<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Grinds My Gears &#8211; 60 Minutes Fat Report</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.roweware.com/2007/11/19/grinds-my-gears-60-minutes-fat-report/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.roweware.com/2007/11/19/grinds-my-gears-60-minutes-fat-report/</link>
	<description>Ramblings about things I think I know...</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 07 Sep 2011 13:12:56 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jon</title>
		<link>http://blog.roweware.com/2007/11/19/grinds-my-gears-60-minutes-fat-report/comment-page-1/#comment-229</link>
		<dc:creator>Jon</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 Nov 2007 04:13:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.roweware.com/2007/11/19/grinds-my-gears-60-minutes-fat-report/#comment-229</guid>
		<description>Ah, but if we have a national health care system then I want to outlaw McDonald&#039;s.  Or at least put a heavy tax of $2 for each Big Mac sold.  Since these people who eat at Mickey-D&#039;s so often will no doubt have higher cholesterol and thus need their Lipitor,  they then should have to pay more into the system for their poor eating habits.

I&#039;m being sarcastic about this, but you see where this could go.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ah, but if we have a national health care system then I want to outlaw McDonald&#8217;s.  Or at least put a heavy tax of $2 for each Big Mac sold.  Since these people who eat at Mickey-D&#8217;s so often will no doubt have higher cholesterol and thus need their Lipitor,  they then should have to pay more into the system for their poor eating habits.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m being sarcastic about this, but you see where this could go.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: dave</title>
		<link>http://blog.roweware.com/2007/11/19/grinds-my-gears-60-minutes-fat-report/comment-page-1/#comment-228</link>
		<dc:creator>dave</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 20 Nov 2007 04:07:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.roweware.com/2007/11/19/grinds-my-gears-60-minutes-fat-report/#comment-228</guid>
		<description>Ah, but there&#039;s the rub.  The FDA has already deemed the food &#039;edible&#039; (McDonald&#039;s is still open, right?), the issue is not whether the food is &#039;edible&#039; or not, the issue is trying to beat people over the head with the &quot;wrong&quot; decision.  And is it the wrong decision to eat McDonald&#039;s?  I think it is, which is why I rarely eat there, but I have no right to say it&#039;s the wrong decision for someone else.  I understand that McDonald&#039;s has alot of calories and fat, as does alot of fast food.  The nutritional facts are posted at the restaurant already, why force the companies to further clutter up the menu with the calories and fat directly on the menu?

Trying to post _more_ nutritional information won&#039;t accomplish anything.  If people ignore it now, why won&#039;t they later?

I&#039;m just saying.  The money could&#039;ve been spent on PSAs (or something) on healthy eating, rather than creating another bureaucratic mess trying to regulate companies on how much nutritional information is on the menu / wrappers.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ah, but there&#8217;s the rub.  The FDA has already deemed the food &#8216;edible&#8217; (McDonald&#8217;s is still open, right?), the issue is not whether the food is &#8216;edible&#8217; or not, the issue is trying to beat people over the head with the &#8220;wrong&#8221; decision.  And is it the wrong decision to eat McDonald&#8217;s?  I think it is, which is why I rarely eat there, but I have no right to say it&#8217;s the wrong decision for someone else.  I understand that McDonald&#8217;s has alot of calories and fat, as does alot of fast food.  The nutritional facts are posted at the restaurant already, why force the companies to further clutter up the menu with the calories and fat directly on the menu?</p>
<p>Trying to post _more_ nutritional information won&#8217;t accomplish anything.  If people ignore it now, why won&#8217;t they later?</p>
<p>I&#8217;m just saying.  The money could&#8217;ve been spent on PSAs (or something) on healthy eating, rather than creating another bureaucratic mess trying to regulate companies on how much nutritional information is on the menu / wrappers.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: raj</title>
		<link>http://blog.roweware.com/2007/11/19/grinds-my-gears-60-minutes-fat-report/comment-page-1/#comment-227</link>
		<dc:creator>raj</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Nov 2007 23:19:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.roweware.com/2007/11/19/grinds-my-gears-60-minutes-fat-report/#comment-227</guid>
		<description>I agree that it is the consumer&#039;s responsibility to make wise choices about what they eat, but I don&#039;t think that abdicates McDonald&#039;s (or any other restaurant) of all responsibility.

We have laws about what substances pharmaceutical companies can sell.  We tell them that they can&#039;t sell cocaine.  There would probably be a huge market for it, even though people know it&#039;s addictive and bad for them.

If they can&#039;t sell a horribly damaging product and label it as a &quot;medicine,&quot; then why should McDonald&#039;s be allowed to sell a horribly damaging product and call it &quot;food&quot;?

Obviously there are differences.  Cocaine will get you hooked immediately and has no redeeming value (aside from perhaps pain relief), and cheeseburgers will only kill you when consumed in excess.

Either way, the point is that while it is ultimately the consumer&#039;s responsibility, I don&#039;t know that there&#039;s anything wrong with helping them make better choices.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I agree that it is the consumer&#8217;s responsibility to make wise choices about what they eat, but I don&#8217;t think that abdicates McDonald&#8217;s (or any other restaurant) of all responsibility.</p>
<p>We have laws about what substances pharmaceutical companies can sell.  We tell them that they can&#8217;t sell cocaine.  There would probably be a huge market for it, even though people know it&#8217;s addictive and bad for them.</p>
<p>If they can&#8217;t sell a horribly damaging product and label it as a &#8220;medicine,&#8221; then why should McDonald&#8217;s be allowed to sell a horribly damaging product and call it &#8220;food&#8221;?</p>
<p>Obviously there are differences.  Cocaine will get you hooked immediately and has no redeeming value (aside from perhaps pain relief), and cheeseburgers will only kill you when consumed in excess.</p>
<p>Either way, the point is that while it is ultimately the consumer&#8217;s responsibility, I don&#8217;t know that there&#8217;s anything wrong with helping them make better choices.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

