dimreepr

Since robots are only superior in repetitive basic tasks, the haphazard nature of human talents is clearly superior since that nature includes the invention of robots.

Oh please, I made this statement in post #28: “Of the 600,000 or so food products currently available in the US, apparently, roughly 80% contains added sugar” You’re reply in post #29 seemed to argue that point, so I provided a link to support my claim in post #30 (clear for all to see in the 2nd section 3rd bullet point is the above quote) did I really need to re-quote or have you just run out of ideas?

http://michelle-maclean.com/the-sugar-facts/

Of the 600,000 or so food products currently available in the US, apparently, roughly 80% contains added sugar.

The lack of citations aside, are you really trying to argue, that, because starvation kills more children than obesity, we should ignore the obesity problem? If obesity is so easily remedied why does bariatric surgery so often fail? Maybe someone has done you a disservice, MonDie, but the minus one speaks volumes.

Nope that’s a miss please try again, maybe with a citation that actually supports your claim. So far I have provided 13 links in support of my position (not all as dubious as the 4 you’ve picked out) you’ve provided 2 that only support a part of your claim (the only part of your claim BTW that I agree with). If you want to sink a battleship you need to work much harder.

I have no doubts that starvation kills children but that’s only one side of your claim. “Obesity only kills the aged” I also need a citation for this claim, along with another that supports: “More live-years are lost.”

Are you sure about that? I look forward to reading your citations. edit. whatever the source.

On top of the advertising are the outright lies, like promoting lean products as healthy; when a product that contains half the fat, in order to make it palatable, also contains twice the sugar. Also the label, due to lobbying, displays a percentage of recommended daily intake for everything other than sugar (ergo their trying to hoodwink).

So it’s the addicts fault? Their moral fortitude is the problem rather than the advertising designed to get them hooked early and once hooked surround them with more advertising and product placement. In a free bar, they can't escape, how many alcoholics do you think would stay sober? http://metro.co.uk/2011/09/22/world-now-has-more-people-dying-from-obesity-than-malnutrition-160264/ http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/health/news/article3630642.ece It maybe unclear, that sugar is addictive, in your terms but it does seem a reasonable explanation for the obesity epidemic. http://samples.sainsburysebooks.co.uk/9781134365654_sample_535837.pdf http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0272523109000471 http://www.heart.org/HEARTORG/GettingHealthy/WeightManagement/Obesity/Understanding-the-American-Obesity-Epidemic_UCM_461650_Article.jsp http://www.theobesityepidemic.org/

On reflection/hindsight I realise the topic title was a mistake (my apologies), since my intention has been neatly captioned by iNow (thank you), a more appropriate title maybe “More people die from obesity than starvation”. I struggle to understand why people are willing to allow industry to buy rewrites to important government documents like the McGovern report or be allowed to self regulate when, we all know, nothing will change (other than more child targeted adverts)?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/health/news/9742960/Obesity-killing-three-times-as-many-as-malnutrition.html http://metro.co.uk/2011/09/22/world-now-has-more-people-dying-from-obesity-than-malnutrition-160264/ https://fullfact.org/factchecks/first_year_that_more_people_worldwide_died_obesity_malnutrition-28558 http://authoritynutrition.com/10-disturbing-reasons-why-sugar-is-bad/

That may well be true but it doesn’t stop me thinking that way; I therefore maintain my position. We think what we think because we think it, whatever the reason; we act on that thinking for a reason and that’s the difference.

“Sugar is a dose dependant chronic hepato toxin” so fuel yes but only in the right amount. http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2012/05/07/the-sweetener-that-is-more-dangerous-than-alcohol.aspx http://imgur.com/gallery/qnMLBt2 I’m not trying too (someone else did) I just use it for emphasis.

Well when I see a pretty shapely young lady, I may think, wouldn’t it be great if I could have sexual congress with her without the moral and legal consequences? That doesn’t mean I would, even with her insistence, because any reasonable person understands the moral imperative to resist, not mentioning the legal consequences. Unvirtuous isn’t necessarily the antipode of virtuous. IOW my actions are virtuous whilst my thoughts, sometimes even disgusts me “Let he who is without sin cast the first stone”; honesty with others is but a mask and meaningless but honesty with yourself is crucial.

A thought isn’t unvirtuous acting on the thought certainly is.

http://www.ecorazzi.com/2015/02/26/study-sugar-is-eight-times-more-addictive-than-cocaine/ And just, if not more, dangerous to our health, yet one is illegal and the other is freely advertised/promoted ubiquitously throughout the world. Is the mighty dollar really so powerful as to seduce the world with such a drug and are we all equally culpable; given our collective need to accumulate imagined wealth?

Fair point. I think it is the whole point but I don’t think the cheerleaders mind, given the clothes girls of this age choose to wear, and even enjoy that kind of sexual attention (don’t we all) it only becomes a problem when the attention is inappropriate.

You surely aren’t trying to suggest the leotard has no sexual aspect? Does not the male version exaggerate maleness?

Whilst I realise there’s an extra layer of titillation, with the short skirts, vies-a-vie the school girl look; a gymnast’s clothing could easily be less titillating, it’s not like the hips aren’t exaggerated with the design of most leotards. If the girls get pleasure from their “sport” I say good luck to them; I’m sure some women got pleasure from looking at some of the guys in my rugby team.

You seem to make a habit of missing the point; do you really imagine you’ll see them coming?

“Your paranoid fantasies about fighting a rebellion against a theoretical future fascist government takeover” The arguments moot anyway, given that any authoritarian government, worth its salt, will seek out and eliminate any potential threat to its governance.

Not in a thread entitled "every day, 20 US children hospitalized w/Gun injury (6% die)". Think again.

What about this question? Worth a try I suppose. I haven’t given away my rights; I have merely accepted my right to a firearm comes with a condition that means a gun isn’t just given to people that are unable, through mental illness or ignorance, to comprehend the dangers. Your inability to come to terms with the above just shows how selfish you are; you’d rather people die than submit to a simple test, your shame is pitiable, whereas I wear your pity with pride. I have little doubt you’ll fail to understand that, so yet another reason for my pity.

What about the right of today’s dead child, to life? America may be a developed nation but while this blatant disregard for human life is not addressed, it can’t call itself a civilised nation. If you can’t see that the right to life trumps your right to a gun, I pity you.