Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
At some point, you just have to accept that it's fething bonkers to expect every person to make an informed decision on every additive put in to their food. You have to accept that it is simply more efficient for society as a whole to identify products that no person would ever make an informed decision to consume, and to just remove that stuff from food.
It's also fething bonkers to expect every person to be fine with letting a government make your eating decisions for you.
And the government isn't telling anybody that they can't eat trans fats. Nobody is going to get punished for eating trans fats, so this whole "I should be able to eat what I want" argument is pretty stupid.
The government can however regulate what kind of foods and additives are sold. Which is of course quite a bit different from telling you what you can stuff in your mouth.
It's an important distinction, but one that seems like it has been ignored over the last 8 pages.
I hope that you read the labels on any ingridients that your friends might use for their jerky.
Does freshly killed and then dried deer meat have some I don't know about? Maybe salt and pepper does too? Contrary to popular belief, you don't have to put loads of gak on your meat to make it taste good. Meat is good just the way it is.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/11/11 09:12:03
Does freshly killed and then dried deer meat have some I don't know about? Contrary to popular belief, you don't have to put loads of gak on your meat to make it taste good. Meat is good just the way it is.
Are you talking about "dried deer meat" or are you talking about Jerky?
If you are using arbitrary definitions that only you know then you must excuse us for having a hard time following you. Most people have a specific type of preparation in mind when they hear people talk about jerky, which usually includes marinates and/or seasonings.
But if you are using jerky to simply imply the drying of meat, then please proceed. And if you know 100% for certain that your friends don't use any additives or commercial spices on their dried meat strips, then you are safe.
Although you should probably look through their cabinets just to make sure there is nothing they might be using that you don't agree with.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/11/11 09:17:36
I've made It with them before a few times. Fanciest we ever get is Garlic, honey, and paprika. Usually it's a simple salt and peppering of the meat, then into the dehydrator (or oven)
I mean, jerky is simply dried meat..... There's literally no reason to marinade it if you don't want to. And there's definitely no reason to use a cure.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2013/11/11 09:28:51
cincydooley wrote: I've made It with them before a few times. Fanciest we ever get is Garlic, honey, and paprika. Usually it's a simple salt and peppering of the meat, then into the dehydrator (or oven)
I mean, jerky is simply dried meat..... There's literally no reason to marinade it if you don't want to. And there's definitely no reason to use a cure.
Well, lot's of people do. Which is the reason why I asked "I hope you read the labels of what your friends are using". Which would also require knowing what they use, which you do.
You have go to easy on it though. It's one of those ingredients that makes things bitter super fast if you overuse it.
d-usa wrote: The government can however regulate what kind of foods and additives are sold. Which is of course quite a bit different from telling you what you can stuff in your mouth.
....but.... but.... FREEDOM!
You guys remember that scandal in China a few years ago, where they sold tainted powdered milk, and a bunch of babies died? I believe they executed the head of their (equivalent to the) FDA over that.
It seems like some people here think the invisible hand of the free market should take care of that - that if milk powder is tainted and kills enough babies, why, people will just stop buying that brand. No big-government bureaucrat should be telling these guys not to adulterate food with melamine, right? So long as it's on the label, caveat emptor and all.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2013/11/11 12:56:13
lord_blackfang wrote: Respect to the guy who subscribed just to post a massive ASCII dong in the chat and immediately get banned.
Flinty wrote: The benefit of slate is that its.actually a.rock with rock like properties. The downside is that it's a rock
Seaward wrote: It turns out that all food will eventually kill you.
Ban everything.
Indeed. I mean seriously, why is Methanol in drinking alcohol banned anyway? When I say I want to get blind drunk, I'm not being metaphorical! Bloody government types, limiting the amount of methanol in my Vodak.
Looking for a club in Brisbane, Australia? Come and enjoy a game and a beer at Pubhammer, our friendly club in a pub at the Junction pub in Annerley (opposite Ace Comics), Sunday nights from 6:30. All brisbanites welcome, don't wait, check out our Club Page on Facebook group for details or to organize a game. We play all sorts of board and war games, so hit us up if you're interested.
Pubhammer is Moving! Starting from the 25th of May we'll be gaming at The Junction pub (AKA The Muddy Farmer), opposite Ace Comics & Games in Annerley! Still Sunday nights from 6:30 in the Function room Come along and play Warmachine, 40k, boardgames or anything else!
The poor man really has a stake in the country. The rich man hasn't; he can go away to New Guinea in a yacht. The poor have sometimes objected to being governed badly; the rich have always objected to being governed at all
We love our superheroes because they refuse to give up on us. We can analyze them out of existence, kill them, ban them, mock them, and still they return, patiently reminding us of who we are and what we wish we could be.
"the play's the thing wherein I'll catch the conscience of the king,
Cows are 5d beings or higher. They incarnated on the 3d Earth to provide 5d food (beef) for humans. They provide 5d food for humans by converting 3d foods into 5d flesh.
Their main mission is to serve mankind by feeding you, thus helping you to return home.
Not sure about this.
I've long suspected that cows are up to something, they're always very shifty if you watch them. Preferably from a hide or similar.
"EMPOWERED ASCENSION"
or
IMMORTALITY
INITIATION WORKSHOPS
BY
WILEY BROOKS, BREATHARIAN AND FOUNDER OF
The Breatharian Institute of America
To do this workshop you must be able to spend 1 or 2 weeks traveling
to special places throughout the four corner states.
The students who complete this workshop will be the
spiritual leaders and teachers of the New World.
The workshop includes a visit to Earth Prime in the 5th Dimension
in your physical body if you are ready.
My Workshops are being extended to March 23, 2014
The cost of the workshop is $100,000.00 USD
The process starts with a $10,000.00 USD deposit which must be
received 30 days before the beginning date of workshop.
Click on Payment Information sub-tab
The poor man really has a stake in the country. The rich man hasn't; he can go away to New Guinea in a yacht. The poor have sometimes objected to being governed badly; the rich have always objected to being governed at all
We love our superheroes because they refuse to give up on us. We can analyze them out of existence, kill them, ban them, mock them, and still they return, patiently reminding us of who we are and what we wish we could be.
"the play's the thing wherein I'll catch the conscience of the king,
You know you're really doing something when you can make strangers hate you over the Internet. - Mauleed
Just remember folks. Panic. Panic all the time. It's the only way to survive, other than just being mindful, of course-but geez, that's so friggin' boring. - Aegis Grimm
Hallowed is the All Pie The Before Times: A Place That Celebrates The World That Was
I don't know, but it felt strange... it must be my stomach absorbing the sound frequencies!
See, you're trying to use people logic. DM uses Mandelogic, which we've established has 2+2=quack. - Aerethan
Putin.....would make a Vulcan Intelligence officer cry. - Jihadin
AFAIK, there is only one world, and it is the real world. - Iron_Captain
DakkaRank Comment: I sound like a Power Ranger.
TFOL and proud. Also a Forge World Fan.
I should really paint some of my models instead of browsing forums.
Putting additives in beef jerky is completely unnecessary.
And putting transfats in foods is also completely unecessary. And yet companies do it.
That is how ridiculous your argument has gotten - "oh you saw that word salad on the labeling and still chose to buy it when there are tons or options out there that don't have any of that gak in it".
And now you're just asserting that any additives should be rejected, even the ones that have no health implications. Which is both childishly simplistic, and also makes a mess of your main argument, as it leaves you arguing that government must not ban any product because people have the absolute right to buy products that no-one should ever buy.
You're basically trying to argue that it's terrible, just terrible that a choice might be removed from people, when it's a choice that you would never take, and don't think anyone should ever make. It's quickly reached the point where your argument is just as contrived, and just as boring as those lefties who always want to be offended on behalf of someone else.
It's also fething bonkers to expect every person to be fine with letting a government make your eating decisions for you.
Except, of course, we don't just give them free reign to go about banning as they please, like your grand conservative fantasy drives you to believe. They have a very limited hand, and only ban products when they have clear and significant negative health consequences, and the product is something that no person fully informed on the product would ever choose to consume.
“We may observe that the government in a civilized country is much more expensive than in a barbarous one; and when we say that one government is more expensive than another, it is the same as if we said that that one country is farther advanced in improvement than another. To say that the government is expensive and the people not oppressed is to say that the people are rich.”
Adam Smith, who must have been some kind of leftie or something.
Additionally: http://www.kravejerky.com/nutrition. You'll notice the "worst" thing there is evaporated cane sugar, which of course already eliminates many of the steps of the refining process and is arguably more "natural" than normal brown or white sugars.
People should be allowed to chose to eat trans fats if they want to. It isn't the governments place to ban them, unless they plan on banning everything that's bad for you, which would be categorically absurd.
Well, I'm glad you informed yourself here past the first result google returned you. Additionally, I think I may make you a t-shirt that says "as I already explained..." Since it's like, your go to catch phrase.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2013/11/13 03:02:32
If somebody wants to smoke, there is literally no way to get that without cigarettes. If somebody wants to fried chicken, there are plenty of ways to get that same flavour if transfats are banned.
People should be allowed to chose to eat trans fats if they want to. It isn't the governments place to ban them, unless they plan on banning everything that's bad for you, which would be categorically absurd.
This is ridiculous, I've stated several times that there's a condition for banning that doesn't involve just banning everything that's bad for a person;
"identify products that no person would ever make an informed decision to consume, and to just remove that stuff from food"
"I'm saying if it's a product that a person might make an informed choice to consume, after they'd weighed up the taste against the health costs, then its best practice to just make sure the consumer is informed, but let him make his own choice. But there's some ingredients that a person will only consume because they don't know they're in the product, or they don't understand how bad they are for them."
"The point is that in almost all cases that unhealthy choice has some kind of upside. McDonalds is convenient, and when you pick the couple of decent items on the menu then it tastes okay. So in that case there is way too much subjectivity to bad McDonald's, because for some people in some specific situations it is the optimum choice. So government takes a step back accepts that it's too subjective for them to step in and act in everyone's overall best interest, and just accepts that some portion of the population will over consume and do themselves considerable harm. But then there's other products where there simply is no upside. Clothing that is no way remarkable, but includes materials that are, like carcinogenic or something... we simply know that no person who is properly informed of the dangers of the product will choose it. A product that is chosen only through the ignorance of the consumer is not a choice that needs to be preserved. And transfats, with absolutely no upside, are a product just like that."
That's just going back over the last couple of pages of the thread in a quick skim. And one of the above statements was made directly to you. And despite that you are just completely oblivious of the point, and still acting as if the only possible conditions are 'government bans everything bad for us' and 'everything is legal and all responsibility to know about chemical gunk lies with the consumer'. You have as little idea of the possibility of another condition 'ban things that consumers would only choose to consume if they had no idea it was in the product, or no idea what harm it did' You just don't read any thread you post in. You completely waste your time here.
Well, I'm glad you informed yourself here past the first result google returned you. Additionally, I think I may make you a t-shirt that says "as I already explained..." Since it's like, your go to catch phrase.
I'm informed enough to know that most beef jerky is made through chemical processes that sound more like the development of rocket fuel than food, I just wasn't informed enough to know what exact list of chemicals is used in . So sorry I couldn't just rattle hydrolyzed soy protein, polysorbate 80, disodium inosinate off the top of my head. So sorry for going and actually getting some real world information to substantiate my point, I know how much you hate that kind of thing.
And yeah, I often type out 'as I already explained', just as I often repeat the same points to you over and over again. Because you don't read, don't consider, don't argue. You just sit there prattling the same couple of lines over and over again, because ultimately you just don't fething care if your argument makes any sense, you just want to crusade on behalf of your beliefs.
“We may observe that the government in a civilized country is much more expensive than in a barbarous one; and when we say that one government is more expensive than another, it is the same as if we said that that one country is farther advanced in improvement than another. To say that the government is expensive and the people not oppressed is to say that the people are rich.”
Adam Smith, who must have been some kind of leftie or something.
sebster wrote: And yeah, I often type out 'as I already explained', just as I often repeat the same points to you over and over again. Because you don't read, don't consider, don't argue. You just sit there prattling the same couple of lines over and over again, because ultimately you just don't fething care if your argument makes any sense, you just want to crusade on behalf of your beliefs.
It's just the way it is.
lord_blackfang wrote: Respect to the guy who subscribed just to post a massive ASCII dong in the chat and immediately get banned.
Flinty wrote: The benefit of slate is that its.actually a.rock with rock like properties. The downside is that it's a rock
As I already explained, I'm informed enough to kno that plenty of people make their own beef or deer jerky which looks nothing like the process for making rocket fuel, and I was informed enough to detail the process and then link to you the only beef jerky we buy that dpesnt include any list of chemicals. So sorry for going and actually getting some real world information prove you wrong; I know how much you hate admitting you're wrong about anything.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/11/13 03:56:03
Waiting for my shill money from Spiral Arm Studios
There are plenty of alternative to cigarettes that aren't as harmful. One of the best ways to get off them is a controlled dose of nicotine instead of smoking.
Yet we don't ban cigarettes. Why should we ban trans-fats when they are basically in the same situation. Something that's horribly bad for you which no sane person would choose.
People do plenty of things that nobody would make a rational decision to do. We aren't always rational beings. And its not the government's job to make that decision for us.
Label trans-fats, educate the feth out of people, put a tax on them if you want.
If we MUST ban trans-fats then by that same logic we should ban cigarettes.
At least trans-fats aren't guaranteed to kill you. Like alcohol, they aren't lethal unless consumed in unhealthy quantities, and paired with a lack of exercise. A cigarette addiction isn't safe under any circumstances.
It makes no more sense to ban trans-fats than it makes sense to ban cigarettes(also something nobody in their right mind would ever do)
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/11/13 04:04:54
Self-proclaimed evil Cat-person. Dues Ex Felines
Cato Sicarius, after force feeding Captain Ventris a copy of the Codex Astartes for having the audacity to play Deathwatch, chokes to death on his own D-baggery after finding Calgar assembling his new Eldar army.
Label trans-fats, educate the feth out of people, put a tax on them if you want.
If we MUST ban trans-fats then by that same logic we should ban cigarettes.
At least trans-fats aren't guaranteed to kill you. Like alcohol, they aren't lethal unless consumed in unhealthy quantities, and paired with a lack of exercise. A cigarette addiction isn't safe under any circumstances.
Insaniak has already concisely expressed the difference between these two situations 7 pages ago. Truly, the argument just loops around.
It is irrelevant that there would be tremendous uproar over banning Cigarettes, yet Trans-fats will not elicit the same response. It doesn't change the fact that one is miles and away worse for you, yet that one is perfectly legal and nobody would ever suggest banning it.
Everybody knows smoking is bad for you, thanks to all that education we've put forth on the subject. But people still have the choice to participate in it. If someone is willing to buy and consume trans-fats that is their choice.
Label what contains them, educate people, and let them decide. it is a complete waste of the government's time to ban trans-fats, not that they wouldn't find something else to waste time on but one less issue is an improvement.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/11/13 04:18:23
Self-proclaimed evil Cat-person. Dues Ex Felines
Cato Sicarius, after force feeding Captain Ventris a copy of the Codex Astartes for having the audacity to play Deathwatch, chokes to death on his own D-baggery after finding Calgar assembling his new Eldar army.
.
