Should addictive food substances be limited or banned altogether?

  • xKorix

    Posts: 607

    Sep 25, 2013 8:35 PM GMT
    I don't think this is a normally talked about issue and it does fall outside the usual topics, but what do you think? Myself, I'm kind of seeing the junk food industry more like legal drug peddlers than anything else. Junk food has actually become a careful science. The products are engineered and studied to create and maximize that junk food high. They attempt to make people addicted by studying the food's effect on brain, brain receptors, etc. It's kind of scary and who knows what kind of new techniques or additives they could add in the next 10 or 20 years, perfecting the science of junk food high. Consider how much food has changed since the 70's, 80's, etc. To be honest it actually kind of scares me and a lot of people have grown kind of numb and apathetic to the reality of it.

    I'm all for personal responsibility but what worries me is vulnerable people(children who are over-marketed too, people who don't have access to good information, or people suffering from high stress or mental stress, etc.) and also the fact that, there's not a lot of information out there about this subject. What's in junk food? How's it made? What does it do to you? What are the chemicals? etc. There's no warnings on the packages(What you're holding and about to consume is addictive by design), not a lot of concern from media sources, etc. I think everybody needs to take responsibility including the people who create and mass-market this "food". I'd put junk food in a dangerous category such as cigarettes and think it should be treated that way. I feel like the reality and full impact of this is being diluted or downplayed so it doesn't really click with people how sinister, harmful and unnatural this really is. It is similar to legal drug peddling.

    Interesting article about the subject.

    http://www.policymic.com/articles/28009/the-science-behind-your-likely-addiction-to-junk-food
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 28, 2013 6:55 PM GMT
    Well, obesity is rising in developing countries and companies only care about making a profit. There is still a problem with obesity in the US and banning may help somewhat. It is the companies that need to look for healthier choices while keeping a high revenue.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 28, 2013 7:09 PM GMT
    No
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 28, 2013 7:11 PM GMT
    "Addictive" substances in my mind are nothing short of drugs. So yes, if it's proven to be addictive AND a man made chemical, I think it should be banned.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 29, 2013 9:48 AM GMT
    However banning it would require stricter and harsher punishment.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 29, 2013 11:20 AM GMT
    The world is over-populated by incredibly stupid people, because the stupids breed at a much higher rate than smart and responsible people. Instead of outlawing foods that the stupids enjoy, why not get right to the point and require an IQ check before anyone is allowed to breed? If you can pass the IQ test, you then must apply for a license to parent, which would require people to be educated about proper parenting techniques, including diet and exercise.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 29, 2013 1:44 PM GMT
    Banning things never eliminates them, it only makes them" go underground" See prohibition in the early 20th century USA. Also, who's to say whats " bad" lots of things can be addictive even outside of foods. Better ban all GYMS because for SOME it becomes and addictive obsession....... and so on and so-forth.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 29, 2013 8:28 PM GMT
    Amylopectin A should be banned. It is worse than methamphetamine AND heroin COMBINED! icon_eek.gif
  • Rhi_Bran

    Posts: 904

    Sep 30, 2013 2:27 AM GMT
    smartmoney saidThe world is over-populated by incredibly stupid people, because the stupids breed at a much higher rate than smart and responsible people. Instead of outlawing foods that the stupids enjoy, why not get right to the point and require an IQ check before anyone is allowed to breed? If you can pass the IQ test, you then must apply for a license to parent, which would require people to be educated about proper parenting techniques, including diet and exercise.


    As much as this screams "eugenics" to me, I kind of want to agree. It's okay if you yourself want to live like a slob and waste your life, but don't pass that crap on to future generations. I suppose there's a difference between selecting for genes and selecting against bad habits, though...