MAHAs now trying to rip away our food supply

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It’s hard to define legally what’s junk food and what’s healthy. There’s a large grey zone between candy and granola/protein/breakfast bars. One pending bill tries to define candy as “flourless”, but under that definition, Twix and Kit Kat would be exempt. Cereal also gets blurry. Many cereals contain added sugar but also contain healthy ingredients. Do we ban Honey Nut Cheerios?

There isn’t much evidence to suggest SNAP recipients eat any less healthily than other low-income earners. It’s also hard to restrict foods without further stigmatizing that group. I’ve gone through periods where money was extremely tight, and being able to have an occasional treat or give my kids a birthday cake was so important psychologically. There’s a strain of Ayn Rand heartlessness in these policies - the attitude seems to be if you’re poor, you must live only on rice and beans until you’ve bootstrapped yourself into a strata of society that deserves ice cream.

That said, I do agree with reducing harmful food dyes amd additives, looking at alternative pest reduction methods, and encouraging Americans to eat more healthily. I’m old enough to remember when Michelle Obama wanted everyone to eat more fruits and veggies, and the right wing lost their mind. This shouldn’t be a partisan issue.

Sweetened beverages and soda are the top two items purchased through SNAP. By definition, that is junk nutrition and evidence of SNAP recipients eating less healthy.

SNAP; it is in the name, is meant to provide sustenance, not treats on the taxpayer's dime.

[Anonymous]

Thing is, the government subsidizes corn, which is why we have hfcs and weird foods made with corn. Many farms switched from multi crop to single crop corn to get the subsidy. This was done to avoid importing sugarcane. It will be expensive to switch to other sources in the USA, like beets.
The other thing is, farmers buy their fertilizer far in advance. I hope the ban is gradual, say for 2027, so that they don’t have to suddenly be unable to use what they purchased and be unable to protect the crops from the weird pests brought in since indicators were fired in the name of efficiency.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:MAHA here. We are not even close to starving to death as a nation. And, the issue with starvation is malnutrition. The majority of Americans are malnourished in several significant vitamins and minerals despite being literally obese. Be open to change.

Brain worm

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I love that Michelle Obama did this and the Right went nuts.

And opposing this is even dumber now than it was before because we know more and the food got worse.

[Anonymous]

OP is lunatic who can't even articulate the complaint.

Here's what the article says:


RFK Jr.’s MAHA report raises concerns about vaccines, food

Activists suggest a ban on harmful pesticides like glyphosate and atrazine
Farmers, GOP senators worry new rules could disrupt food production
70+ lawmakers urge Kennedy, EPA to keep report science-based, not political


----

Glyphosate (Roundup) is banned in many countries and localities.

https://phys.org/news/2023-09-glyphosate-restricted.html

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s hard to define legally what’s junk food and what’s healthy. There’s a large grey zone between candy and granola/protein/breakfast bars. One pending bill tries to define candy as “flourless”, but under that definition, Twix and Kit Kat would be exempt. Cereal also gets blurry. Many cereals contain added sugar but also contain healthy ingredients. Do we ban Honey Nut Cheerios?

There isn’t much evidence to suggest SNAP recipients eat any less healthily than other low-income earners. It’s also hard to restrict foods without further stigmatizing that group. I’ve gone through periods where money was extremely tight, and being able to have an occasional treat or give my kids a birthday cake was so important psychologically. There’s a strain of Ayn Rand heartlessness in these policies - the attitude seems to be if you’re poor, you must live only on rice and beans until you’ve bootstrapped yourself into a strata of society that deserves ice cream.

That said, I do agree with reducing harmful food dyes amd additives, looking at alternative pest reduction methods, and encouraging Americans to eat more healthily. I’m old enough to remember when Michelle Obama wanted everyone to eat more fruits and veggies, and the right wing lost their mind. This shouldn’t be a partisan issue.

Sweetened beverages and soda are the top two items purchased through SNAP. By definition, that is junk nutrition and evidence of SNAP recipients eating less healthy.

SNAP; it is in the name, is meant to provide sustenance, not treats on the taxpayer's dime.

+1

No one is saying poor people can’t have candy and ice cream. They can buy it using their own money like every one else. A government safety net should focus on basic needs, not candy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MAHA here. We are not even close to starving to death as a nation. And, the issue with starvation is malnutrition. The majority of Americans are malnourished in several significant vitamins and minerals despite being literally obese. Be open to change.

The the solution is to get corn and corn sugar/high fructose corn syrup out of all of our food and eliminate all processed foods from our public schools and don't allow SNAP funds to purchase processed foods, soda or other junk foods.

And if you do this, watch the American farmers and the consuming public go bananas on the lawmakers who impose it.

"All processed foods"? That would include bread, low fat milk, nut butters, and precut veggies. Perhaps you mean ultraprocessed?

Also this is not happening without increasing taxes. So sure, as long as you agree to increase your local taxes to pay for it? I mean, I supported improving school lunches back when Michelle Obama took that initiative but Republicans somehow were adamantly opposed. What changed?

When we cut SNAP benefits, are we doing anything to change food deserts?

There is a difference between different qualities of bread. Something like Wonder is mostly chemicals. SNAP shouldn't pay for it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MAHA here. We are not even close to starving to death as a nation. And, the issue with starvation is malnutrition. The majority of Americans are malnourished in several significant vitamins and minerals despite being literally obese. Be open to change.

The the solution is to get corn and corn sugar/high fructose corn syrup out of all of our food and eliminate all processed foods from our public schools and don't allow SNAP funds to purchase processed foods, soda or other junk foods.

And if you do this, watch the American farmers and the consuming public go bananas on the lawmakers who impose it.

You mean ultra processed foods. There are plenty of healthy processed foods: peanut butter, yogurt, ground turkey to name three. All of those listed are processed.

Indeed. Thank you for clarifying.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MAHA here. We are not even close to starving to death as a nation. And, the issue with starvation is malnutrition. The majority of Americans are malnourished in several significant vitamins and minerals despite being literally obese. Be open to change.

The the solution is to get corn and corn sugar/high fructose corn syrup out of all of our food and eliminate all processed foods from our public schools and don't allow SNAP funds to purchase processed foods, soda or other junk foods.

And if you do this, watch the American farmers and the consuming public go bananas on the lawmakers who impose it.

"All processed foods"? That would include bread, low fat milk, nut butters, and precut veggies. Perhaps you mean ultraprocessed?

Also this is not happening without increasing taxes. So sure, as long as you agree to increase your local taxes to pay for it? I mean, I supported improving school lunches back when Michelle Obama took that initiative but Republicans somehow were adamantly opposed. What changed?

When we cut SNAP benefits, are we doing anything to change food deserts?

There is a difference between different qualities of bread. Something like Wonder is mostly chemicals. SNAP shouldn't pay for it.

Ok, are we ok with raising SNAP coverage then because whole grain breads typically costs more? FWIW, I only buy whole grain/wheat but it is definitely more (and not all wheat brain is actually made with whole grain wheat).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I love that Michelle Obama did this and the Right went nuts.

RIGHT?!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MAHA here. We are not even close to starving to death as a nation. And, the issue with starvation is malnutrition. The majority of Americans are malnourished in several significant vitamins and minerals despite being literally obese. Be open to change.

The the solution is to get corn and corn sugar/high fructose corn syrup out of all of our food and eliminate all processed foods from our public schools and don't allow SNAP funds to purchase processed foods, soda or other junk foods.

And if you do this, watch the American farmers and the consuming public go bananas on the lawmakers who impose it.

"All processed foods"? That would include bread, low fat milk, nut butters, and precut veggies. Perhaps you mean ultraprocessed?

Also this is not happening without increasing taxes. So sure, as long as you agree to increase your local taxes to pay for it? I mean, I supported improving school lunches back when Michelle Obama took that initiative but Republicans somehow were adamantly opposed. What changed?

When we cut SNAP benefits, are we doing anything to change food deserts?

Food deserts are when people live in rural areas, and or in a culture that drives business away due to violent crime and theft.

Those are things that the government cannot control.

Government can definitely incentivize grocery stores to create locations in food deserts.

[Anonymous]

I’m not MAHA in the least, but we should ban these toxic chemicals. But, there will be a strong push back with the billionaire bros because it means they can’t pump out perfect crops. We desperately need regulations on beef, but Trump just banned farmers from identifying preservatives.

MAHA and MAGA really aren’t aligned. Let’s stop subsidizing corn and soy and start subsiding kale and broccoli.

I think it’s mostly bluster and nothing will change. Except for vaccinations, which is tragic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:MAHA here. We are not even close to starving to death as a nation. And, the issue with starvation is malnutrition. The majority of Americans are malnourished in several significant vitamins and minerals despite being literally obese. Be open to change.

Exactly. And get the poisons out of the food supply.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’m not MAHA in the least, but we should ban these toxic chemicals. But, there will be a strong push back with the billionaire bros because it means they can’t pump out perfect crops. We desperately need regulations on beef, but Trump just banned farmers from identifying preservatives.

MAHA and MAGA really aren’t aligned. Let’s stop subsidizing corn and soy and start subsiding kale and broccoli.

I think it’s mostly bluster and nothing will change. Except for vaccinations, which is tragic.

MAHA and the EPA are not aligned.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I love that Michelle Obama did this and the Right went nuts.

RIGHT?!

Racism is the only explanation... Or else, MAHAs, why did you object to this under Michelle? No, food knowledge about this stuff did not suddenly change per the PP, that is BS.