yes, it's cool that we've been able to go to McD's for our whole lives and buy a nice fat cheeseburger and large coke whenever we feel like, but there are more important things than invented corporate attractions intentionally designed to keep you coming back.[/QUOTE] "Wake up, sheeple." You act like I drink coke because a corporation has pulled one over one me. I drink coke because I like the way it tastes. I eat McDonalds because I like the way it tastes. But I also practice self control, I live my life the way I want to live it, and there's nothing wrong with that. You have failed to establish any meaningful argument in this thread, all you're doing is shaming people living average lives, accusing me of propping up the ~corporate agenda~ by buying things I like and using them responsibly. It's not healthy to sit on your ass and shitpost on Facepunch, either. Should I call up the nanny state and have them take away your computer? [I]After all, there're more important things to consider here.[/I] I'm going to stop responding to you now. [QUOTE=Mister Sandman;52936191]Diet sodas aren't worse, but they aren't good either. If I were an isolated incident then yeah, that would suck for me, but I don't think I am. I think a lot of children right now drink ludicrous amounts of soda and are causing quantifiable harm to their future selves without even thinking about it.[/QUOTE] Until now, I had assumed that your proposed regulation idea was meant to apply to everyone, and that was a misunderstanding. So let's talk about regulating with regards to children. [quote]Adults have vices and do things that harm themselves, sure. We can make those decisions precisely because we're adults. But should children? [I]Should[/I] children be allowed to have chemically addictive substances and vices? If so, why don't we let kids smoke and drink liquor?[/QUOTE] It's a matter of numbers. Everyone I know drinks soda, and a few of them drink more than they should. I've never met someone who drinks as much as you, nor have I ever encountered anyone who describes an addiction as heavily as you. You are an extreme outlier, whether you want to acknowledge that or not. I know plenty of people who smoke, and literally all of them are heavily addicted. The danger of drinking soda is not even remotely comparable to cigarettes. Alcohol isn't just dangerous to your long-term health. It immediately impairs judgement and motor skills. Too much alcohol in one sitting will kill you, and with children, that amount is fairly small. The danger of drinking soda is not even remotely comparable to alcohol. Both of these comparisons are false equivalencies. Sugar and caffeine in general are given too much to children, and in some cases it's causing serious harm. But it's entirely on the parents to raise their children effectively, especially since the ill effects of over-consumption are known.

[QUOTE=Sega Saturn;52936304] Until now, I had assumed that your proposed regulation idea was meant to apply to everyone, and that was a misunderstanding. So let's talk about regulating with regards to children. It's a matter of numbers. Everyone I know drinks soda, and a few of them drink more than they should. I've never met someone who drinks as much as you, nor have I ever encountered anyone who describes an addiction as heavily as you. You are an extreme outlier, whether you want to acknowledge that or not. I know plenty of people who smoke, and literally all of them are heavily addicted. The danger of drinking soda is not even remotely comparable to cigarettes. Alcohol isn't just dangerous to your long-term health. It immediately impairs judgement and motor skills. Too much alcohol in one sitting will kill you, and with children, that amount is fairly small. The danger of drinking soda is not even remotely comparable to alcohol. Both of these comparisons are false equivalencies. Sugar and caffeine in general are given too much to children, and in some cases it's causing serious harm. But it's entirely on the parents to raise their children effectively, especially since the ill effects of over-consumption are known.[/QUOTE] Granted those substances are much more addictive than soda itself. But does the fact that soda is [I]less[/I] addictive excuse it in the first place? I think there needs to be a larger discussion about how much can you fuck up your kid's health before being held legally responsible in SOME form. As for me being an outlier, at the very least we know that [url=http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/26/health/sugary-drinks-children-cdc-study/index.html]30 percent of children have '2 or more sugary drinks' a day and the article mentions two thirds having at least one[/url]. Which isn't the most helpful study when trying to talk about [I]specifically[/I] soda, and lots of it, but that's what I could find. I keep googling this and getting buried under articles from mom sites. I did find one source from 'NOLA', which appears to be some sort of new orleans based news site, [url=http://www.nola.com/health/index.ssf/2017/01/sugar_soda_consumption_study.html]which published something where professors claimed that 'two-thirds' of children are having one sugary drink a day' [/url], but I'll let you decide for yourself how trustworthy that is. I don't know how much I trust it. Mind you, one soda a day could be considered unacceptable in and of itself.

[QUOTE=Mister Sandman;52936362]Granted those substances are much more addictive than soda itself. But does the fact that soda is [I]less[/I] addictive excuse it in the first place? I think there needs to be a larger discussion about how much can you fuck up your kid's health before being held legally responsible in SOME form. As for me being an outlier, at the very least we know that [url=http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/26/health/sugary-drinks-children-cdc-study/index.html]30 percent of children have '2 or more sugary drinks' a day[/url]. Which isn't the most helpful study when trying to talk about [I]specifically[/I] soda, and lots of it, but that's what I could find. I keep googling this and getting buried under articles from mom sites. I did find one source from 'NOLA', which appears to be some sort of new orleans based news site, [url=http://www.nola.com/health/index.ssf/2017/01/sugar_soda_consumption_study.html]which published something where professors claimed that 'two-thirds' of children are having one sugary drink a day' [/url], but I'll let you decide for yourself how trustworthy that is. I don't know how much I trust it. Mind you, one soda a day could be considered unacceptable in and of itself.[/QUOTE] Soda addiction is far more about the psychological addiction than the physical addiction, which passes after a week or so. With that in mind, your argument would apply to any psychologically addictive food... which can be anything at all. Should we ban candy for children? How about French fries? Etc. Those are all possibly psychologically addictive.

I drink about 1 can of Pepsi Max a day about 3/4 times a week. I know it is still not great for you but at least the sugar content is nothing to worry about.

maybe this lobster is just trying to represent his brand deals brah

[QUOTE=Mister Sandman;52936362]Granted those substances are much more addictive than soda itself. But does the fact that soda is [I]less[/I] addictive excuse it in the first place? I think there needs to be a larger discussion about how much can you fuck up your kid's health before being held legally responsible in SOME form.[/QUOTE] Because the very fact that something is far less addictive than something else means it's less of a danger to public health? I really don't know how else to spell that out to you. The difference in threat between cigarettes and heroin is exactly why one is age restricted and the other will land you in rehab or prison. The difference between coke and cigarettes is why one is unrestricted and the other is. Simple as. [quote]As for me being an outlier, at the very least we know that [url=http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/26/health/sugary-drinks-children-cdc-study/index.html]30 percent of children have '2 or more sugary drinks' a day[/url]. Which isn't the most helpful study when trying to talk about [I]specifically[/I] soda, and lots of it, but that's what I could find. I keep googling this and getting buried under articles from mom sites. I did find one source from 'NOLA', which appears to be some sort of new orleans based news site, [url=http://www.nola.com/health/index.ssf/2017/01/sugar_soda_consumption_study.html]which published something where professors claimed that 'two-thirds' of children are having one sugary drink a day' [/url], but I'll let you decide for yourself how trustworthy that is. I don't know how much I trust it. Mind you, one soda a day could be considered unacceptable in and of itself.[/QUOTE] The data gives a vague ballpark estimate of how much sugar is being consumed by minors. I've already agreed that sugar is generally too freely given, but that encompasses far more than just soda or even "sugary drinks." Regardless, the average rate of consumption among children tells us nothing about the amount of resulting adults who have a crippling addiction to soda in same vein as you. You're asking me to prove a negative, which I'm not going to do. Specifically, you're asking me to prove that regulating consumption of soda among minors is [b]not[/b] justified. The burden is on you to prove that the well-being of those who cannot control themselves should outweigh the freedom of choice enjoyed by everyone else, [B]and[/B] that establishing regulations prohibiting minors from consuming soda is fully justified by by that notion. I don't think you're capable of proving either of those things.

[QUOTE=sgman91;52936372]Soda addiction is far more about the psychological addiction than the physical addiction, which passes after a week or so. With that in mind, your argument would apply to any psychologically addictive food... which can be anything at all. Should we ban candy for children? How about French fries? Etc. Those are all possibly psychologically addictive.[/QUOTE] Even a weak physical addiction can be enough to keep you coming back for a long time. Soda is still addictive on a chemical basis, even if not the strongest in the world. And if something is chemically addictive, I just don't feel that comfortable letting children have it without justification like for medicative purposes. That said, where candy and french fries and the like belong in a kid's diet should be more up for debate than it is in my opinion. What sort of consequences, if any, do [I]you[/I] think a parent should face for allowing their child to become obese? How much does a parent's responsibility to the human person they created matter in comparison to 'it's MY KID FUCK OF f'. This is naturally a double sided issue where some parents can't [I]afford[/I] healthy food and it's all super fucking complicated. I do think there are more creative ways one could handle the topic in general. For instance, when you look at Japan, which has a shockingly low obesity rate. It's not illegal to be fat, but they do have a metabo law where adults are required to be measured each year and if they are obese then the company or local government can be fined. Dunno how you feel about that but it's an instance of using a mixture of culture and softer laws like taxes to discourage behaviors. Being fat is way too normal in western society. I think that ought to change. [editline]e[/editline] Y'know not to excuse myself out of the argument but this is getting really off topic for a really long time. We went from a lobsters to soda addictions to childhood obesity. Maybe this should just go to PMs or it's own thread? I'll respond.

[QUOTE=Mister Sandman;52936410]Even a weak physical addiction can be enough to keep you coming back for a long time. Soda is still addictive on a chemical basis, even if not the strongest in the world. And if something is chemically addictive, I just don't feel that comfortable letting children have it without justification like for medicative purposes. That said, where candy and french fries and the like belong in a kid's diet should be more up for debate than it is in my opinion. What sort of consequences, if any, do [I]you[/I] think a parent should face for allowing their child to become obese? How much does a parent's responsibility to the human person they created matter in comparison to 'it's MY KID FUCK OF f'. This is naturally a double sided issue where some parents can't [I]afford[/I] healthy food and it's all super fucking complicated. I do think there are more creative ways one could handle the topic in general. For instance, when you look at Japan, which has a shockingly low obesity rate. It's not illegal to be fat, but they do have a metabo law where adults are required to be measured each year and if they are obese then the company or local government can be fined. Dunno how you feel about that but it's an instance of using a mixture of culture and softer laws like taxes to discourage behaviors. Being fat is way too normal in western society. I think that ought to change. [editline]e[/editline] Y'know not to excuse myself out of the argument but this is getting really off topic. We went from a lobsters to soda addictions to childhood obesity. Maybe this should just go to PMs? I'll respond.[/QUOTE] If you want to satisfy the caffeine addiction, there are tons of sugar free options. I drink black coffee. You don't need to drink pop. You are psychologically addicted to pop, like you can be to pizza or to crack. You are physically addicted to caffeine, and that is factually speaking a weak addiction. Don't talk to me about addiction like I don't have experience here. I currently smoke, so I still have an active addiction and understand the feelings that go along with that. Children shouldn't have pop on a daily basis. I don't have a solution for this beyond education.

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;52936436]If you want to satisfy the caffeine addiction, there are tons of sugar free options. I drink black coffee. You don't need to drink pop. You are psychologically addicted to pop, like you can be to pizza or to crack. You are physically addicted to caffeine, and that is factually speaking a weak addiction. Don't talk to me about addiction like I don't have experience here. I currently smoke, so I still have an active addiction and understand the feelings that go along with that. Children shouldn't have pop on a daily basis. I don't have a solution for this beyond education.[/QUOTE] Well that is an interesting point, I am specifically addicted to soda in a way that coffee doesn't satisfy (although that could partially be because I just don't like the taste of coffee at all which is its own discouragement). I'd be lying for the record if I said a lot of the arguments aren't convincing and I'm not doubting my own position. That said, it's occurred to me there are more ways to handle soda than [I]just[/I] saying kids can't have it. For instance, education, intentionally shifting culture, discouragement taxes, so on. Though I do still think not letting kids have it would arguably benefit them; one could apply this to any caffeinated beverage and make this about whether or not kids should be allowed to have consumables (barring medications) that have caffeine in them. The soda angle is mostly personal bias because 99 percent of the time I forget energy drinks even exist.

I dunno what they've been putting in the soda you guys have been drinking, must be a predisposition thing.

I'm addicted to soda. I know it's the sugar in the soda that's addicting me and not the caffeine, because I've taken caffeine in pill form (100mg, or about one cup of coffee) for over a month while trying to kick the habit and I still craved soda. I ended up drinking soda and not taking the pills. It's tasty, it perks my mood up, I feel energized when I drink it, and without it I struggle to function. I started drinking it daily around high school once my parents stopped limiting how much I could have. Some days I would drink soda only, no water, and I'd keep it up until I absolutely needed water. Nowadays I still mainly drink soda, though I try to drink water more often. I have at least two cans/20oz bottles a day. I'm overweight and not happy with my body image, but every time I tried to quit soda I ended up relapsing, so now I'm just accepting it as a part of my life. I'm trying to get more exercise and adjusting my diet by not eating anything sugary besides soda and limiting my carbs. Basically I'm trying to work around soda since I've given up trying to give it up. Even though I know soda addiction sucks, I'm definitely opposed to banning it from adults, because its more of a sugar addiction than soda inherently, and banning sugar or regulating how much can be in a product is unfeasible. Banning it from kids is a slippery slope because it opens a can of worms on what other foods could be regulated - things like candy, or even buffalo wings, which are chock full of calories and I could see some lawmaker/soccer mom try to ban any food not 100% healthy. Banning soda would also seriously limit access to it for everyone - no more vending machines (unless they require ID somehow), since kids could take $1.50 and buy a soda unsupervised. I do think that the health effects of soda should be taught in school just like [URL="https://www.dare.org/"]DARE[/URL] does for drugs. Everyone knows its "bad" for you and will make you fat, but the effects take a long time to manifest and occasional usage isn't harmful. However, long term effects on mood, skin, diet, etc. arenb't talked about as often and there aren't any resources for people struggling with it who lack the willpower to overcome, aside from expensive dieticians or personal trainers. Also, back on topic, littering sucks.

[QUOTE=LZTYBRN;52935687]don't lobsters molt? or am i confusing my arthropods[/QUOTE] All crustaceans molt.

I had almost forgotten this thread was about a lobster. The article quotes Lindstrand saying the image was pixelated--that's potential evidence that it could have been outdoor marketing material, meant to be seen from far away. So, maybe the material was part of a sign that became embedded into the shell. My guess is the image was printed on weather-resistant or treated cardboard or plastic, like for outdoor signage. Then the lobster, freshly-molted and looking for a place to hide while it generated a new shell*, took up residence underneath the ad or a fragment of it, and when the new shell grew, it took up the piece of the sign with it. And maybe somewhere else another lobster escaped the net, crawling around with an image on its back reading, "1 HOT DOG + SODA NOW $4.99," and a hotdog on its belly. *OvB, or another crustacean expert, do their shells grow in strata, layer by layer? That's the only way i can see this theory working.