Auto-edited on 2020-08-02 to update URLs

I don't eat peanut butter, I eat JIF.

Dirckman wrote:

I don't see what the big deal is...  People in a lot of countries eat bugs as do a shitload of other animals...  I myself wouldn't eat a bug if it was offered to me whole...Life is nothing more than a massive competition for resources and it's only natural that crops be infested with all manner of biological organisms....  If people have become so ginger and violated that they expect all produce to not only be safe, but also free of any other biologics then they should also expect their food costs to skyrocket... The only way to reduce this is the use of pesticides and all manner of chemicals and I'm sure the same people complaining about the insects would complain about that too....  Some people need to just accept reality and shut the fuck up...

What he said!

If you are eating mushrooms from a can you deserve the maggots anyway.

I think I just threw up a little bit in my mouth.

Pus/blood in cow's milk is the one that gives me the heebies.


http://www.notmilk.com/lawbreakers.html

tojo2000 wrote:

Dirckman wrote:

I don't see what the big deal is...  People in a lot of countries eat bugs as do a shitload of other animals...  I myself wouldn't eat a bug if it was offered to me whole...

The people in those countries also tend to suffer from avoidable diseases in exponentially larger numbers.

I'll admit that there is a correlation between these two things, but I doubt eating insects is the causation....  The countries that have people dying out in large numbers due to disease are generally the countries that don't have proper sewage or have their children vaccinated for infectious disease at an early age...

tojo2000 wrote:

Dirckman wrote:

tojo2000 wrote:

The people in those countries also tend to suffer from avoidable diseases in exponentially larger numbers.

I'll admit that there is a correlation between these two things, but I doubt eating insects is the causation....  The countries that have people dying out in large numbers due to disease are generally the countries that don't have proper sewage or have their children vaccinated for infectious disease at an early age...

Sure, whatever you have to tell yourself to sleep at night...

Just enjoy your  clean American vegetables...and American water...and American people who work at every establishment that you frequent that are educated...

...and just try to forget what externalities are, and why Thomas Jefferson disagrees with you, even though the people you trust say he doesn't.

Hearing someone like you pull out the Jefferson card almost makes me laugh.

That's like me busting out, "oh yeah, well Clara Zetkin would disagree with you on that issue no matter what your handlers are telling you".

hehehe

square wrote:

As of February 19, 654 illnesses and nine deaths confirmed associated with the Salmonella Typhimurium outbreak.  Send these lovely e-cards to all your family and friends.

So, roughly .0000025% of our population?

How will we ever recover from such a plague?

ptah13 wrote:

So, roughly .0000025% of our population?

How will we ever recover from such a plague?

Obvious troll is obvious.  Good luck getting others to bite.

square wrote:

ptah13 wrote:

So, roughly .0000025% of our population?

How will we ever recover from such a plague?

Obvious troll is obvious.  Good luck getting others to bite.

I'll bite, if only because the information is actually pretty notable.

In any sort of food-related outbreak such as the recent salmonella contamination case, the actual numbers of people who are sickened are believed to be far more substantial than actually reported. While the official numbers of those sickened, or hospitalized, or killed by the contamination may seem literally low, the real numbers are probably hundreds of times greater, at least in the cases of those made ill.

Why? People don't report it. The figures published by the FDA are based almost entirely on figures produced by the CDC which, in turn, are derived from state agencies which, in turn, are provided by city and county governments. The symptoms of salmonella poisoning are very similar to the flu, which leads many to believe they have the flu rather than food poisoning. Many people also tend to blame the non-existent "stomach flu" for their illness, not realizing they've been hit with food poisoning. Another popular scapegoat is the restaurant at which someone had eaten only a few hours before: except in the rare, most extreme, cases salmonella typically takes up to 24 hours to build up enough presence in the body to induce illness. Chances are, it may have been their own cooking that did them in.

And while Ptah is an idiot - at least on line - and would never understand this baffling concept, our food isn't supposed to make us sick. People have the right to expect their food is safe, and the majority of food producers understand that: killing off or even just sickening one's customer base is a terrible way to build brand loyalty.

But again, this is probably over Ptah's head so I leave it to the other intelligent residents of High Street to fully appreciate this information.

Taint wrote:

square wrote:

ptah13 wrote:

So, roughly .0000025% of our population?

How will we ever recover from such a plague?

Obvious troll is obvious.  Good luck getting others to bite.

I'll bite, if only because the information is actually pretty notable.

In any sort of food-related outbreak such as the recent salmonella contamination case, the actual numbers of people who are sickened are believed to be far more substantial than actually reported. While the official numbers of those sickened, or hospitalized, or killed by the contamination may seem literally low, the real numbers are probably hundreds of times greater, at least in the cases of those made ill.

Why? People don't report it. The figures published by the FDA are based almost entirely on figures produced by the CDC which, in turn, are derived from state agencies which, in turn, are provided by city and county governments. The symptoms of salmonella poisoning are very similar to the flu, which leads many to believe they have the flu rather than food poisoning. Many people also tend to blame the non-existent "stomach flu" for their illness, not realizing they've been hit with food poisoning. Another popular scapegoat is the restaurant at which someone had eaten only a few hours before: except in the rare, most extreme, cases salmonella typically takes up to 24 hours to build up enough presence in the body to induce illness. Chances are, it may have been their own cooking that did them in.

And while Ptah is an idiot - at least on line - and would never understand this baffling concept, our food isn't supposed to make us sick. People have the right to expect their food is safe, and the majority of food producers understand that: killing off or even just sickening one's customer base is a terrible way to build brand loyalty.

But again, this is probably over Ptah's head so I leave it to the other intelligent residents of High Street to fully appreciate this information.

Whoa there, trigger!

Wtf did you write that wasn't obvious in the first place? I bet nobody purchased any Tylenol in the Chicagoland area in the mid-80's...

You're never going to edjumacate me in the ways of branding or customer loyalty, I've had these concepts drilled in my head quite a bit, over the years.

I'm sure more than 9 people will die from this nonsense, but you have to consider the cost/benefit deal involved here. 20 people die every 6-8 years in a salmonella outbreak vs cost to prevent. What is the value of each life? I guess you'd have to figure the average lawsuit settlement for food poisoning related deaths vs the costs involved.

If it costs enough, they will prevent this. You libs should fully understand this as your party is the one known to be pro limitless punitive damages in lawsuits (hence why my conservative father has voted Democrat in every election since Regan, being a lawyer, now retired). I'm of two minds on the subject. I see how sometimes punitive damages are retarded (I'm sorry, but your ass isn't worth a billion dollars). On the other hand, the definition of "punitive" is "punishment" and, sometimes, a really negligent business deserves to be assraped back to the stone age....

WTF do you think I not understand? I've had food poisoning before and I first thought it was "the flu". Why wouldn't I know that the numbers are skewered?

Damn... fuck I mean I expect this response from Blojo, DMT and the psuedo-barrister, but your my favorite gooch....

Taint wrote:

ptah13 wrote:

Taint wrote:

I'll bite, if only because the information is actually pretty notable.

In any sort of food-related outbreak such as the recent salmonella contamination case, the actual numbers of people who are sickened are believed to be far more substantial than actually reported. While the official numbers of those sickened, or hospitalized, or killed by the contamination may seem literally low, the real numbers are probably hundreds of times greater, at least in the cases of those made ill.

Why? People don't report it. The figures published by the FDA are based almost entirely on figures produced by the CDC which, in turn, are derived from state agencies which, in turn, are provided by city and county governments. The symptoms of salmonella poisoning are very similar to the flu, which leads many to believe they have the flu rather than food poisoning. Many people also tend to blame the non-existent "stomach flu" for their illness, not realizing they've been hit with food poisoning. Another popular scapegoat is the restaurant at which someone had eaten only a few hours before: except in the rare, most extreme, cases salmonella typically takes up to 24 hours to build up enough presence in the body to induce illness. Chances are, it may have been their own cooking that did them in.

And while Ptah is an idiot - at least on line - and would never understand this baffling concept, our food isn't supposed to make us sick. People have the right to expect their food is safe, and the majority of food producers understand that: killing off or even just sickening one's customer base is a terrible way to build brand loyalty.

But again, this is probably over Ptah's head so I leave it to the other intelligent residents of High Street to fully appreciate this information.

Whoa there, trigger!

Wtf did you write that wasn't obvious in the first place? ...

Damn... fuck I mean I expect this response from Blojo, DMT and the psuedo-barrister, but your my favorite gooch....

Because you're missing the very real expense - if we're going to excuse the cost to human health and life - from the impact on productivity and the increased medical costs. If hundreds of thousands of people, or more, are calling in sick, or shelling out for medications they don't really need or that aren't appropriate for them, the overall financial costs to society are enormous.

Sorry, Trigger. Your attempt at callousness was based on a weak premise.

Fair enough....


Edited:

Whoa, there!!! You almost had me!

How do you get from 654 illnesses to "hundreds of thousands". I'll admit that the numbers are probably skewered, but, umm, not anything like you are dreaming there, sailor....

Last edited by ptah13 (2009-02-24 18:28:56)

Dirckman wrote:

The whole thing has a happy middle ground and is in many ways similar to the medical crisis....  People demand a higher and higher quality of medical care and actually expect it to be foolproof..  In an attempt to give the customer what they are looking for the medical industry has to increase costs exponentially to help pay for the research and development...  You can't demand increasingly better health care and food cleanliness without expecting to pay a higher cost...  I would love my food to be 100% of the way free of all contaminants, but it would be difficult for me and millions of others to afford food of that quality all of the time...

No, Dirck... it should all be free, to everyone, both food and healthcare!!!

How dare they expect us to spend our welfare checks on basic needs when there are Escalades and Tags to purchase???

In all reality, I'm with da bitch on this one.

I want the least amount of dookey in my processed meats, god dammit.

I could have gone through my whole life without learning that there are "peckers and shit" in potted meat. Of course, I don't eat potted meat, but I don't think people who do should have to live on assholes and dung, either.

Taint wrote:

The gist of my initial post was that hundreds of thousands, potentially millions, of food poisoning cases go unreported because people fail to understand the symptoms.

Sounds like you might enjoy reading Barf Blog.

Featuring gems like kitchen staff killing mice with cooking utensils.

tojo2000 wrote:

When I lived in rural northwestern Argentina in the 80's the local Chinese food place had a pet parrot that lived in the kitchen and fed off of the scraps.  Probably not all that sanitary.  At the other restaurants they would put breadsticks out and then when you finished eating they would grab the breadsticks you didn't eat and put them on the empty tables that were waiting for customers.

That's common even here, unfortunately.

square wrote:

Taint wrote:

The gist of my initial post was that hundreds of thousands, potentially millions, of food poisoning cases go unreported because people fail to understand the symptoms.

Sounds like you might enjoy reading Barf Blog.

Featuring gems like kitchen staff killing mice with cooking utensils.

Duly bookmarked. Thanks!

A local Mexican restaurant here recently caused an outbreak of Legionnaires' disease...  They traced the source of the outbreak to a decorative fountain in the lobby...  They removed the fountain and had a massive cleanup, but that wasn't enough to save their business...  People just immediately stopped dining there and within a few months they closed the doors for good...  This wasn't even a food preparation issue or even had anything to do with neglect on the part of the business...  People just don't do business with places that are deemed unsanitary........

tojo2000 wrote:

Unfortunately it's not that simple when we're talking about a peanut processing plant or a farm. 

You buy some girl scout cookies and you get sick 24 hours later.  You probably never even notice that it was the peanut butter. You go to the supermarket and buy a bag of spinach to make a salad.  Parts of it came from a farm with a fecal contamination problem this year, due to changing habitat of the local pig population.

How exactly were you supposed to know?  The problem with the idea that people just won't buy from people who contaminate the food or water supply is it assumes a level of knowledge about where everything you eat comes from that just isn't practical.  It would be so time-consuming that you would be giving up part of the productivity of your workforce to researching food sources, not to mention that it would require labeling all of the food with the origin somehow.

Simple regulations can make this kind of thing exceedingly rare, and they do.  The breakdown in the system is that the regulations we have had been weakened to the point that the FDA had to ask permission to inspect facilities, and had to trust test results provided to them by the industries they were supposed to be regulating.  Yes, regulations can get out of hand, but they also can free up the members of our society from worrying about stupid shit like whether or not their toothpaste is sweetened with antifreeze, or whether their Clif bars have contamintated peanut butter because it's cheaper, and hey, it'll kill at most a half dozen or so people, most people will just get sick if they're affected.  It frees them up to work on being productive.

Rather than government regulation (which can quickly get out of hand), I'd prefer private third party certification of products....  Underwriters' Laboratories is a perfect example of this...  If a company wants their product to be sold to the public they should be willing to submit their product to a trusted third party which can choose to or not to stamp the product with their seal of approval...  UL has recently moved into testing both water and food safety and they might be the answer to this entire mess...  If the public was made aware that food not stamped with a trusted third party certification label might not meet their quality needs then they'll probably not buy it....  I still stand by my philosophy that government is a poor alternative to anything that can be done in the private sector...

fnord wrote:

Dirckman wrote:

Rather than government regulation (which can quickly get out of hand), I'd prefer private third party certification of products....  Underwriters' Laboratories is a perfect example of this...  If a company wants their product to be sold to the public they should be willing to submit their product to a trusted third party which can choose to or not to stamp the product with their seal of approval...  UL has recently moved into testing both water and food safety and they might be the answer to this entire mess...  If the public was made aware that food not stamped with a trusted third party certification label might not meet their quality needs then they'll probably not buy it....  I still stand by my philosophy that government is a poor alternative to anything that can be done in the private sector...

I take you approve of kosher stamps on food, Brillo pads and aluminum foil?  At least someone is supposedly inspecting the factories; never mind that rabbis and officials of Jewish organizations are dual Israeli citizens/agents and that part of any money collected by Jewish kosher certification groups or other Jewish organizations winds up helping the Israeli Zionazi’s kill Arabs and make our world less safe.

I take the "kosher" label for what it is, a religious organization's approval of a product....  The only third party label I'd be willing to accept is one from a company that uses the scientific method and whose integrity is on the line...  Science is far from perfect, but it's the best thing we have going for us now...  Religion didn't put us on the moon, the scientific method did, religion didn't more than double our lifespans, science did...

I think that's the first time I've heard anyone call Mexicans "mexis".

jesusluvspegging wrote:

Taint wrote:

Indeed, Sailor. The gist of my initial post was that hundreds of thousands, potentially millions, of food poisoning cases go unreported because people fail to understand the symptoms.

Yes. Millions.

If the symptoms aren't bad enough that it sends them to the doctor, why does it matter?

What if it's your peanut butter, your Spinach, the sausage, your toothpaste, and the paint on your children's toys?  Also, that's a lot of lost productivity just because people cut corners to save a buck.

Last edited by tojo2000 (2009-02-25 03:51:06)

GooberMcNutly wrote:

Until they grow, harvest, package prepare and serve your food inside a Stage III clean-room at Intel, you are going to have microbes hitchhiking on your food. Some people will be sensitive to those critters and will feel poorly because of it. What are you going to do?

Drink plenty of fluids and, maybe, if you're small or have a weak immune system, take an antibiotic.

kim wrote:

tojo2000 wrote:

I think that's the first time I've heard anyone call Mexicans "mexis".

Naw, Taco bell has a "mexi melt" on their menu so I think I'm okay

Like Soylent Green, it made from genuine melted Mexicans...or at least it appears that way.

jesusluvspegging wrote:

If the symptoms aren't bad enough that it sends them to the doctor, why does it matter?

Just because the stomach pain and diarrhea isn’t bad enough to send me to the doctor or hospital doesn’t make it OK!  I am not a masochist!  I don’t enjoy being in pain or racing for the toilet before I shit my pants!  Food poisoning also means I have to worry about the diarrhea medication interacting with my regular meds and the worry that I’m shitting out my meds before adequate amounts have been absorbed into my bloodstream.

Last edited by fnord (2009-02-25 16:08:27)