Ban Ronald McDonald?

Post Reply

Should Ronald McDonald be banned?

Yes, ban him.
25
43%
No, don't ban him.
30
52%
Maybe/Not sure
3
5%
 
Total votes: 58

Coito ergo sum
Posts: 32040
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 2:03 pm
Contact:

Re: Ban Ronald McDonald?

Post by Coito ergo sum » Wed Apr 06, 2011 10:58 pm

hadespussercats wrote:
Warren Dew wrote:
sandinista wrote:fat people that don't eat meat? All 5 of them? :lol:
You might be surprised how many fat vegetarians there are.
Look at cows!
Cows are not fat. They're big-boned.

User avatar
sandinista
Posts: 2546
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 9:15 pm
About me: It’s a plot, but busta can you tell me who’s greedier?
Big corporations, the pigs or the media?
Contact:

Re: Ban Ronald McDonald?

Post by sandinista » Wed Apr 06, 2011 11:34 pm

Coito ergo sum wrote:
Yes, for the most part. Jane Doe's body is her body, and it's none of your business, really. If she wants to have an abortion, while smoking a joint, and shoving Big Macs up her ass and while chewing on a McRib, that should be her right. You have the right to comment on it, and I have the right to tell you but out. It's called liberty.
Where does this "liberty" you speak of exist?
Our struggle is not against actual corrupt individuals, but against those in power in general, against their authority, against the global order and the ideological mystification which sustains it.

User avatar
maiforpeace
Account Suspended at Member's Request
Posts: 15726
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 1:41 am
Location: under the redwood trees

Re: Ban Ronald McDonald?

Post by maiforpeace » Wed Apr 06, 2011 11:46 pm

Warren Dew wrote:
maiforpeace wrote:People who eat a lot of meat have a much stronger, stinky body odor, but I haven't sniffed close enough to smell the fry grease. ;)
On what do you base this?
Just personal experience. I might be wrong about this but I've spent time around my Vietnamese relatives and German relatives...the latter ate a lot more meat and carbs, and they had a much stronger body odor. That's not to say Vietnamese don't have their own smells but they tended to smell more garlicky.

I expect body odor is much stronger in fatter people because they perspire more.
Warren Dew wrote:
sandinista wrote:fat people that don't eat meat? All 5 of them? :lol:
You might be surprised how many fat vegetarians there are.


:this:

They often they make up their diet out of carbohydrates. And the animal products they do eat, dairy and eggs are the ones higher in fats.
Atheists have always argued that this world is all that we have, and that our duty is to one another to make the very most and best of it. ~Christopher Hitchens~
Image
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3534/379 ... 3be9_o.jpg[/imgc]

User avatar
sandinista
Posts: 2546
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 9:15 pm
About me: It’s a plot, but busta can you tell me who’s greedier?
Big corporations, the pigs or the media?
Contact:

Re: Ban Ronald McDonald?

Post by sandinista » Thu Apr 07, 2011 12:22 am

maiforpeace wrote:
Warren Dew wrote:
maiforpeace wrote:People who eat a lot of meat have a much stronger, stinky body odor, but I haven't sniffed close enough to smell the fry grease. ;)
On what do you base this?
Just personal experience. I might be wrong about this but I've spent time around my Vietnamese relatives and German relatives...the latter ate a lot more meat and carbs, and they had a much stronger body odor. That's not to say Vietnamese don't have their own smells but they tended to smell more garlicky.

I expect body odor is much stronger in fatter people because they perspire more.
Warren Dew wrote:
sandinista wrote:fat people that don't eat meat? All 5 of them? :lol:
You might be surprised how many fat vegetarians there are.


:this:

They often they make up their diet out of carbohydrates. And the animal products they do eat, dairy and eggs are the ones higher in fats.
:what: really? The reality is, if you lined up 100 obese north americans and asked which of them were vegetarian and which ate meat at least 90% would be meat eaters.

...and yes, I did the study myself. :dance:
Our struggle is not against actual corrupt individuals, but against those in power in general, against their authority, against the global order and the ideological mystification which sustains it.

User avatar
maiforpeace
Account Suspended at Member's Request
Posts: 15726
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 1:41 am
Location: under the redwood trees

Re: Ban Ronald McDonald?

Post by maiforpeace » Thu Apr 07, 2011 1:08 am

I'm not disagreeing with you, I'm just saying that vegetarians are often overweight.

On the other hand, I haven't met many fat vegans.
Atheists have always argued that this world is all that we have, and that our duty is to one another to make the very most and best of it. ~Christopher Hitchens~
Image
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3534/379 ... 3be9_o.jpg[/imgc]

User avatar
sandinista
Posts: 2546
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 9:15 pm
About me: It’s a plot, but busta can you tell me who’s greedier?
Big corporations, the pigs or the media?
Contact:

Re: Ban Ronald McDonald?

Post by sandinista » Thu Apr 07, 2011 1:09 am

maiforpeace wrote:I'm not disagreeing with you, I'm just saying that vegetarians are often overweight.

On the other hand, I haven't met many fat vegans.
I wouldn't go as far as to say "often". That's all. My only point is, not as often as meat eaters.
Our struggle is not against actual corrupt individuals, but against those in power in general, against their authority, against the global order and the ideological mystification which sustains it.

User avatar
Warren Dew
Posts: 3781
Joined: Thu Aug 19, 2010 1:41 pm
Location: Somerville, MA, USA
Contact:

Re: Ban Ronald McDonald?

Post by Warren Dew » Thu Apr 07, 2011 5:30 am

maiforpeace wrote:Just personal experience. I might be wrong about this but I've spent time around my Vietnamese relatives and German relatives...the latter ate a lot more meat and carbs, and they had a much stronger body odor. That's not to say Vietnamese don't have their own smells but they tended to smell more garlicky.
I always figured that was just Asians having less body odor, as long as you don't count halitosis. It could be diet, though ... but it could be the potatoes rather than the meat, too.
sandinista wrote::what: really? The reality is, if you lined up 100 obese north americans and asked which of them were vegetarian and which ate meat at least 90% would be meat eaters.
If you lined up 100 thin north americans, 90% would eat meat too.

Sisifo
Posts: 1252
Joined: Tue Aug 04, 2009 11:35 am

Re: Ban Ronald McDonald?

Post by Sisifo » Thu Apr 07, 2011 7:10 am

Sweat is odorless. Body odor comes from chemical and biological reactions on the sweat that take place at skin level (not from the glands) with the sweat, and that reaction is believed to be mostly genetically determined from a gene that also regulates ear wax, and other body mucus. Of course you can modify it slightly with diet (especially dairy intake and water. Lactate and urea are the main "stinkers" in the smell). But experimenting with a group who has the same diet, there will be differences genetically explained by the above. East Asians have less body odor but, for example, they have such dry earwax that there is an "ear unplugging" service in all beauty salons.

User avatar
sandinista
Posts: 2546
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 9:15 pm
About me: It’s a plot, but busta can you tell me who’s greedier?
Big corporations, the pigs or the media?
Contact:

Re: Ban Ronald McDonald?

Post by sandinista » Thu Apr 07, 2011 7:37 am

Warren Dew wrote:
maiforpeace wrote:J
sandinista wrote::what: really? The reality is, if you lined up 100 obese north americans and asked which of them were vegetarian and which ate meat at least 90% would be meat eaters.
If you lined up 100 thin north americans, 90% would eat meat too.
touche :duel:
Our struggle is not against actual corrupt individuals, but against those in power in general, against their authority, against the global order and the ideological mystification which sustains it.

Coito ergo sum
Posts: 32040
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 2:03 pm
Contact:

Re: Ban Ronald McDonald?

Post by Coito ergo sum » Thu Apr 07, 2011 12:49 pm

sandinista wrote:
Coito ergo sum wrote:
Yes, for the most part. Jane Doe's body is her body, and it's none of your business, really. If she wants to have an abortion, while smoking a joint, and shoving Big Macs up her ass and while chewing on a McRib, that should be her right. You have the right to comment on it, and I have the right to tell you but out. It's called liberty.
Where does this "liberty" you speak of exist?
The liberty to comment, and the liberty to tell others who comment to butt out? The right to abortions, Big Macs and McRibs? That exists here in the US. The liberty to smoke pot - that's a work in process. There isn't a place with absolute liberty, but because there isn't absolute liberty doesn't mean we throw it all out the window and say "fuck it, just tell me what to do, say and eat all day long and have done with it."

The Puritans among us want to take way our booze, cigarettes, cigars, coffee, snacks, fast foods, and a host of other things. They can fuck right off, as far as I'm concerned.

Coito ergo sum
Posts: 32040
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 2:03 pm
Contact:

Re: Ban Ronald McDonald?

Post by Coito ergo sum » Thu Apr 07, 2011 1:00 pm

Regarding the obesity issue and vegetarianism, I have to side with sandinista on this one: The obesity rate among vegetarians is only about 6 percent compared to 30 percent of the American population. Only 2% of vegans are overweight.

Read more: http://health.blogs.foxnews.com/2010/06 ... z1IqF5Sl29

[and before anyone knee-jerks about how you can't believe anything on Foxnews, these statistics are contrary to what one would expect to find in a conservative media source. The expectation would be for foxnews to scoff at vegetarianism and veganism as products of liberalism]

Based on a quick google search, I found some mentions of the percentage of "overweight" vegetarians in the US being between 25 and 29%. So, I think it is fair to say that they are "often" overweight. They aren't, however, "often" obese. They are also far less likely to be overweight than meat eaters (about 60% of the general population are overweight).

User avatar
Warren Dew
Posts: 3781
Joined: Thu Aug 19, 2010 1:41 pm
Location: Somerville, MA, USA
Contact:

Re: Ban Ronald McDonald?

Post by Warren Dew » Thu Apr 07, 2011 4:30 pm

Coito ergo sum wrote:Regarding the obesity issue and vegetarianism, I have to side with sandinista on this one: The obesity rate among vegetarians is only about 6 percent compared to 30 percent of the American population. Only 2% of vegans are overweight.
You might try comparing this to statistics on south Asians, which don't show the same trends with respect to vegetarians. It's likely that the better than average health of vegetarians in the U.S. is due to their overall health consciousness, not their vegetarianism - they also tend to avoid things like soft drinks and other forms of sugar, even though high fructose corn syrup is vegan.

Coito ergo sum
Posts: 32040
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 2:03 pm
Contact:

Re: Ban Ronald McDonald?

Post by Coito ergo sum » Thu Apr 07, 2011 5:29 pm

Warren Dew wrote:
Coito ergo sum wrote:Regarding the obesity issue and vegetarianism, I have to side with sandinista on this one: The obesity rate among vegetarians is only about 6 percent compared to 30 percent of the American population. Only 2% of vegans are overweight.
You might try comparing this to statistics on south Asians, which don't show the same trends with respect to vegetarians. It's likely that the better than average health of vegetarians in the U.S. is due to their overall health consciousness, not their vegetarianism - they also tend to avoid things like soft drinks and other forms of sugar, even though high fructose corn syrup is vegan.
Certainly, all that is true. They may well be more health conscious. But, the fact remains, they are thinner, by and large, which is what sandinista was talking about - not health, but thinness.

I'm a skeptic when it comes to the HFCS. I see no evidence it's any worse than table sugar. Not that that makes it good, of course. Too much sugar is just as bad as too much HFCS. HFCS is extracted from corn plants and contains 55% fructose. Sucrose is fructose and glucose linked together, so it has 50% fructose and 50% glucose. As far as I can tell, they are basically the same thing.

User avatar
Warren Dew
Posts: 3781
Joined: Thu Aug 19, 2010 1:41 pm
Location: Somerville, MA, USA
Contact:

Re: Ban Ronald McDonald?

Post by Warren Dew » Thu Apr 07, 2011 7:10 pm

Coito ergo sum wrote:I'm a skeptic when it comes to the HFCS. I see no evidence it's any worse than table sugar. Not that that makes it good, of course. Too much sugar is just as bad as too much HFCS. HFCS is extracted from corn plants and contains 55% fructose. Sucrose is fructose and glucose linked together, so it has 50% fructose and 50% glucose. As far as I can tell, they are basically the same thing.
They are basically the same thing. That's why I called out both sugar and high fructose corn syrup. I did also call out soft drinks, because there's some evidence that liquid forms of sugar are worse than solid forms.

User avatar
sandinista
Posts: 2546
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 9:15 pm
About me: It’s a plot, but busta can you tell me who’s greedier?
Big corporations, the pigs or the media?
Contact:

Re: Ban Ronald McDonald?

Post by sandinista » Thu Apr 07, 2011 7:16 pm

Coito ergo sum wrote:
sandinista wrote:
Coito ergo sum wrote:
Yes, for the most part. Jane Doe's body is her body, and it's none of your business, really. If she wants to have an abortion, while smoking a joint, and shoving Big Macs up her ass and while chewing on a McRib, that should be her right. You have the right to comment on it, and I have the right to tell you but out. It's called liberty.
Where does this "liberty" you speak of exist?
The liberty to comment, and the liberty to tell others who comment to butt out? The right to abortions, Big Macs and McRibs? That exists here in the US. The liberty to smoke pot - that's a work in process. There isn't a place with absolute liberty, but because there isn't absolute liberty doesn't mean we throw it all out the window and say "fuck it, just tell me what to do, say and eat all day long and have done with it."

The Puritans among us want to take way our booze, cigarettes, cigars, coffee, snacks, fast foods, and a host of other things. They can fuck right off, as far as I'm concerned.
So, this "liberty" pretty much exists everywhere on the planet then. The "freedom" to eat mcshit, drink booze, snack etc. That's "liberty" to you. wow. :shock:
Our struggle is not against actual corrupt individuals, but against those in power in general, against their authority, against the global order and the ideological mystification which sustains it.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 13 guests