viscousmemories

I saw this article in the paper yesterday about some major reforms fast food and junk food manufacturers are making to their entire product line, in an effort to make their foods more healthy. This movement to offer less fattening alternatives to a citizenry that is mostly obese seems to me to be inarguably positive.
The catch is, these companies seem to be making this move not because it's the right thing to do, but because they are afraid that they'll lose billions in legal battles against obese people.

I know a lot of people think our hyper-litigious society is pathetic, but don't massive, sweeping positive movements like this illustrate a very definite benefit to the fear of lawsuits these huge companies have?

vm

Kinross

I don't think an over litigious society is a good thing. There are already many healthful foods out there. Packages are clearly labeled with calories, fat, carbs, and protein content. You cannot claim to be ignorant on what you are putting into your body.

People make a choice on what to eat and must face the consequences of that choice. I choose to eat non-processed foods but on occasion I like to have some Kraft Macaroni and Cheese, I just have it in moderation.

Companies are now being black mailed to limit consumer choice for fear of being sued because a few are unable to take responsibility for their actions.

viscousmemories

Fair enough, but I didn't ask if having an overly litigious society is a good thing. I asked how we can deny that there are some benefits to it. More specifically, I should have said "In a market economy, is there a better way to force the hand of giant corporations than fear of litigation?"But as the article I linked to points out, the majority of the consumers of these products are children. Should they be expected to weigh the costs of eating the foods they do? Are children equipped to see through the clever marketing strategies of the behemoth junk food peddlers and make healthy choices? At any rate, they didn't say they were going to eliminate their more unhealthy foods, but increase their healthy food offerings.You assume that everyone has the same level of control over their impulses that you do. Is it safe to assume that there are no areas of your life where you over-indulge, or are you just being biased against overeaters because you don't happen to be one yourself? But that's a whole other question. The point is that there are a lot more factors at work than simple choice. Time, financial resources, susceptibility to advertising, etc. all play a part in what we choose to eat. I don't see how making the overall offerings more healthy can possibly be construed as a negative.I disagree that "consumer choice" takes precedence over corporate responsibility. I can't order a Jack Russell burger at Wendy's, and frankly it would probably be healthier than half the stuff on their menu. Are they limiting my choice? You bet. Is there a good reason for that? Arguable, but I'd probably let the pet owners here take up that battle.

vm

King Rat

[ledzeppelin]N-n-n-n-nobody's fault but mi-ine[/ledzeppelin]

Don't ask me though, I think the suits against the tobacco companies was wrong too. I have this crazy hang-up about personal freedoms and consequent personal responsibility.

viscousmemories

That does seem like a bit of a crazy hang-up to me. So you don't believe that some of the wealthiest and most powerful companies in the world, utilizing decades of extensive psychological research, were able to in any way influence consumers choices in favor of disregarding health concerns and consuming their extremely physically and mentally addictive product? Or you just think they were acting well within their rights as a corporation, as the junk food giants are as well?

King Rat

So you were brainwashed into smoking? Wow, cool! Any consumer that is so weak-willed as to be "influenced" by some stoopid tobacky ad in Playboy does not get any sympathy from me.

I'm kind of a dick that way.

viscousmemories

Brainwashing isn't mythology, Mr. Rat. It's psychology. Its effect is measurable. Corporations such as the tobacco giants have been utilizing its effect against the population for as long as they've known this, and waving your hands in the air and saying "I'm bigger than them and all you weak-minded people" is to deny these facts. Contrary to your insinuations, this doesn't make you look really strong minded.
I'll take your word on that.

vm

King Rat

I never said that brainwashing was myth, and strong minded? More like psychotically obstinate. I don't recall insinuating a dern thing. I came right out and said it.

I'm pretty good about putting words in my own mouth, thank you very much.

Jimmy Higgins

If I'm not mistaken, tobacco companies were liable for putting in addictive ingredients that they weren't disclosing.

King Rat

You are not mistaken. If it is found that fast food franchises are doing something similar, lets hang 'em high. If not, it's just food that is bad for you. Sir, put down the Twinkie and nobody gets hurt.

I've always been suspicious of KFC, that stuff is worse than cocaine.