[X] My Assistant

[IndigoRain]

Your logic does not compute. Its still up to a parent to say no. Kids have no power over what they do unless the parent lets them. A parent can say no to the kid if they want a happy meal or toy and keep saying no despite the fact they are screaming and carrying on. They either eat their vegetables or go to sleep hungry. Most parents just cave in because they don't want to listen to their kid screaming. I've been playing violent video games since I was 3. One of my favorite games was Wolfenstein 3D (not that I actually understood what you were killing). I turned out just fine. Its up to the parents to tell their kids that what happens in a movie is NOT real. Even when I was 3 I could tell the difference between fantasy and reality, and with good parents, most kids can. People who are seriously impressionable by tv have some deeper lying mental problem.

Using yourself as an example for the rest of humankind would be highly inaccurate.
You yourself may be immune to whatever violent video games you have played since you were three, and you must have been a very bright child to understand the difference between reality and fantasy at such a young age. But not everyone is exactly the same. I looked back on my preschool yearbook, and 99% of the girls said they either wanted to be a princess or a fairy when they grew up.
You cannot deny that most little kids these days can't just absorb violent images daily and not have an image of it later on. Most 3 year-olds are still practicing how to walk and talk properly.
Also, yes, the parents technically can say "no. either eat the greens, or go hungry."
But honestly, which parent these days does that? Not all parents cave in because they hate screaming kids. Parents aren't machines-most of them love their kids. Some parents also don't know any better and give their kids the best they can because they can't resist their cute little faces. a huge portion of the population eats junk food on a daily basis. Kids simply take it as junk food should be part of their regular diet, and that it's perfectly fine to eat it all the time.
And commercials are real. Parents can't just say "oh, that hamburger isn't real." to a kid, because it is. But parents can tell kids that the junk food is bad for them. I'm not trying to say parents don't play a role at all. They do. And a big one in fact. But I'm just trying to say that bad parenting isn't the whole reason why kids eat junk food.
You must admit, most people eat junk food every once in a while. In my opinion, the biggest problem is self-control.
My parents didn't care if I ate junk food or not (they mostly cared about math and whatnot). I didn't shove handfuls of chips in my mouth, or drink soda instead of water every day. In fact, I rarely had soda available in the house. Why do you need soda when you have water?

I think we're getting slightly off the topic of "junk food commercials", but it's fun to debate anyways

This post has been edited by IndigoBlue: Nov 16 2011, 11:41 PM

[Ariana Grande]

People choose to buy the food.
The commercial didn't buy it for them.

Look at it from the businessman's perspective.
He wants money, so he needs to advertise.
Advertise=more money

Instead of blaming commercials, start taking responsibility and blame yourself.
People nowadays never want to be the reason for a problem and always have to point fingers, when in reality they were a part of the problem.

[BarkingChaos]

Your logic does not compute. Its still up to a parent to say no. Kids have no power over what they do unless the parent lets them. A parent can say no to the kid if they want a happy meal or toy and keep saying no despite the fact they are screaming and carrying on. They either eat their vegetables or go to sleep hungry. Most parents just cave in because they don't want to listen to their kid screaming. I've been playing violent video games since I was 3. One of my favorite games was Wolfenstein 3D (not that I actually understood what you were killing). I turned out just fine. Its up to the parents to tell their kids that what happens in a movie is NOT real. Even when I was 3 I could tell the difference between fantasy and reality, and with good parents, most kids can. People who are seriously impressionable by tv have some deeper lying mental problem.

Using yourself as an example for the rest of humankind would be highly inaccurate.
You yourself may be immune to whatever violent video games you have played since you were three, and you must have been a very bright child to understand the difference between reality and fantasy at such a young age. But not everyone is exactly the same. I looked back on my preschool yearbook, and 99% of the girls said they either wanted to be a princess or a fairy when they grew up.
You cannot deny that most little kids these days can't just absorb violent images daily and not have an image of it later on. Most 3 year-olds are still practicing how to walk and talk properly.
Also, yes, the parents technically can say "no. either eat the greens, or go hungry."
But honestly, which parent these days does that? Not all parents cave in because they hate screaming kids. Parents aren't machines-most of them love their kids. Some parents also don't know any better and give their kids the best they can because they can't resist their cute little faces. a huge portion of the population eats junk food on a daily basis. Kids simply take it as junk food should be part of their regular diet, and that it's perfectly fine to eat it all the time.
And commercials are real. Parents can't just say "oh, that hamburger isn't real." to a kid, because it is. But parents can tell kids that the junk food is bad for them. I'm not trying to say parents don't play a role at all. They do. And a big one in fact. But I'm just trying to say that bad parenting isn't the whole reason why kids eat junk food.
You must admit, most people eat junk food every once in a while. In my opinion, the biggest problem is self-control.
My parents didn't care if I ate junk food or not (they mostly cared about math and whatnot). I didn't shove handfuls of chips in my mouth, or drink soda instead of water every day. In fact, I rarely had soda available in the house. Why do you need soda when you have water?

I think we're getting slightly off the topic of "junk food commercials", but it's fun to debate anyways

My parents taught me at a very young age that not everything I see is real. I guess the video game thing was a bad example as it has nothing to really do with this topic. I'm not even sure why I went off in the direction to begin with

I guess what I'm trying to say is that up until the kid can fend for themselves, its the parents job. And until the kid has a car, its the parents job to keep junk food out of the house. And like I said, most parents give their kid what they want so they dont have to listen to the screaming.

I understand that kids see all these fast food things, people eating fast food, but unless their parents tell them that junk food is ok to eat in moderation, they will think its ok to eat every day. I just don't think its entirely a commercials fault. Companies need to advertise their products to make business, even fast food companies.

This post has been edited by BarkingChaos: Nov 17 2011, 05:00 PM

[IndigoRain]

Your logic does not compute. Its still up to a parent to say no. Kids have no power over what they do unless the parent lets them. A parent can say no to the kid if they want a happy meal or toy and keep saying no despite the fact they are screaming and carrying on. They either eat their vegetables or go to sleep hungry. Most parents just cave in because they don't want to listen to their kid screaming. I've been playing violent video games since I was 3. One of my favorite games was Wolfenstein 3D (not that I actually understood what you were killing). I turned out just fine. Its up to the parents to tell their kids that what happens in a movie is NOT real. Even when I was 3 I could tell the difference between fantasy and reality, and with good parents, most kids can. People who are seriously impressionable by tv have some deeper lying mental problem.

Using yourself as an example for the rest of humankind would be highly inaccurate.
You yourself may be immune to whatever violent video games you have played since you were three, and you must have been a very bright child to understand the difference between reality and fantasy at such a young age. But not everyone is exactly the same. I looked back on my preschool yearbook, and 99% of the girls said they either wanted to be a princess or a fairy when they grew up.
You cannot deny that most little kids these days can't just absorb violent images daily and not have an image of it later on. Most 3 year-olds are still practicing how to walk and talk properly.
Also, yes, the parents technically can say "no. either eat the greens, or go hungry."
But honestly, which parent these days does that? Not all parents cave in because they hate screaming kids. Parents aren't machines-most of them love their kids. Some parents also don't know any better and give their kids the best they can because they can't resist their cute little faces. a huge portion of the population eats junk food on a daily basis. Kids simply take it as junk food should be part of their regular diet, and that it's perfectly fine to eat it all the time.
And commercials are real. Parents can't just say "oh, that hamburger isn't real." to a kid, because it is. But parents can tell kids that the junk food is bad for them. I'm not trying to say parents don't play a role at all. They do. And a big one in fact. But I'm just trying to say that bad parenting isn't the whole reason why kids eat junk food.
You must admit, most people eat junk food every once in a while. In my opinion, the biggest problem is self-control.
My parents didn't care if I ate junk food or not (they mostly cared about math and whatnot). I didn't shove handfuls of chips in my mouth, or drink soda instead of water every day. In fact, I rarely had soda available in the house. Why do you need soda when you have water?

I think we're getting slightly off the topic of "junk food commercials", but it's fun to debate anyways

My parents taught me at a very young age that not everything I see is real. I guess the video game thing was a bad example as it has nothing to really do with this topic. I'm not even sure why I went off in the direction to begin with

I guess what I'm trying to say is that up until the kid can fend for themselves, its the parents job. And until the kid has a car, its the parents job to keep junk food out of the house. And like I said, most parents give their kid what they want so they dont have to listen to the screaming.

I understand that kids see all these fast food things, people eating fast food, but unless their parents tell them that junk food is ok to eat in moderation, they will think its ok to eat every day. I just don't think its entirely a commercials fault. Companies need to advertise their products to make business, even fast food companies.

I agree that all companies have to advertise to make business. No business, no company.
But some of advertisements have huge lies in them.
For example, McDonald's advertising their "healthy" salads.

[Lord Raven]

People choose to buy the food.
The commercial didn't buy it for them.

Look at it from the businessman's perspective.
He wants money, so he needs to advertise.
Advertise=more money

Instead of blaming commercials, start taking responsibility and blame yourself.
People nowadays never want to be the reason for a problem and always have to point fingers, when in reality they were a part of the problem.

For someone with an avatar I really like, you are simplifying the situation far too much. It doesn't matter who is "at fault" because if obesity rates are increasing then something _really_ needs to be done and seeing the same ad about the same food that is fucking terrible for you does not help matters. It adds to a craving, in fact, and many times it is extremely difficult to resist temptation. People can blame themselves all they want but it won't help them fix shit.

Fuck this capitalistic economy, you can screw up people's health all you want and you will be hidden behind the veil of "it was their choice!" You don't just tell someone to commit suicide and them blame the person when they do it, do you? Because it's obvious that your words were at least partially relevant.

[The Unholy Diver]

This is just like this one sinerio i heard of. This famous guy was mad for some reason and told his audience to kill someone. The audience acctually followed through. Wich is to blame? both!

Same thing here. People are idiotic enough to be brainwashed by commercials, and people are also addicted to junk food. Notice how both sentences used "people", meaning that it is a viewer's fault mostly.
The only time it is the commercials fault is when the commercial lies.
Earlier i read a reference to "supersize me". If you watched it, you wil see that the salads have almost as much calories as the burgers. The snack size parfet(yogurt) was ok, but extremely small. the regular had as many calories as a strawberry sundae, and the regular with granola had as much as the chocolate or caramel sundae!!!! I don't see how that could possably be "healthy". those commercials are technically illeagal, and yet the food places are allowed to show them.

[Poqle McBeth]

What is considered "healthy" can be subjective to people as well, though. As said before, the salads are not the healthiest, but are healthier than getting, say, a Big Mac. Does that count as healthy? What is the official definition of what food is healthy and what food isn't? McDonald's doesn't kill people with ecoli poisoning, does that make it technically healthy? America officially has pizza down as a vegetable. Is that healthy, then? The subjective-ness surrounding it makes their propaganda commercials nearly untouchable when it comes to false advertising.

[The Unholy Diver]

Here is what is healthy:
by definition, a good source of a nutrient is between 5 and 20%
an exelent scource of a nutrient is 20% and up.

Supposedly, if it has a good scource of a nutrient, even fat or saturated fat or cholesterol, it is healthy. That is what allows mcdonalds and other food companys to say that their food is healthy. This is propaganda. I think that a new law should be passed that makes people unable to say food is "good" or "healthy" unless is is a good or excelent scource of any nutrition OTHER than fat, trans fat, monounsaturated fat, polyunsaturated fat, saturated fat, cholesterol, or sodium. Also, it would have to be under 500 calories. If we do that, we can stop the companies from lyeing.

im not saying remove anything from the menu or stop advertising because it is unhealthy, just stop lying about how it is so "good for you" and how it is a "better burger" and all of that. Basicaly, i am saying that they shouldn't be able to lie like that. they should advertise, but not try to brainwash people into believeing that its healthy. If someone wants to be like me and eat unhealthy, so be it. don't remove anything, just stop trying to pass your salad off as healthy.

This post has been edited by zerohundred: May 27 2012, 11:54 AM

[Poqle McBeth]

Here is what is healthy:
by definition, a good source of a nutrient is between 5 and 20%
an exelent scource of a nutrient is 20% and up.

Where'd you get this information?

[bijoukaiba]

Here is what is healthy:
by definition, a good source of a nutrient is between 5 and 20%
an exelent scource of a nutrient is 20% and up.

Where'd you get this information?

I, too, question this.

Also, in response to zerohundred's statement that:

Supposedly, if it has a good scource of a nutrient, even fat or saturated fat or cholesterol, it is healthy. That is what allows mcdonalds and other food companys to say that their food is healthy.

If that 'good source is x% and excellent source is y%' statement is true, then it could be argued that McDonalds is not necessarily using fat as the nutrient they are trying to advertise. If you read over their nutrition facts:

nutrition.mcdonalds.com/nutritionexchange/nutritionfacts.pdf

You would see that technically, by your definition of "good" and "excellent", McDonald's foods actually are quite "healthy". A double quarter-pounder with cheese, for instance, although it does contain over 700 calories, 65% of your DV for fat, and even 95% of the DV for saturated fat... it also provides you with 11% of your recommended daily fiber, 48g of protein, 10% of the DV for Vitamin A, 30% DV for calcium, and 35% DV for iron (after all, there's a lot of meat and cheese on that sandwich). I'm not trying to sound like I'm siding with McDonald's, because it's pretty obvious that most - if not all - of their menu items are unhealthy, but a food item that offered 30% DV calcium and 35% DV iron IN OTHER CIRCUMSTANCES could be pretty healthy.

The thing is, not all food can be 100% healthy because not all nutrients are perfect. The body does need calories for energy. It does need fat (to an extent). It does need carbs, protein, vitamins, minerals, and more. The problem is knowing what your own limits are.

Spinach, for example, is highly praised as a healthy food. It contains a large number of vitamins (particularly Vitamin K, as a 100g serving contains 460% of your DV for Vit. K). It's also pretty high in iron (21% DV, 100g). It also contains some calcium, but it also contains oxalate, which prevents full absorption of the calcium. What's more, diets high in oxalate can lead to kidney stones - and those aren't exactly an "I'll get over it" medical condition. I would know, I had one in November and it HURT.

This post has been edited by bijoukaiba: May 27 2012, 05:28 PM

[The Unholy Diver]

Here is what is healthy:
by definition, a good source of a nutrient is between 5 and 20%
an exelent scource of a nutrient is 20% and up.

Where'd you get this information?

I, too, question this.

*editted for space.*

health class. The sort of information only someone in school currently would know because health things like this isn't neccisarily circulated for some reason. anyway, I forgot to mention the "ecxelent scource" may sometimes be limmited to 25% for lesser needed things like fat. the thing is, you can survive up to a month without food, so obviously you don't need fat as much as everything else. Too much of anything is never a good thing.
But more on topic, The commercials are at fault just as much as people are. like i said before, people are at fault too. Stopping fast food commercials will probably only have a negative effect on our economy. It won't help much unless people stop letting themselves be brainwashed by this.

But, as mercinary raven said

Fuck this capitalistic economy, you can screw up people's health all you want and you will be hidden behind the veil of "it was their choice!" You don't just tell someone to commit suicide and them blame the person when they do it, do you? Because it's obvious that your words were at least partially relevant.

The commercials are just as much to blame as the people.

[bijoukaiba]

http://www.fda.gov/Food/GuidanceCompliance...e/ucm064916.htm

Well, I did find an official website that defines what is makes a "good source" or "excellent source" of x nutrient. It could still be argued that technically, most of McDonald's food could be labeled as a good/excellent source of iron or calcium.

But McDonald's can't come out and officially state that their food is "healthy" unless it meets the conditions listed on the website, if I understood correctly. For example, it has to meet the "low fat" condition.

[Yuno Gasai]

Being someone who's suffered with various eating disorders, is vegetarian and has parents who struggle with obesity this is something I feel very strongly about and I could write for hours. But I won't.

I will say however that I very much disagree with the way some companies attract customers and the dishonesty when it comes to their products and what they're really doing with them.

I recommend watching Supersize Me and watching the Meat Video on youtube if you've not already seen them.

Anyway, IMO people with obesity and who suffer from compulsive over eating or the likes (Which is by the looks of it the majority of the USA and a large number of the UK sadly) should not have cheap, unhealthy, fast food products shoved in their faces all day everyday. It's the same as going up to alcoholics and saying "Hey look at all this cheap delicious whiskey. You should buy some and drink it NOW."
These people have struggles and addictions and a lot of companies take advantage of that.

This post has been edited by AllTheCoolNamesAreTaken: Jun 7 2012, 05:11 AM

[The Unholy Diver]

Being someone who's suffered with various eating disorders, is vegetarian and has parents who struggle with obesity this is something I feel very strongly about and I could write for hours. But I won't.

I will say however that I very much disagree with the way some companies attract customers and the dishonesty when it comes to their products and what they're really doing with them.

I recommend watching Supersize Me and watching the Meat Video on youtube if you've not already seen them.

Anyway, IMO people with obesity and who suffer from compulsive over eating or the likes (Which is by the looks of it the majority of the USA and a large number of the UK sadly) should not have cheap, unhealthy, fast food products shoved in their faces all day everyday. It's the same as going up to alcoholics and saying "Hey look at all this cheap delicious whiskey. You should buy some and drink it NOW."
These people have struggles and addictions and a lot of companies take advantage of that.

This is a valid point. Food addiction and drug addiction have the exact same effect on the brain's chemestry. You don't see a commercial advertising cocaine or marojuana, do you? Even beer commercials are limmited, so why is it leagal for junk food commercials to be so common and so dishonest? As you said earlier, it's just like a beer commercial to an alchaholic.
But the thing is, fast food commercials are way more common than beer commercials! Plus, our screwed up scociety says it's ok to show theese commercial around kids and it's fine if the kids get addicted! Better yet, that beer commercial is considered a "negative influence" when the fast food commercial that is addicting and deadly at the same level is perfectly fine.
Not only that, kids are introduced to this at such a young age it's impossable to stop them from being addicted so they're hooked for life. If parents could just say "no" to their screaming kids who want mcdonald's or wendy's, we wouldn't need this discusion and our country would be alot healthier.
All I'm saying is that people should stop being stupid and food companies should stop propaganating all of this nonsense and have a straightforward, simple add that doesn't lie and get people addicted.

This post has been edited by zerohundred: Jun 8 2012, 02:10 PM