Is Burger King trying to kill us????

[ChadTower]

 

[MaximRecoil]

Where are your facts? I want a "Coupon Damage Detection Test

[ChadTower]

It will be bad for you if the paper is coated in hydrogenated oils.

[thebrownshow]

See that's just the thing, if it appears as if I'm lacking an argument it's because I'm not arguing!  I don't even know what/who you're arguing wth at this point.  Holy hell... MaximRecoil, relax man, I'm just messing with ya.  Maybe we've discovered another side-effect of trans-fats... it destroys your ability to take a joke

[ChadTower]

But it may lube his ability to take less funny things.

[jbox]

Be afraid, be very afraid...

[somunny]

 cut the mustard in an argument.

Appropriately misstated given the subject matter. 

[ChadTower]

Mustard is high in lead.

[SithMaster]

I tried a quad and it was okay.  yummy but the bacon was sweet and wasnt crispy.  i like crispy bacon.  that and i dont recall any ketchup on it which was lame.  and i had a diet coke to balance it all out.

that comic pic was good.  KGB lol thats the russian cia correct?  lol.

[NightGod]

In communist Russia, Burger Comrade Quad eat YOU!!

[Dartful Dodger]

I was going to post some nonsense in this thread, but I see there are 4 pages of nonsense, so I'm just going to ignore it instead.

[ChadTower]

In communist Russia, Burger Comrade Quad eat YOU!!

 

[SirPeale]

Your analogy is ridiculous.

If one injests lead, the damage can be established.

The analogy is sound.  Sure, lead damage has been 'known' about for a while.  Ben Franklin wrote about a connection between painters and a crippling effect they had later in their lives, attributing it to the paint they were ingesting.  Yes that's right...ingesting.  To make sure they had enough lead in the paint they'd taste it.

But it's only within the last twenty years (1987) that lead has gained as much attention as it has.  Lead paint is still available, but only for industrial applications.  It's been banned for household use since then.

If I eat French Fries, show me the damage.

Unlike lead, trans fats are not a directly damaging substance.  What happens is your body converts hydrogenated oils directly into cholesterol, which in turn begin depositing themselves on your arteries.  Will eating a little of it hurt you?  Unlikely.  Eating a lot certainly *will*, however.  Hence the link to heart disease.

Oh, and there is no such thing as a "100% man-made" vegetable oil.

Okay, that was a goof.  They take straight vegetable oil and add hydrogen to it.

Busybody Do-Gooder long term wild guesses mean nothing to me.

This is far more a political issue than it is a health issue.

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&safe=off&rls=GGLG%2CGGLG%3A2006-13%2CGGLG%3Aen&q=trans+fat+law

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&safe=off&rls=GGLG%2CGGLG%3A2006-13%2CGGLG%3Aen&q=trans+fat+legislation

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&safe=off&rls=GGLG%2CGGLG%3A2006-13%2CGGLG%3Aen&q=obesity+legislation

Follow the money. Politics = big business.

Now excuse me while I call the Poison Control Center. I just ate some margarine and I might be on death's door!

*shrug* it's your body.

[ChadTower]

*shrug* it's your body.

DING DING DING DING DING

Let this guy do what he wants.  None of us will remember him when he dies at 48.

[MaximRecoil]

The analogy is sound.  Sure, lead damage has been 'known' about for a while.  Ben Franklin wrote about a connection between painters and a crippling effect they had later in their lives, attributing it to the paint they were ingesting.  Yes that's right...ingesting.  To make sure they had enough lead in the paint they'd taste it.

But it's only within the last twenty years (1987) that lead has gained as much attention as it has.  Lead paint is still available, but only for industrial applications.  It's been banned for household use since then.

The analogy is not sound for the reasons I stated above. The rest of your text here is fine, though it did nothing to establish the validity of your analogy.

Unlike lead, trans fats are not a directly damaging substance.  What happens is your body converts hydrogenated oils directly into cholesterol, which in turn begin depositing themselves on your arteries.  Will eating a little of it hurt you?  Unlikely.  Eating a lot certainly *will*, however.  Hence the link to heart disease.

It is a crap shoot. There are people who eat these "bad" foods indiscriminately for all of their lives and outlive people who don't. With a real 1:1 correlation we could say something along the lines of "given X quantity of trans fat consumed, person A will develop heart disease within Y amount of time." There is a problem with that though; namely the people who eat the "bad" foods all of their lives and do not develop heart disease, but rather they die of "old age". Saying that something is "bad" is not an accurate statement if it does not apply to everyone, every time.

[NightGod]

There is a problem with that though; namely the people who eat the "bad" foods all of their lives and do not develop heart disease, but rather they die of "old age". Saying that something is "bad" is not an accurate statement if it does not apply to everyone, every time.

So cigarettes aren't bad then? There are people who smoke multiple packs a day for their entire lives and never get lung cancer. Playing Russian Roulette must be OK, too, since that only kills one out of every six times. Guess this also means I can stop wearing my seat belts and they should stop selling motorcycle and bicycle helmets.

What a rediculous statement.

[MaximRecoil]

*shrug* it's your body.

DING DING DING DING DING

Let this guy do what he wants.  None of us will remember him when he dies at 48.

Longevity runs in my family.

Let's see ... Genetics vs. Chad "The Soothsayer" Tower's prediction ...

I'll have to say that genetics wins by default.

I don't mean to take away from your brilliant cold-reading parlor trick though!

[MaximRecoil]

There is a problem with that though; namely the people who eat the "bad" foods all of their lives and do not develop heart disease, but rather they die of "old age". Saying that something is "bad" is not an accurate statement if it does not apply to everyone, every time.

So cigarettes aren't bad then? There are people who smoke multiple packs a day for their entire lives and never get lung cancer.

There is no such thing as "death by cigarette". Smoking may increase the likelihood of certain ailments, or it may not, as you have pointed out.

Playing Russian Roulette must be OK, too, since that only kills one out of every six times.

Being shot in the head is bad. Not being shot in the head is not bad. It is not rocket science. The game itself is a foolish one, given the 1 in 6 chance of instant death, and is not even roughly analogous to eating "bad" foods.

Guess this also means I can stop wearing my seat belts and they should stop selling motorcycle and bicycle helmets.

You can do whatever you want to. It is when you or the government want to force other people to play the odds in the manner that you or they approve of -- that is what I take issue with.

[SirPeale]

There is no such thing as "death by cigarette". Smoking may increase the likelihood of certain ailments, or it may not, as you have pointed out.

...

...

...

I'm not touching this with a ten foot pole, and Chad holding it.

[thebrownshow]

Well, if smoking isn't bad for you, and if trans-fats aren't bad for you... I wonder what the long-term health effects are for people who argue on the internet.

[MaximRecoil]

Well, if smoking isn't bad for you, and if trans-fats aren't bad for you... I wonder what the long-term health effects are for people who argue on the internet.

Or for people who construct strawman fallacies ...

[NightGod]

There is no such thing as "death by cigarette". Smoking may increase the likelihood of certain ailments, or it may not, as you have pointed out.

And you've FINALLY made my point for me-thank you!

See...trans-fats do the exact same thing, they can increase the likelyhood of certain ailments, or may not.

How is informing people of these risk factors and requiring companies to present the information on their packaging in a way that allows people who choose to respond to those risk factors to make an informed decision be a bad thing? I see the listing of the amount of trans-fats in a product on the label as analgous to listing the amount of Sodium or Carbohydrates. Noone is calling for a world-wide ban on trans-fats, they're calling for informational packaging.

[MaximRecoil]

And you've FINALLY made my point for me-thank you!

See...trans-fats do the exact same thing, they can increase the likelyhood of certain ailments, or may not.

Of course. But, maybe you haven't really been following along. I am arguing with people who are declaring trans fat to be universally "bad", across the board; despite the fact that there are people who have never or will never experience any negative effects from it.

How is informing people of these risk factors and requiring companies to present the information on their packaging in a way that allows people who choose to respond to those risk factors to make an informed decision be a bad thing?

It is not a bad thing, though with the suddenness that this burst onto the scene this late in the game; I am more than a little cynical regarding the motives. And, as usual, there is the generous helping of not-so-hard "science" accompanying this latest "health scare".

Noone is calling for a world-wide ban on trans-fats, they're calling for informational packaging.

You are wrong.

Canadian Government Trans Fat Task Force
recommends regulations to limit
partially hydrogenated oils

Canadian food industry
supports recommendations

http://www.bantransfats.com/

Chicago Weighs New Prohibition: Bad-for-You Fats

http://travel2.nytimes.com/2006/07/18/us/18chicago.html

Lawsuit Targets Trans Fat at KFC

http://www.medicinenet.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=62493

[NightGod]

Canadian Government Trans Fat Task Force
recommends regulations to limit
partially hydrogenated oils

Canadian food industry
supports recommendations

http://www.bantransfats.com/

Limitation, not banning.

Chicago Weighs New Prohibition: Bad-for-You Fats

http://travel2.nytimes.com/2006/07/18/us/18chicago.html

Most people, including the mayor of Chicago, think this is a bit nuts.

Lawsuit Targets Trans Fat at KFC

http://www.medicinenet.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=62493

Filing a lawsuit is different than calling for a ban. Besides, all that lawsuit is seeking is informational packaging.

And just because some people do not experience deletarious effects from something does not mean that it ceases to be bad, it just means that they are immune to it's effects. Is smallpox any less of a "bad" disease simply because the majority of the world is immune to it? No, it just means it is less dangerous-that still does not make it into a good thing.

[jbox]

Well, if smoking isn't bad for you, and if trans-fats aren't bad for you... I wonder what the long-term health effects are for people who argue on the internet.

[NightGod]

Hye Jbox, since you're the self-proclaimed Star Wars expert here, answer a question that came up in another forum for me. What prevents a Jedi from just shutting off the lightsaber of an opponent during a fight?

I personally thought it had something to do with needing the Force to use on in the first place, so the saber would constantly be 'in tune' with the Jedi who was weilding it, but then someone else pointed out the whole "Han Solo cuts open an tuantuan on Hoth" thing, which pretty much blew my idea out of the water (unless you just say George made a continuity error, not totally outside the realm of reason).

/thread hijack

[jbox]

Nothing. Some Jedi Masters have been able to drain the power cell for an opponents lightsaber, and sometimes you can knock it out of their hand if their grip is loose enough. The issue is how strong in the force you are, since the concentration required to manipulate parts that small needs to take less effort from you in the grand scheme of things then it takes your opponent to cut your head off while you are distracted with trying to zap their saber.

It's like how kung fu movies show people's guns being snatched from their hands, it's just that it's not going to be anywhere near that easy to pull that trick off against another kung fu master. 

[NightGod]

OK then, why didn't Darth just snatch the saber out of Luke's hand in ESB? Luke was NOWHERE near as powerful as Darth at that time and if all he wanted to do was subdue him so he talk him into coming over to the Dark side, I would think that would have been the first thing he did.

I mean, I understand it was an excuse for a really cool battle scene, but really...

[jbox]

Huh? Why did Darth keep fighting Luke, taunting him with his superior skill, making him more exhausted and more pissed off, more angry, less in control of his thoughts and taking him closer and closer to going over to the Dark Side, instead of simply capturing him and talking to him calmly from the other side of prison bars? Let me guess, you also ask why bad guys don't just shoot the hero in the head with a gun ("bam bam, we can do it together like father and son!") and instead try to taunt them into breaking down and turning on their own side..... 

[MaximRecoil]

Limitation, not banning.

I guess you didn't notice the name of the site?

http://bantransfat.com/

BAN TRANS FATS
THE CAMPAIGN TO BAN PARTIALLY HYDROGENATED OILS

Most people, including the mayor of Chicago, think this is a bit nuts.

It is nuts; what of it?

Filing a lawsuit is different than calling for a ban. Besides, all that lawsuit is seeking is informational packaging.

No, CSPI also asked the judge to order KFC to use other types of cooking oils. So yes, that is calling for a ban; specifically a ban on KFC's use of their current cooking oils.

And just because some people do not experience deletarious effects from something does not mean that it ceases to be bad, it just means that they are immune to it's effects. Is smallpox any less of a "bad" disease simply because the majority of the world is immune to it? No, it just means it is less dangerous-that still does not make it into a good thing.

Trans fat has yet to be established to have any "bad" effects on anyone. It is all conjecture and not backed by any real science. There have been no studies which have established a statistically significant correlation between the consumption of trans fat and any "bad" effects.

And no, being exposed to a disease that one is immune to is not a "bad" thing; not that your analogy is even valid in the first place.

[pointdablame]

I had a double stacker yesterday.  It was good.


I asked for extra trans fat too.

[NightGod]

Huh? Why did Darth keep fighting Luke, taunting him with his superior skill, making him more exhausted and more pissed off, more angry, less in control of his thoughts and taking him closer and closer to going over to the Dark Side, instead of simply capturing him and talking to him calmly from the other side of prison bars? Let me guess, you also ask why bad guys don't just shoot the hero in the head with a gun ("bam bam, we can do it together like father and son!") and instead try to taunt them into breaking down and turning on their own side..... 

I didn't say throw him in a prison cell, I just said take away his weapon (which would have made him feel even more powerless in out of control).

I'll respond to MR in a bit, got a Hapkido test I need to prepare for.

[DrewKaree]

I had a double stacker yesterday.  It was good.


I asked for extra trans fat too.

I was going to try one today, but with "Sunday.  SUNDAY! SUNDAY!!!!!! QUOTE WARS GOING ON THAT WILL BLOW. YOUR. MIND!!!!!!! SUNDAY!!!!!!" I was afraid I was going to puke. 

Will someone please post the definition of "picayune" and "obtuse"?

[ChadTower]

I tell you what.  How's about we meet someplace, say halfway in the tween.  I come with a bucket of trans fat.  I'll show you how harmful it can be.  In the tween.

[DrewKaree]

I tell you what.  How's about we meet someplace, say halfway in the tween.  I come with a bucket of trans fat.  I'll show you how harmful it can be.  In the tween.

I look forward to the method you're gonna use to get it into his arteries.

If you can, please get video.  I'm sure we can find some way to host it

[ChadTower]

In the tween.

[sez]

And you've FINALLY made my point for me-thank you!

See...trans-fats do the exact same thing, they can increase the likelyhood of certain ailments, or may not.

Of course. But, maybe you haven't really been following along. I am arguing with people who are declaring trans fat to be universally "bad", across the board; despite the fact that there are people who have never or will never experience any negative effects from it.

How is informing people of these risk factors and requiring companies to present the information on their packaging in a way that allows people who choose to respond to those risk factors to make an informed decision be a bad thing?

It is not a bad thing, though with the suddenness that this burst onto the scene this late in the game; I am more than a little cynical regarding the motives. And, as usual, there is the generous helping of not-so-hard "science" accompanying this latest "health scare".

Noone is calling for a world-wide ban on trans-fats, they're calling for informational packaging.

You are wrong.

Canadian Government Trans Fat Task Force
recommends regulations to limit
partially hydrogenated oils

Canadian food industry
supports recommendations

http://www.bantransfats.com/

Chicago Weighs New Prohibition: Bad-for-You Fats

http://travel2.nytimes.com/2006/07/18/us/18chicago.html

Lawsuit Targets Trans Fat at KFC

http://www.medicinenet.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=62493

All this talk about "fats" is making me horny 

[fredster]

All this talk about "fats" is making me horny 

Yep, you have to be nicer to skinny chicks. Don't you hate that?

[ChadTower]

Would this idiotic conversation be easier if someone concluded that yes, Burger King is in fact trying to kill us?

Why is BK so evil for this and yet McDonald's, which has just introduced the Bigger Mac, is not?

[thebrownshow]

Why is BK so evil for this and yet McDonald's, which has just introduced the Bigger Mac, is not?

While the Burger King is a tyranical dictator that has sworn vengenance upon moderation in the American diet, Ronald McDonald better multicultural marketing and a charity that helps children.