Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Nestlé Wants to Sell You Both Sugary Snacks and Diabetes Pills

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 347 posts

Re: Nestlé Wants to Sell You Both Sugary Snacks and Diabetes Pills

#181

Post by ksk »

jensen123 wrote: post #72

The other day I went to buy some canned refried beans. When I read the label, I noticed that it contained refined sugar. WTF?!? There should be no need for sugar in refried beans! After recovering from the shock, I went to another grocery store, where I found refried beans without sugar. Why does this happen? Obviously, sugar tastes good. That has to be why companies add it to all sorts of things. However, if most pe…

Well, there is one question you have forgotten to ask. How many people have YOU educated about this? If everyone spread the word and spent time educating others, the companies would lose money, and soon stop doing it.

It's easy to blame others.

Re: Nestlé Wants to Sell You Both Sugary Snacks and Diabetes Pills

#182

Post by mikeash »

jzwinck wrote: post #174
mikeash wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So they're not encouraging people to consume sugary stuff, they're encouraging people to consume a category of food where people prefer sugary stuff? This is about as sensible as saying that Krispy Kreme isn't pushing sugary foods, people just happen to prefer donuts with lots of sugar in them.

What would you have Krispy Kreme do? Pivot to Kimchi Kombucha?

I don't know. I just think that if we're going to talk about what companies encourage customers to do through their marketing, we should be straight about it.

Re: Nestlé Wants to Sell You Both Sugary Snacks and Diabetes Pills

#184

Post by antisthenes »

blowski wrote: post #13
nsajko wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It would evidently be bad for people to be blobs of fat, remember that in WALL-E they couldn't even stand up. That level of physical impairment is awful whether you're mortally ill or not.

Why? If I value eating whatever I like above having a small waist, why would it be bad for me to be a blob of fat? The only reason I should lose weight is for health reasons, but if there's a magic pill that would remove that reason, then why should I care? I kind of agree with you, but I don't think it's immediately obvious.

Being a blob of fat is a great thing: you're contributing a ton to GDP, you're completely dependent on others for physical tasks, requiring more services, contributing to GDP even further and you'll die before retirement, thus saving society from having to pay you Social Security.

It's not for me, personally, but I'd love if we had more blobs of fat! I'd maybe even start a fat blob washing company!

Re: Nestlé Wants to Sell You Both Sugary Snacks and Diabetes Pills

#185

Post by scalio »

jensen123 wrote: post #72

The other day I went to buy some canned refried beans. When I read the label, I noticed that it contained refined sugar. WTF?!? There should be no need for sugar in refried beans! After recovering from the shock, I went to another grocery store, where I found refried beans without sugar. Why does this happen? Obviously, sugar tastes good. That has to be why companies add it to all sorts of things. However, if most pe…

Right on. The masses that can't be bothered to willingly switch on a couple neurons every now and again are the real problem.

We "the People" have unbelievable power once we unite behind an issue. Only problem is, the vast majority can't be bothered to unhinge their eyeballs from their newsfeeds for a moment and try and understand the world.

Capitalist corps are only happy to feed that behaviour with more happy-hormone-releasing crap.

Re: Nestlé Wants to Sell You Both Sugary Snacks and Diabetes Pills

#186

Post by vonmoltke »

GordonS wrote: post #149
lake99 wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I used to eat a lot of sweets when I was young. Not for breakfast, because that's not the customary here, but at all other times. I liked that stuff. As I grew older, I lost my taste for all that. I have seen this pattern in so many other people too. Kids like sweet stuff. As long as they are active and are in the normal weight range, I don't see any reason to discourage it either, except at night, after brushing tee…

> As long as they are active and are in the normal weight range, I don't see any reason to discourage it either Diabetes is a pretty good reason.

Where is the research linking T2DM to sugar consumption in active, normal-weight people?

Re: Nestlé Wants to Sell You Both Sugary Snacks and Diabetes Pills

#187

Post by rusabd »

noxToken wrote: post #137
jensen123 wrote: post #72

The other day I went to buy some canned refried beans. When I read the label, I noticed that it contained refined sugar. WTF?!? There should be no need for sugar in refried beans! After recovering from the shock, I went to another grocery store, where I found refried beans without sugar. Why does this happen? Obviously, sugar tastes good. That has to be why companies add it to all sorts of things. However, if most pe…

I don't know if dumb is the right word. Ignorant is probably most apt. I want you to think about all of the food that's in your house. Eliminate anything that you would consider intentionally sugary like candy, confection, soda, etc. Now how much of a time consuming task would it be to scrutinize every label for needlessly added sugar? Consider how many people would be willing to do that to check for some extra sugar…

It's easier than someone might think. If you avoid food that contains ingredient list as a general rule scrutinizing the rest would be not such a hard work

Re: Nestlé Wants to Sell You Both Sugary Snacks and Diabetes Pills

#188

Post by MisterBastahrd »

noxToken wrote: post #137
jensen123 wrote: post #72

The other day I went to buy some canned refried beans. When I read the label, I noticed that it contained refined sugar. WTF?!? There should be no need for sugar in refried beans! After recovering from the shock, I went to another grocery store, where I found refried beans without sugar. Why does this happen? Obviously, sugar tastes good. That has to be why companies add it to all sorts of things. However, if most pe…

I don't know if dumb is the right word. Ignorant is probably most apt. I want you to think about all of the food that's in your house. Eliminate anything that you would consider intentionally sugary like candy, confection, soda, etc. Now how much of a time consuming task would it be to scrutinize every label for needlessly added sugar? Consider how many people would be willing to do that to check for some extra sugar…

Time consuming? I read the label of every product I buy when I go to the supermarket. If I do it often enough, I keep track of what's got added sugar and I just don't buy those anymore. It isn't that hard.

Re: Nestlé Wants to Sell You Both Sugary Snacks and Diabetes Pills

#189

Post by escherize »

ams6110 wrote: post #177
cookiecaper wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Do you feel that a consumer is responsible for what they put in their body? Of course. But the average consumer is not only at a disadvantage, they are regularly deceived into believing that unhealthy foods are in fact healthy. In reality, culpability is a complex calculation that passes through the farmer, the food processor, the manufacturer, the ad firm, the grocer, the consumer, and any other party involved in t…

The blame also rests with regulators like the FDA, who for decades promoted a food pyramid that was basically upside-down in terms of what was healthy; who for decades promoted that partially-hydroginated oils (trans-fats) were preferable to natural saturated fats; who encouraged a "low fat" diet that prompted food producers to substitute sugar for fat to make foods tasty and consumers to consume an unhealthy high-st…

... while being funded under the threat of force (taxation).

Re: Nestlé Wants to Sell You Both Sugary Snacks and Diabetes Pills

#190

Post by parennoob »

piquadrat wrote: post #80
parennoob wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No one is showing the clip of what he actually said, which is here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vWkA-uAPXCE#t=2m10s He does absolutely say that "NGOs bang on about water being declared a human right", at the time when he is relaxed, and even bringing up some Austrian folk song about water. He says absolutely nothing about limits, or just being careful. The page you linked is a great example of corporate damage co…

That video cuts off right before Brabeck states his own view. Thanks for proving my point that his quote is often taken out of context. Here's a longer one https://youtu.be/7iGj4GpAbTM?t=192 He states that he thinks it would be better to give water a price so that we are aware of its value, and take specific measures to provide access to water to people who can't afford it. Not the worst idea ever to fight water wast…

Thanks for linking a more complete video. However, I don't understand how the extra context absolves him. In fact, it shows more clearly that he is of the "put a price on everything" (implicit: and then we can sell it at that price) worldview.

Notice that he clearly calls water a "foodstuff" before talking about giving it a price. He then follows it up by saying "The biggest social responsibility of any CEO is to maintain and ensure the successful and profitable future of his enterprise".

Somehow I don't think water waste and access for needy people is particularly important to him. At minimum, I would at least say that he is mildly in opposition to access to clean drinking water being declared a fundamental right instead of a product to be sold. This makes perfect sense, because it would eliminate or heavily impact Nestlé's water business if every country in the world had clean drinking water.

Post reply on HN