How to fast track health reform and The Parasite the Government is Trying to Hide [Video THE SODA WAR]
- BeNotDeceived
- Agent38
- Posts: 9078
- Location: Tralfamadore
- Contact:
How to fast track health reform and The Parasite the Government is Trying to Hide [Video THE SODA WAR]
July 27 (Reuters) - With John McCain’s support, and a tie-breaking vote by Vice-President Mike Pence, the Republican party managed to bring the Better Care Reconciliation Act of 2017 to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act (aka Obamacare) to the Senate floor for debate. Originally proposed in March 2017, this bill made it out of committee in record time.
The Senate rejected the bill Wednesday, but Republican leaders are now trying to gain support for a slimmed-down version. It’s unclear exactly what the “skinny” bill would include, but so far all versions of the Republican health plans include variations of measures to decrease government support of Medicaid by approximately 850 billion dollars over the next 10 years and leave 20-25 million more Americans without health insurance. Many of them substantially increase average premiums.
In contrast, health care proposals that actually benefit the public, sometimes at the expense of Big Insurance, Big Food, and other “Bigs”, seem destined to be shuffled from committee to committee for years without ever being openly debated in Congress and in front of America. Something is wrong here. Why should health care bills designed to enrich big business be prioritized over those that promote a healthier America?
The Stop Subsidizing Childhood Obesity Act, introduced by two Democratic senators in 2012, would have ended federal tax subsidies for advertising promoting the consumption of products that are unhealthy for children. That money would be re-routed to provide more fresh fruits and vegetables to elementary school students in low income schools.
The idea that we should stop government support for unhealthy products and use those funds to promote better health instead seems like a no-brainer. Except for the fact that if it passed it would stop giving Big Food companies a tax break when they encouraged our kids to eat cakes, candy, sugar-sweetened beverages and other foods that are clearly bad for them. Yet the bill has never made it out of committee and has been resubmitted to each Congressional session. ... https://www.reuters.com/article/rosenba ... SL1N1KI1Q4
End subsidies on and excise tax bad stuff (net-carbs), that's how.
The Senate rejected the bill Wednesday, but Republican leaders are now trying to gain support for a slimmed-down version. It’s unclear exactly what the “skinny” bill would include, but so far all versions of the Republican health plans include variations of measures to decrease government support of Medicaid by approximately 850 billion dollars over the next 10 years and leave 20-25 million more Americans without health insurance. Many of them substantially increase average premiums.
In contrast, health care proposals that actually benefit the public, sometimes at the expense of Big Insurance, Big Food, and other “Bigs”, seem destined to be shuffled from committee to committee for years without ever being openly debated in Congress and in front of America. Something is wrong here. Why should health care bills designed to enrich big business be prioritized over those that promote a healthier America?
The Stop Subsidizing Childhood Obesity Act, introduced by two Democratic senators in 2012, would have ended federal tax subsidies for advertising promoting the consumption of products that are unhealthy for children. That money would be re-routed to provide more fresh fruits and vegetables to elementary school students in low income schools.
The idea that we should stop government support for unhealthy products and use those funds to promote better health instead seems like a no-brainer. Except for the fact that if it passed it would stop giving Big Food companies a tax break when they encouraged our kids to eat cakes, candy, sugar-sweetened beverages and other foods that are clearly bad for them. Yet the bill has never made it out of committee and has been resubmitted to each Congressional session. ... https://www.reuters.com/article/rosenba ... SL1N1KI1Q4
End subsidies on and excise tax bad stuff (net-carbs), that's how.
Last edited by BeNotDeceived on February 10th, 2018, 1:11 am, edited 2 times in total.
-
- captain of 1,000
- Posts: 1690
Re: How to fast track health reform
Those are interesting thoughts. I...well...I think part of the problem that nobody is facing is the fact that everybody in healthcare wants a six digit income. If it keeps up like that then no plan on either side of the table will work simply because there's too many people that want wealth for the least amount of effort.
I have a relative that works in healthcare. You can also see how people in those fields often become big spenders on themselves, not their families.
And those people are highly represented with a lot of lobbyists.
There needs to be a shakeup in the idea of healthcare shouldn't be a get rich quick scheme, for it to truly be affordable.
I have a relative that works in healthcare. You can also see how people in those fields often become big spenders on themselves, not their families.
And those people are highly represented with a lot of lobbyists.
There needs to be a shakeup in the idea of healthcare shouldn't be a get rich quick scheme, for it to truly be affordable.
-
- Level 34 Illuminated
- Posts: 11123
- Location: Mesa, Arizona
Re: How to fast track health reform
If I understand the US Constitution correctly, operating a healthcare system is not one of the powers delegated to the FedGov, but "reserved to the states respectively, or to the people."
-
- Level 34 Illuminated
- Posts: 5247
-
- Level 34 Illuminated
- Posts: 5247
Re: How to fast track health reform
If you don't want the doctors to be interested in making lots of money quickly, you're going to have figure out how to allow them to graduate with hundreds of thousands of dollars in student loans.gardener4life wrote: ↑July 28th, 2017, 3:22 am Those are interesting thoughts. I...well...I think part of the problem that nobody is facing is the fact that everybody in healthcare wants a six digit income. If it keeps up like that then no plan on either side of the table will work simply because there's too many people that want wealth for the least amount of effort.
I have a relative that works in healthcare. You can also see how people in those fields often become big spenders on themselves, not their families.
And those people are highly represented with a lot of lobbyists.
There needs to be a shakeup in the idea of healthcare shouldn't be a get rich quick scheme, for it to truly be affordable.
- BeNotDeceived
- Agent38
- Posts: 9078
- Location: Tralfamadore
- Contact:
Re: How to fast track health reform
Here goes an experiment in pic posting.Silver wrote: ↑July 28th, 2017, 10:15 am Interesting recap of last night.
https://www.buzzfeed.com/davidmack/back ... .glQjaJRbK
... even to an experiment upon my words, and exercise a particle of faith, yea, even if ...
Surprisingly my little particle of code doth render said image. @-)
- BeNotDeceived
- Agent38
- Posts: 9078
- Location: Tralfamadore
- Contact:
Re: How to fast track health reform
Dafty's thread about chickens prompted my google search of excise tax on SSBs.
Impact of the Berkeley Excise Tax on Sugar-Sweetened Beverage Consumption.
Falbe J, et al. Am J Public Health. 2016.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the impact of the excise tax on sugar-sweetened beverage (SSB) consumption in Berkeley, California, which became the first US jurisdiction to implement such a tax ($0.01/oz) in March 2015.
METHODS: We used a repeated cross-sectional design to examine changes in pre- to posttax beverage consumption in low-income neighborhoods in Berkeley versus in the comparison cities of Oakland and San Francisco, California. A beverage frequency questionnaire was interviewer administered to 990 participants before the tax and 1689 after the tax (approximately 8 months after the vote and 4 months after implementation) to examine relative changes in consumption.
RESULTS: Consumption of SSBs decreased 21% in Berkeley and increased 4% in comparison cities (P = .046). Water consumption increased more in Berkeley (+63%) than in comparison cities (+19%; P < .01).
CONCLUSIONS: Berkeley's excise tax reduced SSB consumption in low-income neighborhoods. Evaluating SSB taxes in other cities will improve understanding of their public health benefit and their generalizability. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/27552267/
Was the top hit; see even evil liberals are right sometimes, like a broken clock. @-)
Impact of the Berkeley Excise Tax on Sugar-Sweetened Beverage Consumption.
Falbe J, et al. Am J Public Health. 2016.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the impact of the excise tax on sugar-sweetened beverage (SSB) consumption in Berkeley, California, which became the first US jurisdiction to implement such a tax ($0.01/oz) in March 2015.
METHODS: We used a repeated cross-sectional design to examine changes in pre- to posttax beverage consumption in low-income neighborhoods in Berkeley versus in the comparison cities of Oakland and San Francisco, California. A beverage frequency questionnaire was interviewer administered to 990 participants before the tax and 1689 after the tax (approximately 8 months after the vote and 4 months after implementation) to examine relative changes in consumption.
RESULTS: Consumption of SSBs decreased 21% in Berkeley and increased 4% in comparison cities (P = .046). Water consumption increased more in Berkeley (+63%) than in comparison cities (+19%; P < .01).
CONCLUSIONS: Berkeley's excise tax reduced SSB consumption in low-income neighborhoods. Evaluating SSB taxes in other cities will improve understanding of their public health benefit and their generalizability. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/27552267/
Was the top hit; see even evil liberals are right sometimes, like a broken clock. @-)
- BeNotDeceived
- Agent38
- Posts: 9078
- Location: Tralfamadore
- Contact:
Re: How to fast track health reform
Proof positive UKs policy is working. :ymapplause:
... Speaking to analysts yesterday, CEO Damian Gammell said the bottler has already brought 40% of its UK business under the minimum sugar threshold for the levy. He said sugar-reduction work will accelerate ahead of the tax's implementation in April next year, ultimately leaving just the flagship energy drinks brand and full-sugar Coca-Cola in the duty's firing line.
CCEP is "very much focused on reformulating pretty much all of our brands, except Coke Classic and Monster out of the tax", Gammell said. "Clearly, the reformulation was the priority and I'm very pleased ... that we could move so quickly to get that done."
The UK sugar tax will have a taxable threshold of 5g per 10cl, leading a number of UK soft drinks producers to reformulate products to contain less sugar.
CCEP has already lowered the sugar content of Fanta Orange and Sprite by a third to bring the brands under the threshold. ... https://www.just-drinks.com/news/coke-m ... 23807.aspx
... Speaking to analysts yesterday, CEO Damian Gammell said the bottler has already brought 40% of its UK business under the minimum sugar threshold for the levy. He said sugar-reduction work will accelerate ahead of the tax's implementation in April next year, ultimately leaving just the flagship energy drinks brand and full-sugar Coca-Cola in the duty's firing line.
CCEP is "very much focused on reformulating pretty much all of our brands, except Coke Classic and Monster out of the tax", Gammell said. "Clearly, the reformulation was the priority and I'm very pleased ... that we could move so quickly to get that done."
The UK sugar tax will have a taxable threshold of 5g per 10cl, leading a number of UK soft drinks producers to reformulate products to contain less sugar.
CCEP has already lowered the sugar content of Fanta Orange and Sprite by a third to bring the brands under the threshold. ... https://www.just-drinks.com/news/coke-m ... 23807.aspx
-
- Level 34 Illuminated
- Posts: 9935
Re: How to fast track health reform
Let me guess... They're substituting sugar with "fake" sugar? ;(
- BeNotDeceived
- Agent38
- Posts: 9078
- Location: Tralfamadore
- Contact:
Re: How to fast track health reform
viewtopic.php?f=1&t=46255&p=799190&hilit=stevia#p799190 is one post about Stevia products, which are natural in origin.
Processed sugar is better described as a poison:
Is Sugar Toxic? More About The Dangers of Sugar - Dr. Mercola's ... Calling sugar a "toxin" or a "poison" 13 times, and referring to it as "evil" five times, Robert Lustig explains that the dangers of sugar apply to all ...
Shall we allow them to use real anti-freeze to sweeten your cinnamon roll too?
-
- captain of 100
- Posts: 584
Re: How to fast track health reform
I'm totally with you on ending subsidies, but an excise tax is a bad idea. What happens when big bro decides that not vaccinating your kids is bad for public health and decides to withhold tax benefits if you don't comply? Oh wait, that has already happened in Australia. Not to start a vaccination tangent, but that is an easy example of a government deciding for ALL citizens what is good for them regardless of individual needs, differences and opinions. The slippery slope of allowing big bro to decide what is right or wrong and punish or reward accordingly is not a ride I want to be on. Free societies don't do that. I think most people would agree that sodas etc. are bad for you, but why not let people use their agency instead of giving big bro more power over our lives? On another level, it's equivalent to wanting a king (since you have a good one lined up and ready to go), but down the road a bad one pops in and starts to make a mess. You've read it in the BOM folks.
- BeNotDeceived
- Agent38
- Posts: 9078
- Location: Tralfamadore
- Contact:
Re: How to fast track health reform
Each jurisdiction that does something will in effect be an experiment, from which others can learn from. Seems there is a dearth of news reports, but really shouldn't be too much of a surprise considering that big-soda ads pay for many of the news programs. Searching youtube won't show new stuff, but I found:
by searching videos on google. :ymhug:
- BeNotDeceived
- Agent38
- Posts: 9078
- Location: Tralfamadore
- Contact:
-
- captain of 1,000
- Posts: 3511
Re: How to fast track health reform
I don't think the government should decide what food is healthy or not.
-
- captain of 100
- Posts: 636
Re: How to fast track health reform
Many years ago, I attended a Town Hall meeting hosted by my Local state assemblyman. He said that it may be possible to skip the Federal Version of Obama Care and set up a State version. I told him that was just as wrong. He said that the Constitution reserves to the States powers not granted to the Federal Gov. So they could do it.
So I said, Let me demonstrate why it is wrong for any gov. to do that. I stood up and went over to a man I didn't know, I took a risk. I asked him what I could expect from him if I went over to his house and sat down in his living room with him and told him how he had to spend his health care dollars and how much he spent. His response was perfect, "You can expect a bullet in the brain.". I turned to the Assemblyman and said "And rightfully so, why". He was flabbergasted, it was so obvious that I had no right to do so. I responded, If the only source of Government power is the people, then why is it not obvious that it does not also have that power? It left him speechless, but the room exploded.
Anything that the Government does that an Individual can not do is nothing short of Tyranny, the exercise of powers they don't have through deception, extortion, coercion, and down right force.
A little History, during WW2, the federal Gov. illegally froze civilian wages. This made it hard for employers to keep their best employees, they would go elsewhere to get payed what they were worth. So employers created "benefits", compensation outside the freeze law, to keep their employees from going to other companies.
What this caused is to take the health care dollar vote away from the employee and gave it to the employer. And of course, government couldn't resist and took that vote to themselves away from the employer by passing regulations on the health care insurance industry.
Now you see, this problem was initially created by the government and the only way to fix it is to get gov. out of it and return the health care dollar vote back to the one that has to provide the dollar, the actual consumer of health care services.
So I said, Let me demonstrate why it is wrong for any gov. to do that. I stood up and went over to a man I didn't know, I took a risk. I asked him what I could expect from him if I went over to his house and sat down in his living room with him and told him how he had to spend his health care dollars and how much he spent. His response was perfect, "You can expect a bullet in the brain.". I turned to the Assemblyman and said "And rightfully so, why". He was flabbergasted, it was so obvious that I had no right to do so. I responded, If the only source of Government power is the people, then why is it not obvious that it does not also have that power? It left him speechless, but the room exploded.
Anything that the Government does that an Individual can not do is nothing short of Tyranny, the exercise of powers they don't have through deception, extortion, coercion, and down right force.
A little History, during WW2, the federal Gov. illegally froze civilian wages. This made it hard for employers to keep their best employees, they would go elsewhere to get payed what they were worth. So employers created "benefits", compensation outside the freeze law, to keep their employees from going to other companies.
What this caused is to take the health care dollar vote away from the employee and gave it to the employer. And of course, government couldn't resist and took that vote to themselves away from the employer by passing regulations on the health care insurance industry.
Now you see, this problem was initially created by the government and the only way to fix it is to get gov. out of it and return the health care dollar vote back to the one that has to provide the dollar, the actual consumer of health care services.
- BeNotDeceived
- Agent38
- Posts: 9078
- Location: Tralfamadore
- Contact:
Re: How to fast track health reform
Not sure people's reluctance over alternative sweeteners. When my fathers doctor suggested he cut sugar by using products with Aspartame, the woo-woo fanaticals came out of the woodwork. Who do you believe, a medical doctor, or some un-educated Reverend of Reikihttps://www.theguardian.com/society/2016/nov/07/tesco-cuts-sugar-in-own-brand-drinks-to-avoid-sugar-tax wrote: Tesco cuts sugar in own-brand drinks to avoid sugar tax
“We have worked to make sure our soft drinks still taste great, just with less sugar. Tesco customers are now consuming on average over 20% less sugar from our soft drinks than in 2011. We’re hoping this initiative will help make it a little easier for our customers to live more healthily.”
When asked how it had made the reformulation and whether it involved low calorie sweeteners or extra fruit, Tesco replied in a statement: “We’ve worked really hard to make sure the drinks still taste great and we’ve rigorously tested them with our customers.”
The government expressed satisfaction that the threatened tax was exerting the pressure it wanted on the soft drinks industry.
Let's hope they're using awesome and all natural version of Stevia aka Stevita.
One of these jars really goes a long way, and tastes absolutely awesome.
Anyone tried coconut sugars by Coconut Secrets or Divine Organics
Taxing crap will drive innovation towards an ever improving selection of good alternatives.
-
- Level 34 Illuminated
- Posts: 9935
Re: How to fast track health reform
Yes, reluctance. Check out a search on sweeteners. I would believe neither. Do you believe that doctors know much about nutrition, much less sweeteners? Are you aware that 85% (according to the research journal) of what doctors tell you, has no basis in research?BeNotDeceived wrote: ↑November 11th, 2017, 4:22 pmNot sure people's reluctance over alternative sweeteners. When my fathers doctor suggested he cut sugar by using products with Aspartame, the woo-woo fanaticals came out of the woodwork. Who do you believe, a medical doctor, or some un-educated Reverend of Reikihttps://www.theguardian.com/society/2016/nov/07/tesco-cuts-sugar-in-own-brand-drinks-to-avoid-sugar-tax wrote: Tesco cuts sugar in own-brand drinks to avoid sugar tax
“We have worked to make sure our soft drinks still taste great, just with less sugar. Tesco customers are now consuming on average over 20% less sugar from our soft drinks than in 2011. We’re hoping this initiative will help make it a little easier for our customers to live more healthily.”
When asked how it had made the reformulation and whether it involved low calorie sweeteners or extra fruit, Tesco replied in a statement: “We’ve worked really hard to make sure the drinks still taste great and we’ve rigorously tested them with our customers.”
The government expressed satisfaction that the threatened tax was exerting the pressure it wanted on the soft drinks industry.
Let's hope they're using awesome and all natural version of Stevia aka Stevita.
- BeNotDeceived
- Agent38
- Posts: 9078
- Location: Tralfamadore
- Contact:
Re: How to fast track health reform
Please cite your source (research journal)JohnnyL wrote: ↑November 15th, 2017, 11:35 amYes, reluctance. Check out a search on sweeteners. I would believe neither. Do you believe that doctors know much about nutrition, much less sweeteners? Are you aware that 85% (according to the research journal) of what doctors tell you, has no basis in research?BeNotDeceived wrote: ↑November 11th, 2017, 4:22 pmNot sure people's reluctance over alternative sweeteners. When my fathers doctor suggested he cut sugar by using products with Aspartame, the woo-woo fanaticals came out of the woodwork. Who do you believe, a medical doctor, or some un-educated Reverend of Reikihttps://www.theguardian.com/society/2016/nov/07/tesco-cuts-sugar-in-own-brand-drinks-to-avoid-sugar-tax wrote: Tesco cuts sugar in own-brand drinks to avoid sugar tax
“We have worked to make sure our soft drinks still taste great, just with less sugar. Tesco customers are now consuming on average over 20% less sugar from our soft drinks than in 2011. We’re hoping this initiative will help make it a little easier for our customers to live more healthily.”
When asked how it had made the reformulation and whether it involved low calorie sweeteners or extra fruit, Tesco replied in a statement: “We’ve worked really hard to make sure the drinks still taste great and we’ve rigorously tested them with our customers.”
The government expressed satisfaction that the threatened tax was exerting the pressure it wanted on the soft drinks industry.
Let's hope they're using awesome and all natural version of Stevia aka Stevita.
- BeNotDeceived
- Agent38
- Posts: 9078
- Location: Tralfamadore
- Contact:
The Parasite the Government is Trying to Hide.
DRs Lustig and Gundry have established extensive correlation and causation, in the last several year.JohnnyL wrote: ↑November 15th, 2017, 11:35 amYes, reluctance. Check out a search on sweeteners. I would believe neither. Do you believe that doctors know much about nutrition, much less sweeteners? Are you aware that 85% (according to the research journal) of what doctors tell you, has no basis in research?BeNotDeceived wrote: ↑November 11th, 2017, 4:22 pmLet's hope they're using awesome and all natural version of Stevia aka Stevita.
Here is a video with transcript that reveals the secret combination employed by conglomerates of the food industry. They pulled dirty political tricks, tried to change the name of ingredients, slant data and spent millions of dollars and creating numerous front organizations, to confuse the argument.
Jaime Oliver thankfully has presented the real truth and the UK has enacted excise taxes, that take effect on April 6th, 2018. Seattle's measure took effect the first day of 2018, and other jurisdictions are catching on too
Symptoms of this parasite infestation include but not limited to:
Skin and nail fungal infections
Feeling tired and worn down or suffering from chronic fatigue or fibromyalgia
Digestive issues such as bloating, constipation, or diarrhea
Autoimmune disease such as Hashimoto’s thyroiditis, Rheumatoid arthritis, Ulcerative colitis, Lupus, Psoriasis, Scleroderma ...
Difficulty concentrating, poor memory, lack of focus, ADD, ADHD and brain fog
Skin issues such as eczema, psoriasis, hives, and rashes
Irritability, mood swings, anxiety, or depression
Vaginal infections , urinary tract infections, rectal itching or vaginal itching
Severe seasonal allergies or itchy ears
Strong sugar and refined carbohydrate cravings
The video also presents great info about the importance of taking probiotics.
- BeNotDeceived
- Agent38
- Posts: 9078
- Location: Tralfamadore
- Contact:
Truth be told, none of the tastes-testers could tell the difference.
Haha, wackos came out of the closest posting videos about how terrible the reformulation.
Now if they can replace all the bad sweeteners with Stevia, that would be like awesome, or something.
Truth be told, none of the taste-testers could tell the difference.How to spot if you have a can of the new Irn-Bru wrote:
We put new Irn-Bru to taste test on streets of Glasgow and the results might surprise you
Despite the difference in the two cans being very small the change in the recipe is massive with the sugar content halved.
Makers AG Barr decided to make the radical change because of the new 'Sugar Tax' levied on fizzy drinks. ...
Now if they can replace all the bad sweeteners with Stevia, that would be like awesome, or something.
- BeNotDeceived
- Agent38
- Posts: 9078
- Location: Tralfamadore
- Contact:
[Video: THE SODA WARS] Berkeley Lefties, actually do something Right!
BIG SODA wishes to speak with you.
- BeNotDeceived
- Agent38
- Posts: 9078
- Location: Tralfamadore
- Contact:
Re: Why the British soda tax might work better than any of the soda taxes that came before
Weird April 6thhttps://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2018/03/21/why-the-british-soda-tax-might-work-better-than-any-of-the-soda-taxes-that-came-before-it/?utm_term=.d009383f4c6a wrote: The great British soda tax doesn’t begin for two more weeks, but some experts are already calling it a success.
That’s because the graduated levy, which goes into effect April 6, has prompted some of the country’s largest soda-makers to slash the sugar in their beverages.
Coca-Cola has changed the recipe for Fanta. San Pellegrino sodas in the United Kingdom now have 40 percent less sugar. The reduction has been so dramatic that the British Treasury has cut its revenue forecast for the levy almost in half to reflect the shrinking number of soft drinks with a taxable amount of sweetener. ...
- BeNotDeceived
- Agent38
- Posts: 9078
- Location: Tralfamadore
- Contact:
Now you can have your DRY Soda — sugar-free stevia costs less than sugar!
https://www.seattletimes.com/explore/sh ... ugar-free/
Sweetened with stevia and inspired by tax on sugar sweetened beverages.
Only took a few months, and UK has seen sugar count continuing to drop too!
- BeNotDeceived
- Agent38
- Posts: 9078
- Location: Tralfamadore
- Contact:
FAKE NEWS !!!
It’s funny hearing the good doctor decry “FAKE NEWS”, but he gracefully concedes the argument, being a super clinician whose conducted thousands, if not millions of tests for dozens of markers to achieve amazing results.
The book on fats, sugar, lectins & artificial sweeteners is being rewritten, but those in the pockets of big advertisers aid and abet mass confusion.
- BeNotDeceived
- Agent38
- Posts: 9078
- Location: Tralfamadore
- Contact:
Is Cheese Really Bad for You?
Ok, let's leave it up to "independent" research.Seek the Truth wrote: ↑September 4th, 2017, 4:29 am I don't think the government should decide what food is healthy or not.
Michael Greger M.D. FACLM November 14th, 2018
What about the recent studies that show cheese has neutral or positive health effects?
nutritionfacts.org/video/is-cheese-really-bad-for-you