Healthy Food?! You Communist!

[The Comedian]

So my wife works in a big health care facility. And this health care facility is thinking about offering only "healthy" food choices in its cafeteria -- no fried food, lots of fresh veggies, fruit, etc -- and the majority of employees there are accusing their employer of "communism" because they "should be able to eat any damn thing [they] want! Whose right is it to deny them what [they] want to eat?!"

Personally, this juvenile retort sounds absurd. I mean, if I walked into our local McDonald's and said, "I'd like a steamed lobster and wilted spinach salad, please."

And they said "sorry we really only serve hamburgers". . . . .

Should I then say "Communist! I should be able to eat anything I want in this establishment!" :out:

But then again, maybe I'm wrong.

So if a private health care business decides to serve only healthy choices to its employees (note: the employees don't have to eat at the cafeteria -- they can eat whatever crap they want to if they bring it from home) is this establishment taking part in a communist ideology?

Just wondering how the forum comes down on this issue. . .

EDIT to Add: here's another official comment that I've been informed of -- "We're American citizens. Our workplace shouldn't tell us what to eat. If it's so concerned about our health, why don't they just give us FREE memberships at our local gym?"

[papayahed]

Private comapny = they can serve whatever the hell they want in their cafeteria.

(hahaha, reminds me when newbies cry censorship here on the forum, for some reason some posters can't get it through their thick head that this is privately owned website.)

[dafydd manton]

If you don't like the rabbit-food salads and kumquat delight, take a dirty great Spam and Peanut Butter sandwich, some jelly beans, a bag of crisps (chips) and a bag of doughnuts with you. Presumably, the food in the facility is at discount prices, but you can hardly expect a health care facility to provide unhealthy food. It's not as if they are forcing anybody to eat it. They are in fact providing a choice - take it or leave it. (I know what I'd do, but then, I don't suppose they serve a decent beer anyway!)

[billl]

I think it is ridiculous, Comedian, for the reasons that you and Papayahead mention.

[JuniperWoolf]

Yeah, because everyone knows that it's the communist agenda to make all of the fat cat capitalists skinnier and healthy. The people that you wife works with are stupid.

[Paulclem]

People are the same here in the UK. They don't cry communist, but they cry Nanny State. What it comes down to is they don't like to think they are being told what to do - whether they are or not.

[Lulim]

Killer phrases always crop up when someone has no real arguments at hand but want to pretend otherwise. You needn't take them seriously.

[Scheherazade]

This reminds me of parents' outcry when the Healthy School Meals campaign started here in the UK (yes, parents!). Now children cannot take junk food to school as lunch and most schools do not serve unhealthy food either.

At one point, it got so out of hand that some parents were buying fish and chips for their children and passing it through the playground fences so that their children did not have to endure one healthy meal a day!

And the offending healthy meals include, roast beef/chicken/pork, fish/vegetable cakes, oven chips, rice and pasta, pizza, jacket potatoes...

[Paulclem]

Jamie Oliver really did a good job, whether you like him or not. I used to walk through the school canteen at dinner time and the 5-11 year olds would be able to choose any old rubbish. I saw one kid with jam sandwiches and mashed potatoes...and no-one, including me, made the link between healthy diet - better brain.

[OrphanPip]

I remember when I was in Catholic school and had to have fish or the vegetarian option on Fridays, now that's oppression.

Frankly, if they think that's bad, some businesses in Japan measure their employees waist lines and penalize them if they get fat, a healthy worker is a productive worker! Now, that, I think, is going a bit too far.

[papayahed]

I remember when I was in Catholic school and had to have fish or the vegetarian option on Fridays, now that's oppression.



Doh! I used to be the kid that ate the same thing everyday - salami sandwich. Rain or shine. The nuns used to pray over me every friday during lent as I ate my sandwich.





hahahaha just kidding.

[dafydd manton]

I remember when I was in Catholic school and had to have fish or the vegetarian option on Fridays, now that's oppression.

Frankly, if they think that's bad, some businesses in Japan measure their employees waist lines and penalize them if they get fat, a healthy worker is a productive worker! Now, that, I think, is going a bit too far.

Same kind of thing - a Church of England school, and I dreaded Fridays, and fish! I genuinely can't eat the stuff - I still have to cross the road to pass a fishmonger, so when the Dinner Ladies Waffenkommando insisted that we eat Pilchards (that's Satanic!), my sister and I made it outside at the same time - she vomited to the left of the door, me to the right! Praise Be!

I still think it's ridiculous - and nobody has ever given me a valid reason from the Scriptures!! I wonder why not!!

[TheFifthElement]

This reminds me of parents' outcry when the Healthy School Meals campaign started here in the UK (yes, parents!). Now children cannot take junk food to school as lunch and most schools do not serve unhealthy food either...
It's not really a direct comparison. In the example Comedian posted people still had a choice what to eat. They don't have to eat in the canteen; if they want to go to McDonalds they can do. The Healthy School Meals campaign offered no such choice and still doesn't. As is often the case with anything school related it goes too far by means of dictating what you can send for packed lunches. So, for example, you can't send soup (health and safety), you can't send nuts (in case of allergy), you can't put a kit kat in the lunchbox (chocolate is not healthy) and the list goes on. There comes a point where even the most reasonable parent thinks it's time to stand up to the food nazis, and I have some sympathy with that. I think the whole passing chippy food over the wire was done somewhat tongue in cheek.

[Delta40]

I watched a doco last night on fat. the new term is globesity. I think the word is appropriate given that fast food can be found in even the remotest of places and 2 thirds of of western countries are either overweight or obese. this isn't an individual issue, its worldwide.

[Scheherazade]

It's not really a direct comparison. In the example Comedian posted people still had a choice what to eat. They don't have to eat in the canteen; if they want to go to McDonalds they can do. The Healthy School Meals campaign offered no such choice and still doesn't. As is often the case with anything school related it goes too far by means of dictating what you can send for packed lunches. So, for example, you can't send soup (health and safety), you can't send nuts (in case of allergy), you can't put a kit kat in the lunchbox (chocolate is not healthy) and the list goes on. There comes a point where even the most reasonable parent thinks it's time to stand up to the food nazis, and I have some sympathy with that. I think the whole passing chippy food over the wire was done somewhat tongue in cheek. Encouraging children to stick with healthy options at least one meal a day (during term-time only!), in my opinion, is not the worst thing that schools can do.

There are so many children who go back to their sweet bars, crisps, fizzy drinks and fries for other meals of the day at home that, again I believe, it is all right for them to have a sandwich and a fruit for lunch at least.

It is about raising awareness and establishing more desirable future habits.

PS: I have to admit that I have heard of some school which take it too far by not allowing even birthday cakes and so on but I don't think these are that many (and also when the campaign was new, people were not very sure how to adjust).

[Virgil]

Private comapny = they can serve whatever the hell they want in their cafeteria.

(hahaha, reminds me when newbies cry censorship here on the forum, for some reason some posters can't get it through their thick head that this is privately owned website.)

Agreed, and if I were the employees I would not eat at the Cafeteria. If they in mass decided to go out elsewhere for lunch, then either the cafeterria could no longer sustain itself or they will have to answer to people's wishes.

[The Comedian]

Thanks for the input here guys. This situation just makes me laugh. It's so stupid. I have no problem with a health care facility serving healthy food in its cafeteria. It's almost hypocritical not to --

I mean an internal medicine doc says to a patient "you need to lose some weight and cut down on cholesterol"

Patient says "sure thing doc, I'll just go to the cafeteria and eat some lunch. Then I have to do to my other appointment"

Doc -- "sounds great"

Patient -- "What are they serving there?"

Doc -- "Pizza burgers, soda and chips" :lol: !

Just seems so hypocritical not serve what you preach.

It's like tellin' your kid "Let's talk about the dangers of smoking; I don't want you having ten years needlessly taken from your life. And after that, I'm going to need a cig-break".

[prendrelemick]

:lol:Is Communism still the Bete noire over there?

In Merrie England we shout "Health and Safty gone mad!" or "PC gone mad!" or accuse the powers that be of being like Nazis.:thumbsup:

[JuniperWoolf]

:lol:Is Communism still the Bete noire over there?

It's making a big comeback since Obama got elected.

[dafydd manton]

I clearly remember a letter to the British Medical Journal

"Dear Sir,
Various surveys and research have shown that all foodstuffs known to man are dangerous, with the sole exception of cucumber. This merely makes me fart. Please advise."