text:
Food is not just a job for Amber. In fact, she's been experimenting with food since an early age. In the Test Kitchen blog you can read about all her adventures, from canning jams and jellies, to making bread from a wild sourdough starter, to trying out new ethnic cuisines. She is excited to share her creativity and expertise with you.
Get to know the members of the Land O'Lakes Co-op with a seasonal look at family life on the dairy farm.
View our story
This is an easy-to-make-ahead soup for a chilly winter's night.
Melt butter in 4-quart saucepan until sizzling; add potatoes, leeks, salt and pepper. Cook over medium heat, stirring occasionally, 8-10 minutes or until leeks are softened.
Add chicken broth. Increase heat to medium-high; cook 8-10 minutes or until mixture comes to a boil. Reduce heat to low. Cover; cook 25-27 minutes or until potatoes are tender. Stir in half & half.
Place 3 cups soup in 5-cup blender container or food processor bowl fitted with metal blade. Cover; blend until smooth. Pour into large serving bowl; repeat with remaining soup. Stir in 3 tablespoons chives and horseradish. Garnish with chopped fresh chives, if desired.
Calories: 170
Fat: 6g
Cholesterol: 15mg
Sodium: 860mg
Carbohydrates: 25g
Dietary Fiber: 2g
Protein: 5g
Very simple and adaptable. I've served it with bacon and sour cream like a "baked potato soup." I've also tried it with shredded chicken breast and fresh peas. The flavor of the soup is great on its own, but lends itself well to many variations and additions. When I had 2 cups left over once I thinned it out with milk and poured it over a beef roast and veggies like a gravy. INSTANT HIT!
Simple and delicious!
was the best potatoe leek soup i have ever tried. It has become a family favorite!
It is very good.
Very creamy and sure tastes rich and potatoey!! Next time though I won't put 4 leeks in as it was a bit strong...maybe just 2 leeks. This is delish and yes, I will make it again.
I didn't have half and half on hand so I used your site to substitute 1/3 butter with 2/3 milk. The soup was so good...Oh! I also tried it with 1/2 can of peas.Still great!
Email address will not be published
How Did This Recipe Work Out for You?
Please return to landolakes.com to rate and review this recipe.
Your comments and suggestions are appreciated by others.
This recipe was reprinted from landolakes.com. http://www.landolakes.com/recipe/1154
© 2015 Land O'Lakes, Inc.
Mint isn't a traditional Irish flavor, but the color of the green mint mousse in this tart lends itself so well to St. Patrick's Day celebrations, I had to tie them together somehow! The Mint White Chocolate Tart takes a little bit of effort to make with its multiple steps, but the end result is fluffy, subtly sweet and has a perfect hint of mint.
Bring the bold flavors of
ginger and sesame to a
variety of meals.
Eggs Benedict, like this Cheesy Eggs Benedict, is the quintessential brunch dish, but it sure can be challenging to serve to a crowd with so many last-minute elements – toasting English muffins, poaching eggs and making hollandaise sauce. Of course, it can be made easier by toasting all the muffins on a sheet in the oven, and by poaching your eggs the day before your brunch. More ...
The Simple Rewards® Club is your personal online resource for exclusive offers and information. It's also our way of saying "thank you" for trusting Land O'Lakes and inviting us into your home. Membership is free, so sign up today.
We'll email instructions to the address you used to register.
We've sent a confirmation email to the address associated with your account. Check your email and follow the link within 3 hours in order to complete the password reset process.
If you are already a member, please sign in.
Look for an email soon with instructions to reset your password.
If you did not receive the email, please check your email junk folder (just in case) or contact us.
Hi, I'm Becky. I'm eager to share my best ideas and favorite recipes from my 20+ years in the Land O'Lakes Test Kitchen. I'm also excited to help with any questions you have about cooking and baking with Land O Lakes® products. Some of the questions and answers will be published in our newsletter, The Measuring Cup®. Please use the short form below to ask your questions, or share your tip or memory.
Your question has been submitted.
Your email has been sent. Thanks for sharing this Land O Lakes recipe!


text: We found this to be true also. My son applied to and was accepted to both Seton Hall and St. Joe's university. both private, catholic schools, both hovering around 45K. both offered about 22K/year in grant money to him. Of course he picks the school the offers him the least amount of money and is 10 hours away. My child. I'm probably the only mother on the planet who is actively planning on being a burden to her son in her old age.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Akeley settles lawsuit against city employees
The city of Akeley has settled the lawsuit filed by a rural Akeley resident for a reported $55,000.
In a lawsuit filed in May, Kristy Barsch claimed she was sexually assaulted by on-duty Hubbard County sheriff's deputy Greg Siera. Akeley police chief Eric Klein, police officer Travis Carlson and the city were named as defendants for allegedly failing to report the assault.
Are you a newspaper subscriber but you don't have a Digital Access account yet? https://secure.forumcomm.com/?publisher_ID=40&event=subscriber/lookup.
You will need your subscription account number and phone number. Not sure if you have an account? Email us at email@example.com and we can help you.


text:
Once Upon a Time Reviews
The town of Storybrooke is in complete disarray under the Snow Queen's Spell of Shattered Sight in this week's episode of Once Upon a Time , "Shattered Sight." As our favorite fairy tale characters pick each other a More »
Guess what beats the Snow Queen. (Did you guess love? Because the answer is love.) Read More... http://tvrecaps.ew.com/recap/once-upon-a-time-season-4-episode-10/
Note: If you haven't seen the Dec. 7 episode of "Once Upon a Time," serious spoilers are aheadFor all of the build up to the Spell of Shattered Sight, it seems like the spell should have been renamed "Spell of Half More »
I love that when Regina flies into a rage, the first thing she does is don a fancy court dress, coordinating jewels, and a magnificent updo. Read More... http://www.tv.com/shows/once-upon-a-time-2011/community/ More »
A magic mirror, keeping the faith and wishing upon a star still couldn't save Storybrooke from one evil spell on Once Upon a Time Season 4 Episode 10 . Everyone seemed to have faith Emma and Elsa could work to More »
In this weeks Once Upon a Time, Storybrooke is in chaos as the Snow Queens Spell of Shattered Sight approaches the town. Once the purple, billowy cloud hits, everyone will be controlled by his or her worst instincts More »
It was clear nothing good was going to come from Rumpelstiltskin taking Hook's heart on "Once Upon a Time,"but during Sunday's (Nov. 30) episode Hook's forced betrayal proved to be even more devastating than anticip More »
The Spell of Shattered Sight has been cast on "Once Upon a Time," and the whole "Fall" episode has mostly everyone concerned with either combating it or getting out of the Snow Queen's way. Read More... http:// More »
Season 4 of Once Upon a Time continues with a somewhat slow episode that finds our Storybrooke gang preparing for the Spell of Shattered Sight. As everyone gets ready for the latest curse, Belle discovers a possible More »
Did the Shattered Vision Heart Whatever Spell cause everyone in Storybrooke to throw shade at each other and tell it like it is to an unbearable degree? Read More... http://www.tv.com/shows/once-upon-a-time-201 More »


text:
Sketchy Audience
from United States / Member Since 2007
Have you ever watched a movie and someone in the audience was annoying you? Sketchy Audience shows an audience full of people all with 3D glasses on with everyone looking sketched out. This illustrated graphic tee design will have you wearing 3D glasses every where.


text:
Real news. Real funny.
Real news. Real funny.
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.
• • •
5035 clicks; posted to Politics » on 08 Nov 2013 at 6:16 PM (1 year ago) | Favorite | share: more»
Share this link:
Article Comments close
411 Comments (+0 »)
Displayed 11 of 411 comments
This thread is closed to new comments.
Submit a Link »
In Other Media
Stories from our partner sites:
Barry Manilow at STAPLES Center
Win tickets to see comedian Anjelah J...
Creep or Keep
Trisha Yearwood giveaway
More news at KTLA »
WATCH: 1st Official Trailer for 'Fear...
'The Walking Dead' Season 5 Finale: R...
Odds & Picks to Win the 2015 World Se...
Fran Drescher & Peter Marc Jacobson -...
More news at Heavy »
Genetically Modified Food Advocate Re...
Highest Italian Court Overturns Amand...
Five Year Old Missing Boy Found Four...
Who is Responsible for Germanwings Cr...
More news at OraTV »


text:
Machine Operator - 3rd Shift Starting at $12.50 FT w/Benefits!
Are you looking for an active, stable work environment in a manufacturing field?
We're looking for 3rd shift Production Machine Operators/Batch Manufacturing Operators of all experience levels for our Louisville (Riverport) location. If you have a strong work ethic, ...
Mar 30 -
Louisville - Construction & trades
Entry Level Installation Technician
Entry Level Installation Technician
Company vehicles provided! Seeking a challenging position that rewards hard work and quality service? Wanting to have opportunity to make money based on your performance and motivation to succeed? If so, Multiband has the ...
Mar 24 -
Louisville - Construction & trades
Mar 24 -
Jeffersonville - Construction & trades
Supervisor, Patient Care
Overview To perform this job successfully, an individual must be able to perform each essential duty satisfactorily. The requirements listed below are representative of the knowledge, skill, and/or ability required. Reasonable accommodations may be made to enable individuals ...
Mar 16 -
Jeffersonville - Everything else
Mar 2 -
Louisville - Construction & trades
We'll be sending text message alerts for your subscription to


text:
Changes related to "Portal:United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit"
This is a list of changes made recently to pages linked from a specified page (or to members of a specified category). Pages on your watchlist are bold.
22 March 2015
- (diff | hist) . . m Module:Plain sister; 20:57 . . (0) . . Tacsipacsi (Talk | contribs) (the WD code of Wikibooks is "enwikibooks" instead of "e_b_wikibooks")


text:
Latest Socialism Stories
Several Bay Area small business owners combine resources to fund-raiser for 2013 Spring Storms Disaster Relief for Central & Western Oklahoma City, Friday July 12, 2013.
Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam, July 9, 2013 - (ACN Newswire) - Use MTA VIETNAM as a platform to bridge local enterprises and foreign business partners to further establish Vietnam as an attractive investment
Agoda.com, Asia's leading hotel booking site and part of Nasdaq-listed Priceline Group (Nasdaq:PCLN), is showcasing a handful of beautiful hotels in the Laotian capital of Vientiane, one of
A new promotion for travelers reserving Hanoi – Ninh Binh train via HanoiSapaTrain.com has been commenced this week by Blue Dragon Tours, the tour agency that currently operating this website.
Singapore, June 14, 2013 - (ACN Newswire) - With 11 international group pavilions and 325 exhibitors from 21 countries and regions, the international representation at MTA VIETNAM2013 is unmistakable.
In response to an article on BBC, social media agency fishbat reacts to news from Cuba wherein public Internet access is becoming a reality and what it means for social media marketing.
The new Vietnamese restaurant is now serving lunch and dinner Brooklyn, NY (PRWEB) May 31, 2013
Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam, May 27, 2013 - (ACN Newswire) - With a gathering of more than 60 Taiwanese firms at the Saigon Exhibition & Convention Centre (SECC), MTA VIETNAM2013 will unveil its biggest
- One who brings meat to the table; hence, in some countries, the official title of the grand master or steward of the king's or a nobleman's household.


text:
"Not what I had expected. "
- Comp & Benefits
- Work/Life Balance
- Senior Management
- Career Opportunities
I have been working at ChaCha
-Working for ChaCha is online, so you can do it from home
-There's a huge amount of tipsheets and videos to help you learn the ropes.
-You recieve weekly emails giving you your work performance.
-Good employee relations, fully accessible employee forum.
-Payment is only 3 cents per question, so it takes hours of work for average pay.
-You are given no schedule, which makes it hard to work as much as you need.
I personally think questions should be worth more than three cents per question, and also, I think that the new interface for expediting should be introduced already.
- Any Location
- Any Job Title
I have been working at ChaChaPros
You get to make your own hours, work when you feel like it, get to answer funny questions, and help people.Cons
It's hard to hit the actual pay out, it doesn't pay very much per question, and some of the questions can be hard to answer.Advice to ManagementAdvice
I think they're doing a great job, I just wish they would monitor the answers better. I've asked ChaCha questions before and have gotten answers that were completely and totally off despite giving details.Recommends
I worked at ChaChaPros
You can make your own schedule. Work any hours or days that you want. If you have a laptop you can work anywhere you want to as well.Cons
They are very quick to tell you when your not doing good enough but never give you a pat on the back when your doing great. When I stopped working for them I unsubscribed from their emails and they still to this day send me them. When the work got slow, they told me I would have to switch positions even though I knew nothing about it. The pay sucks.Advice to ManagementAdvice
The only thing I can think of to say to management would be to always remember that your company is run by the little people. The people who put their heart and soul into their work and love what they do. We are not numbers.


text:
Americas Best Value Inn-Los Angeles/Hollywood, Los Angeles
Situated in the heart of Los Angeles, Americas Best Value Inn-Los Angeles/Hollywood is close to Angelus Temple, Dodger Stadium, and Walt Disney Concert Hall. Also nearby are Echo Park and MacArthur Park.
Property Features.
A complimentary breakfast is served each morning. Amenities at Americas Best Value Inn-Los Angeles/Hollywood include tour/ticket assistance. Wireless Internet access is complimentary in public areas. Complimentary self parking is available onsite for guests. This is a smoke-free property.
Rooms open to balconies. The 25 guestrooms at Americas Best Value Inn-Los Angeles/Hollywood include hair dryers and irons/ironing boards. Complimentary wireless high-speed Internet access is provided. Televisions are equipped with cable channels. All accommodations provide phones along with free local calls (restrictions may apply). All units feature microwaves and refrigerators.
Neighborhood isn't great. Parking sucks. And they charge your credit card $100 for…
had to gave a 100.00 deposit to stay did not like
Enter dates to check prices
Hotel Info: 866-539-8117from $90
- Standard Room, 1 Queen Bed
- Standard Room, 2 Double Beds
- Room, 1 Queen Bed
- Room, 2 Double Beds
Recommended hotels
At a glance
Key facts
Hotel size
- This hotel has 25 rooms
- This hotel is arranged over 2 floors
- Check-in time starts at 3 PM
- Check-out time is 11 AM
Required at check in
- Credit card or cash deposit required
- Government-issued photo ID required
Travelling with others
- Pets not allowed
- Free WiFi in public areas
- Free WiFi in rooms
- Free self parking
Other information
- Smoke-free property
Nearby Two Star Los Angeles hotels
In the hotel
- Free continental breakfast daily
- 24-hour front desk
- Tours/ticket assistance
- Accessible path of travel
In the room
- Iron/ironing board
- Balcony
- Private bathroom
- Hair dryer
- Cable TV channels
- Free WiFi
- Free local calls
- Refrigerator
- Microwave
Top Los Angeles hotels
Recently reviewed hotels in Los Angeles
- Travelodge Hollywood - Vermont / SunsetFrom
- Best Western Plus South Bay HotelFrom
- Pasadena InnFrom
"Good location. Check in was a problem as both keys did not work. Needs to offer non feather pillows as very allergic."Mar 8, 2015
- Howard Johnson Inn and SuitesFrom
"This hotel is lovely. Staff are courteous and everything is immaculate. Large room with great beds. Quiet facility. Loved the secure parking lot and the breakfast is full of…"Mar 8, 2015


text:
Opening statements
Three major food issues face the world. Local, national, and global governing authorities must take bold and innovative action to avoid catastrophic health consequences, political upheaval, and political and financial instability around the globe.
The food and drink industry shares society's concerns about the health of the nation, particularly rising obesity levels, and it is committed to playing a positive role in responding to this vital debate.
Should governments play a stronger role in guiding food and nutrition choices? Our latest debate takes up this contentious question with the following proposition: This house believes that governments should play a stronger role in guiding food and nutrition choices.
On one side of this fence, public health advocates point to the twin nutrition epidemics of under- and over-nutrition. The world's poorest (the "bottom billion") often do not receive enough calories or micronutrients for proper health. Yet even more elsewhere eat too many calories (albeit many empty ones from junk food), fuelling a global epidemic of obesity. The case for government intervention is bolstered, argues this camp, by the never-ending stream of scientific (and pseudo-scientific) papers claiming that some particular food or additive is particularly lethal or healthful.
Hang on a minute, respond those of a more liberal mindset. Whatever happened to personal responsibility? Or to the glutton's right to live a life that is, if shorter, at least made a bit less nasty and brutish by the pleasures of tasty food? After all, such folk argue, even supposedly healthy foods and vitamins can do harm if eaten in excess or by people with the wrong genetic makeup.
In his opening statement in support of the proposition, Kelly Brownell takes one of the central arguments of the side opposite—the role of personal responsibility for one's health—head-on, arguing that environment plays a more powerful role in determining food choices than does personal irresponsibility. He wags a disapproving finger at America's soaring obesity rates, observing that immigrants tend to lose their thin ways and become obese when exposed to the country's overbearing culture of fast and unhealthy food. In building the case for government intervention, he invokes the notion drawn from the economic theory of "externalities"—harms resulting from the consumption of a product, say, that are not accounted for in the market price of that given product. He argues that the carbon footprint and other environmental externalities are not priced into the cost of much food; he also suggests that obesity results in health costs to society that are not accounted for in the market price of bacon double cheeseburgers.
The side opposite has not given an inch away in its opening remark. Melanie Leech suggests the very frame of the debate needs to be changed from one that weighs up the merits of a bigger role for government to one that sees the food industry as an enlightened and progressive force in dealing with obesity and other nutrition issues. "We have shown real leadership", she insists, pointing to the British food industry's voluntary efforts at on-pack nutrition information and recipe formulations. She acknowledges a legitimate role for government in food and nutrition—to "articulate the broad strategy"—but that proves faint praise indeed, as she proceeds to explain why she thinks the government cannot possibly implement its desired strategies vigorously "without creating a justifiable consumer backlash."
Which side do you agree with? Consider the arguments and cast your vote now, before you reach for that forbidden fruit.
Three major food issues face the world. Local, national, and global governing authorities must take bold and innovative action to avoid catastrophic health consequences, political upheaval, and political and financial instability around the globe. Policies are needed to improve the world's diet.
Problem 1: Imagine the day when obesity rivals hunger as the world's chief nutrition concern. That day has arrived. Two-thirds of American adults and one-third of children are now overweight or obese. More disturbing are alarming increases in every corner of the world, particularly unlikely countries such as India and China. Approximately 1 billion people worldwide are overweight or obese. Human biology was simply not designed to cope with an environment that promotes a diet high in sugar, fat, calories and salt.
Problem 2: Another 1 billion people are hungry. Hungry people, if fortunate enough to survive, do everything less effectively, including working, learning and caring for their families, giving credence to the Byzantine proverb, "He who has bread has many problems. He who has no bread has only one problem." Hunger is caused in part by the vagaries of geography and recurring but unpredictable problems such as droughts and floods. But problems such as war, political oppression, genocide and global warming create great numbers of refugees, populations cut off from food and vast numbers of people who cannot feed themselves. There is now enough food to feed the world, but political and economic barriers prevent its distribution.
Problem 3: Modern food production has grave environmental impact. The carbon footprint of many foods (a fast-food meal can be used as an example) is considerable when one accounts for petroleum-based fertilisers, pesticides, herbicides and hormones used to produce highly processed foods or to fatten farm animals. In addition, food is often transported long distances. Meat consumption illustrates the inefficient use of fossil fuels. Humans can eat grain directly or use the grain to feed animals, but 2kg, 4kg and 7kg of grain respectively are required to produce 1kg of chicken, pork or beef. Animals also produce gases and waste that degrade the environment. According to the Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations, global greenhouse gas emissions from animal agriculture now exceed emissions from transportation.
Water is also a prime example of a political and environmental catastrophe in the making. According to the United Nations, 20% of the world's population experiences water scarcity today; by 2025 the figure will be 67%. When water resources run dry, starvation, migration, collapse of agricultural economies and political unrest are not far behind. Could countries go to war over a shared river or depletion of aquifers? Seventy percent of world water use is for agriculture, and again, some foods are worse than others. Four and a half times the water is required to produce 1kg of beef compared with 1kg of grain. To produce the food a typical individual now eats requires 5,000 litres (1,320 gallons) of water each day.
Ascribing responsibility
These problems are conceptualised in two primary ways. One is to focus on individual misbehaviour as the cause and increased personal responsibility as the solution. The second emphasises the social, political and economic drivers of the problem and underscores public policies that make healthy behaviour a more likely default. Nowhere is the divide as sharp as with obesity.
The personal responsibility position sees overweight people as the problem and education as the solution. This stance is used frequently by the food industry and has undesirable consequences. Stigma and discrimination aimed at overweight individuals are rampant. This stance also permits the food industry to direct attention away from corporate responsibility, captured nicely by Sean McBride, a spokesman for the National Soft Drink Association, saying that obesity is "about the couch and not the can." The outcome is flawed logic about causes, protection of harmful business practices such as marketing foods to children and inaction in the face of crisis.
The personal irresponsibility approach is wrong, and is contradicted by a wealth of scientific evidence. Obesity rates around the world have been rising each year, suggesting a worldwide decline in responsibility. Precisely the opposite is true. Data show people behaving more responsibly in many areas of health. People moving from the United States to countries where people are less obese lose weight and people moving to the United States gain weight. Laboratory animals given access to a healthy diet but also foods high in sugar and fat will eat vast amounts of junk food, sometimes tripling their body weight. When the food environment changes, weight changes. Imploring individuals to become more responsible, penalising them for not and counting on education to solve the problem has been a failed, 40-year experiment.
Changing defaults to correct market failures
It is generally agreed that government intervention is justified when market failures cause sub-optimal production and consumption patterns. Externalities alone argue for constructive government intervention in the case of food. For example, the environmental costs of consuming a fast-food meal are not borne by the person making the purchase. In addition, people do not pay the real cost of producing that meal because subsidies cheapen the hamburger, the oil for frying potatoes and sweeteners for the beverage.
Another example of externalities is the health-care costs of obesity. Obesity costs $147 billion per year in the United States today (9% of total health-care expenditures). Half comes from public funds through Medicare and Medicaid. The figure is expected to be $344 billion (21% of total costs) by 2018. The cost of treating diabetes is expected to triple by 2034.
Current conditions make unhealthy eating the default. Better foods cost more than more healthy choices. The least healthy foods are marketed relentlessly to children. Portions are massive. Opportunities to eat are omnipresent. The government has a clear role in correcting these and other problems, first by changing current trade, agriculture, nutrition and marketing policies to align with health goals, and second, by instituting new policies designed to create better defaults. Such actions are consistent with the government's interest in protecting citizens and creating long-term vitality and viability.
The food and drink industry shares society's concerns about the health of the nation, particularly rising obesity levels, and it is committed to playing a positive role in responding to this vital debate.
In fact, the industry would argue that it has shown real leadership on this particular pillar of public policy for many years.
In the UK, the industry's commitment is long-standing and on the record. The Food and Drink Federation, which represents UK manufacturers, first formalised willingness to be judged by its actions through the publication of its health and well-being manifesto way back in 2004.
The federation's ambition is to make a real difference for consumers. And much progress to date has been made through voluntary action by industry, particularly in areas such as on-pack nutrition information and recipe formulations, where the UK is now widely acknowledged to be leading the world. FDF members have also been developing workplace schemes that go way beyond the traditional health and safety agenda to focus on the health and well-being of employees, again setting the pace in an area that has only very recently moved up the political agenda.
The federation believes that its voluntary work comes at a fascinating time as society enters a new era of public-health policymaking where an interventionist philosophy looks increasingly antediluvian.
Today's priority is no longer tackling visible dangers to public health, such as dirty smokestacks', through a combination of regulation, taxation and bans. Instead, issues such as obesity pose the fresh challenge of trying to encourage consumers to make different choices and purchasing decisions in their everyday lives, leading to long-term sustained changes to their diets and lifestyles. This is a profound and complex task, and one that requires influence and persuasion, as well as direction. Little wonder it is sometimes hard for policymakers to accept that the government is just one of many players in the complex debates on diet and health and there are, in fact, very few regulatory levers that it can pull to effect change without creating a justifiable consumer backlash.
All of which begs the question of whether the state should intervene to guide people's food choices.
It is a simple question about a complex issue and the answer, inevitably, is both yes and no.
It is right for the government to set and clearly articulate the broad strategy, within which all stakeholders work together to deliver achievable, measurable solutions that will make a lasting impact. And we should never forget that in the debates about obesity, in particular, there must always be two sides to any strategy: diet and exercise or balancing calories in and calories out. It is not just food choices.
But the government is often not best placed to deliver such strategies. Its priority should be to develop a stable long-term policy and regulatory framework which harnesses rather than impedes both the wealth of knowledge the industry has about consumer needs and behaviour, and the power of industry and other players to invest and innovate to deliver the strategic objectives.
One of the biggest frustrations is that there is often a lack of clarity and consistency of approach to public health issues and a desire by the government to dictate how as well as what. As a result, there are detailed discussions about possible interventions that are not evidence-based and that will make little difference to the nation's health.
The obsession with so-called traffic light nutrition labelling is a case in point.
We have always argued that industry could not be expected to support any scheme that ignored calorie information, as traffic light labelling does, which makes it largely irrelevant as a tool for tackling the main public-health concern, which relates to the increase in obesity.
Labelling should not dictate food choices from on high. Rather, it should be both objective, allowing consumers to interpret it in relation to their own requirements, and consistent with the concept of encouraging consumers to achieve a balanced diet in the context of their personal lifestyle.
That is why food retailers and manufacturers across Europe have supported the use of guideline daily amount (GDA) labelling as a way of providing nutritional information and helping consumers construct a healthy, balanced diet through developing their nutritional knowledge. We strongly believe that when consumers make informed choices for themselves, through a high level of food literacy, they are more likely to stick with those good habits, rather than when someone tells them to make such choices.
Another way in which industry can make a contribution to improving public health is in finding new ways to lower the salt, fat or sugar content of our products to help consumers make healthier choices, so reformulation is right at the heart of all companies' innovation and development work. Sometimes reformulation is not enough, or is technically difficult to achieve. In that case, members are also looking at the development of alternatives to popular brands that are better for people, or a range of appropriate portion sizes, as other ways of helping consumers choose the products best suited to their consumption needs.
Here in the UK there are encouraging signs that the government recognises the need for collective effort and wants to work in genuine partnership with industry, and others, to encourage consumers to eat better and to exercise more.
The UK Department of Health's Change4Life social marketing programme, developed as part of an obesity strategy, demonstrates a real step-change in the quality of the discussions between the government, potential commercial partners and other stakeholders. The early signs are also encouraging in terms of how such an approach can connect with consumers and start motivating them (rather than telling them) to change their lifestyles for the better.
In a similar vein, the industry has long believed it is vital to act as an exemplar in the workplace. Again our approach is all about supporting, encouraging and motivating employees to lead healthier lives, not telling them what to do. The food industry has shown real leadership in this arena over many years. But we are not alone in realising the importance of having a healthier workforce. That is why FDF is in partnership with a UK charity, Business in the Community, to support the Business Action on Health campaign, which aims to encourage UK companies to commit to making workplace well-being a boardroom issue.
Through ongoing initiatives from industry and many other players, much is being done to help individuals achieve healthier, more balanced lifestyles.
All parties need to work together, working in the same direction in true collaboration and partnership, if we are to educate individuals to be more aware of the impact of the choices they make both in terms of diet and exercise, for them, their families and, ultimately, society.
Successful approaches must be based on empowering healthier choices, rather than trying to direct and impose them on individuals.
Nanny must learn how to play a different role for the 21st century.
Comments from the floor
Dear Sir,
Articles of tastes, like alcohole and tabacoo, which are popular but harmful for your health, has been banned under age 20 by law. Govermnent has to make some effort to protect citizen's lives. It is goverment duty to keep pepople health. So goverment must intervenue food policies.
Dear Sir,
I agree with the motion for government involvement in the food industry. I think that in many places far from big urban areas the choice to eat healthier simply does not exist. The change in consumer behavior should be facilitated by the food industry, which is not interested in it for obvious reasons. The government is responsible for the nation's safety, which is absolutely applicable to its health, the environment and future generations.
Dear Sir,
It's simply a personal of choice. Personal responsibility must be exercise. So, there is no need for governmental involvement.
Dear Sir,
I see no difference in voting yes or no as I see no difference between the industry and the govt . Though I agree with the arguments of Kelly Brownell but he assumes that the government would deal with those issues. Of course a responsible govt ought to do, but does it really? The decisions made by the govt are influenced by lobbyists, voters and the GDP. I say no more on Lobbyists.
Voters want low cost of living to match their pay packets and 'higher standard of living' as perceived by the voter, often and easily influenced by the mass media. TV adverts may give an impression that eating out once a week at MacDonald's, serving microwavable readymade foods for dinner during the week and including some of the well known brands of snacks seen on TV in your child's lunchbox make the family having a good standard of living!
GDP is influenced by the number of bigmacs sold in an year but no impact whatsoever by the number of people obese or ill by consuming junk food.
Even a congenital optimist would find it hard to trust the govt to do the right thing given the above! They may offer a solution but with another agenda in mind.
On the other hand the arguments put forward by Melanie Leech are laughable as she expects wolfs to look after the interest of the sheep! To prove how responsible the industry she cites on-pack nutrition information, voluntary action, etc. On-pack nutrition information is a joke. If you want to understand how good or bad are the ingredients everyone has to be a nutritional expert. Only thing we understand are the eye catching jargons such as 0% fat, sugar free, 100% natural, high in vitamins, free-range, organic, etc. They are all playing with words, load of garbage, at best misleading.
With all the focus on child health one has to walk into the kids cereal section to see the results. A child is better off eating pure organic unrefined cane sugar than eating any of those cereals. Even an organic cereal can be junk if it is highly refined, processed and high in sugar content.
Our only hope is that independent sources such as internet, teachers, etc to give good information and educate the society and keep up with the new developments.
Dear Sir,
In my opinion, instead of guiding the public what to eat and what not to eat, the governments should concentrate on redistribution of income from rich to poor and ensure food security for the poor. Guiding food and nutrition choices is a job od dieticiancs and not for politicians!!!
If the government puts a quota on the amount of food that can be bought by an individual, it might even lead to operations of black market.
What, in the least, the governments can do is to try selling food products at a rationed price to the poor. however, this further calls for a problem. how to distinguish between a rich and a poor? A rich might be willing to show that he is poor just to get food products at a lower price.
Finally, according to me government should let these problems be dealt through individual choices. If it is greatly concerned with rising obesity levels, then why not offer gym and exercising facilities at a lower cost???
Dear Sir,
When you consider the array of issues relating to this question the two most important are that many eat too little and many eat too much. The question of additives and diet are important but the externalities of health care cost from obesity and the suffering and consequences of hunger are the most important issues.
The problem of hunger is very different from the obesity issue and more likely to be in places where the government is probably the cause of the problem. As for the obesity issue, who ever pays for health insurance, the government or business, has a legitimate fiduciary interest in the person's heath and habits relating to health. For instance, business is legitimately reluctant to hire people that smoke.
I would begin with mandatory physical once a year for everyone who doesn't pay 100% of their own health insurance. And now the tricky part, some set of incentives and sanctions for reducing obesity. Just focusing attention on this would cause an increase in the social stigma similar to the situation with smoking and that would actually be positive. Yes, I realize in some cases the obese will be verbally abused by some for raising the everyone's' premiums but everyone knows sometimes the truth hurts.
There is an irony in the connection between income levels and obesity. Malthus would probably not understand how poor people became obese.
Dear Sir,
I am doing my best to eat healthy. But at my local market all the fruits and vegetables are imported and full of chemicals. In the small shop near my house, one or two sections are devoted to real food, the rest (3/4 of the shop) are with junk-food. At work, the cafeteria sells food cooked with too much fat and the snaks are mostly sweets and chips. Very rarely fruits, no fat-free products.
I am talking too much about my personal problmes. But only to make a point. If the government lets the free market to run free, we risk having little to no chance of making healthy choices. The unhealthy food is cheaper, looks better, sometimes tastes better. Therefore, it is easier to sell.
For producers, chemical-treated products grow faster and give a much better production rate. It is expensive to produce naturally. So, without government support, it is very difficult to act in the best interest of the consumer.
The government should not decide what a person can or cannot eat on a daily basis. But, for sure, the government should provide incentives for producers, shops and consumers to deal with natural products. While "the bad food" should be treated as any other product that is downgrading the quality of life: higher taxes, no subsidies, warning of the harmfull effects. A good starting point to fight climate change would be our own plates.
Dear Sir,
I believe that government has already have too much responsibilities to bear and increasing another burden into their hand will just makes them to lose their focus with these many issues.
Government should just play the role as the regulator in setting up the rule of the game. Consumers should have the freedom to decide what they get to eat as long as they can afford it. Firms can also play their role by competing with each other to come out with healthier food with the health-consciousness in the public.
Dear Sir,
I'm against this motion. If we can be honest, we have to recognize government departments (i.e. FDA) with goals intended for the population's good health are often staked against the special interest groups that ultimately create legislation and policy. Though Brownell argues his case convincingly, the additional costs of beaurocracy are not even considered in his "grand scheme." For instance, why should government policy be made to influence consumers to make the healthy lifestyle choices that other government intervention such as corn subsidies helped to create? Before we say that government is responsible for helping us with all our dietary decisions, perhaps we should ask them to stop manipulating the market and supporting multimillion dollar agribusiness. Just a thought.
Dear Sir,
I vote for the motion.
Over the next 30 years climate change will reduce agricultural productivity substantially while the world's population continues to grow. We need to change diet if all are to be adequately fed. In particular the rich world must reduce meat consumption.
This change will happen with less trauma if it is proactively managed by Governments.
J Robert Gibson; Hong Kong
Dear Sir, I don't want the government to go overboard but I do believe more could be done to help people who want to eat healthy. I think the nutritional information for at least 1/2 of the dishes on a menu should be available. People can then make informed decisions about their order. This is particularly true for people with diabetes when carb counting is an absolute must to maintain tight glucose control. Restaurants won't do that on their own. Unfortuatnely, I think it is going to require a mandate.
Dear Sir,
It is hard to side with an industry that has so often colluded with the government to promulgate capital-intensive regulations that drive small farms and food artisans out of business. It is even harder to say that maybe it's not a good idea for the government to legislate against food that is undeniably crappy. But the truth is that the government has a terrible track record when it comes to food.
The excellent book Good Calories, Bad Calories by Gary Taubes reveals how current government nutrition guidelines are based on faulty science. They wouldn't just brand chicken mcnuggets as bad, but whole foods like butter and eggs as well.
I work for non-profit that does healthy cooking education and helps build healthy food infrastructure. While government funds sound awfully nice, I would be very fearful that they would come with a heavy price of less freedom. Working with small farmers who suffer greatly under government regulation that actually is often the cause of lack of healthy food in the first place, I'd prefer the government not be involved.
If you want to support healthy food, consider shopping at your local farmer's market, donating fresh food to food pantries, and giving to your local food-education non-profit.
Dear Sir,
The prime issue as I see it is this, a globalized food system is heavily consumptive and dependent on cheap petroleum. We are clearly in the midst of or just over the peak of global production. After this point we start to see price destabilization as nations start to war over the last of the cheaply extracted oil.
We will need what is left of that to build out a renewable infrastructure, but we are still acting like it will never end.
Industrial globalized agribusiness is completely vulnerable to this fact. Therefore to relocalize and save that global transport for vital necessities for the sanity of most people I know, namely tea, coffee and chocolate becomes ever clearer.
Along with relocalising comes infilling of spawl with hyperlocal food production. It is the only way to redeemed these badly designed car dependent communities. Without hyperlocalizing these communities will be abandoned useless spaces - covering much of the best agricultural land.
Dear Sir,
I cautiously agree with the motion for one particular reason: a lot of highly processed food is made to practically be addictive, to create addictions in people. Usually natural food and food prepared in a more traditional way has none or few of the combination of ingredients that creates addiction. Because of this underlying problem, I support the motion.
Remember though that food industry, like tobbaco industry, will fight tooth and nail against declaring certain food categories as addictive.
On another note, governments prefer the stability of over fed and dumbed down population, because the risks of any social upheavals are minimal. The existing structures must be preserved at any cost. So, based on this rationale, there will always be collusion between the government that wants to us to eat healthier food (but in smaller quantities and at a higher price, with less money for other things), and the government that doesn't want any challange from its citizens, especially not hungry citizens.
Dear Sir,
It is amusing that Mr. Brownell speaks of market failure respecting food production. Does not sugar receive massive public support? How about soybeans? What are the most common ingredients in some of the "cheapest" foods? And while we're at it, who first planned the cities to separate work from home so that driving became a necessity? Who built the massive interstates that underwrote urban sprawl? And so you want government to tell us how to eat? Where will this all end?
Dear Sir, I believe that there should be more Government involvement in the food industry, and at the very least strong education regarding importance of a diet which is not based on a majority of junk foods. A lot of people evidently don't manage their intake of foods properly. There should be some incentives to promote weight loss, but I think some government involvement is essential.
Dear Sir,
I feel as there is an ever increasing influence by the state in the lives of the citizens. Individuals should be given enough information to allow them to make informed decisions on any matter that could affect them. I will be against the motion.
Harvey Jones
Dear Sir,
The whole premise of this debate seems to be that people no longer have the capacity to make thier own decisions when it comes to food. If this is the case, why do we assume that the government will be able to make better decisions? Do people suddenly gain common sense and personal responsibility when they are hired or elected to the government? For anyone who has ever seen government in action, the answer is a resounding "no".
Dear Sir,
New regulations, more civil servants, new costs for business and bigger still, costlier government.
Bureaucracy is very good in finding reasons to grow. In the current crisis, shouldn't the society trim the government of its most dubious functions?
Dear Sir,
"46% of the U.S. population are functionally illiterate"
If people are realy so dumb, shouldn't we let natural selection deal with them, for improvement of the future of the species? Eating himself to death is much more pleasant than being eaten by sabre-toothed tiger.
Dear Sir,
Information about nutrition is already omnipresent obtainable. I would say, even pushy.
Every normal citizen (not special cases, like mentally retarded) should be expected to guide himself in everyday choices.
I will ask provocatively: if you cannot trust people to choose what to eat, can gullible masses be entrusted with much more difficult problem of choosing their representatives in general elections? Should government representatives perhaps guide more pro-actively also there? This shows absurdity of the Nanny State ideology.
Dear Sir,
This is just too much. No thank you. Government should not tell us what to eat, nor should it bathe us in the evening, and put us to bed at night. The more we are treated as infants, the more helpless we in fact become, witness everything from public schools to welfare. Enough already.
Dear Sir,
46% of the U.S. population are functionally illiterate, meaning they cannot read a poem or prose and understand the underlying meaning and they also cannot balance a checkbook. An unofficial survey of the people I have met in my travels indicate that the less literate tend to be fatter than the more literate (on the Whole). The government has already tried to educate the illiterate through the schoolsystems and have failed. Why do we need a governmental monitoring of body mass index to solve the overweight problem. What will the rules be? Higher taxes for the obese? Limitations on insurance coverage? This issue is a matter of personal choice. Excessive abuse of the body by alcohol and drugs cannot be monitored in the privacy of one's home so how will obesity be handled. The government has enough problems to solve without trying to legislate people's personal choices of how they lead their lives.
Dear Sir,
Needless to say, the motion lends itself to questions of political philosophy. Rather than subject readers to a fatiguing discourse, I will say that I support the motion, but lament that one purpose of government, "to promote the general welfare," will never take place, at least not in this context. In the United States, we already have strong promotion of promotion and nutrition choices by government. More often than not they're the wrong choices, but nevertheless government strongly promotes them. After all, the Food & Agriculture Dept. was not established to encourage sage food and nutrition policy, but to promote the consumption and export of agricultural products. Add in the food industry lobbying (and advertising) done to confuse, undo, and render meaningless government food and nutrition labeling; to add corn syrup into virtually any product that touches one's lips nowadays; to exploit land and water resources beyond their regenerative capacities; and to encourage reliance on fast food and processed foods, and its not too hard to see that that aspect of government which is either institutionalized (Agriculture Dept.) or bought (by the food industry and its lobbyists) will always- ALWAYS- trump that other aspect of government, the CDC, the Office of the Surgeon General, the National Institutes of Health, which is not only warning about but detailing the costs, financial and personal, of obesity and diabetes. With guidance and promotion of choices like that, we are what (the agribusiness-government complex tell us to) eat. Hmmm, maybe I'll change my vote...
Dear Sir,
I voted against the motion, though not because of any merits on the part of the con speaker.
The government already plays a role in "guiding" food and nutrition choices with recommended labeling, the "food pyramid," and through its various agencies (in the US these are the FDA, USDA, and so forth). I think, judging by outcome alone, it can be argued they have done a pretty poor job.
Or, they can be providing us with the wrong, or not useful, information. There is no nutritional value to a soft drink or to most fruit juices, which are reconstituted from concentrate and contain many chemicals, flavorings, and sugars, none of which are good for the human body.
The "recommendations" given us by the government thus far have been either directly formulated or strongly influenced by various industries – witness the relative position of the bread and pasta to the protein on the food pyramid. It's cheaper to produce, making it easier to turn a profit. Arguing for a stronger role for government in food choice is, in effect, lobbying for a stronger role for the industrialized food industry in your diet. And industrialized food has given us most of the nutrition related problems we see in the developed world today.
Dear Sir,
The issue isn't the government versus big food. The issue is the people versus big money, since big money drives the decision making process for not only government but big food as well. Neither can really be trusted to do the right thing.
There is an assumption that government is working for the people and in their best interest. I don't see this as always being the case, and therefore it calls into question the premise of the argument. There is too much money and influence involved from lobbyists and special interests over our political leaders in the U.S. In the battle for public policy, the average citizen doesn't have enough money to get a hand in the game.
Politicans bow to special interest demands and often do what is in the best economic interest of the State instead of what is in the best interest of people overall. Money always wins.
Perhaps if people paid the actual costs of food production, we would eat less and not have as many problems. It is up to consumers to find alternate food source paths and be willing to pay for and value them. For the poor, that won't be a choice and what will emerge is a new class system in society where those that can afford quality food will buy it while those without the means will have no choice but to consume industrialized food.
Cheap food is a co-dependancy between the poor and big food. They need each other to survive.
Dear Sir,
Dear Sir,
I always hesitate to use the terms "Big Brother" or "Nanny". In this case however, this is the ultimate example of government trying to extend it's tentacles into one of the lowest forms of human need to use Maslow's terminology. Anytime freedom is infringed upon, the question that must be at the fore of our minds is, what's the next logical step? Logically, if the governments of the world would dictate the content of food, they would then regulate or ration the amount of food. To continue along Maslow's line of thought, if we descend down the hierarchy of needs to the physiological, will it then be possible that the state would then coerce me into a certain amount of sleep? After all, many driving fatalities are the result of drowsy driving.
I know this may come across with a tone of fear-mongering. Turnabout is fair play though...the state wants me to believe that I will destroy myself and my children if I don't meet their standards for what's beneficial in my diet. Ultimately, Codex Alimentarius may be mandated and choice and liberty at the most basic level will have evaporated.
Dear Sir,i hope the world can have no hunger.
Dear Sir,
I think government have big responsibility to form a healthy food and drink industry.
Dear Sir, Nanny must learn to butt out when she/it has little chance of making a real difference in our tastes. I agree with those who point to the role of government subsidies of corn and sugar in unbalanced food manufacture. There is no need to force people to eat healthy food. Good food tastes good, for heaven's sake, and government needs to get out of the way of those who can produce it. Advertising sells, as we all know (and frequently lament), and business can produce and sell decent, wholesome food all by itself. If Nanny want to help, she can give cooking lessons.
Dear Sir,
As Prof. Brownell pointed out, albeit in rather abbreviated terms, the influence of social structures on individual behaviour is often far greater than individual control over choice. Different socioeconomic groupings have access to different levels of information about, and variety of, healthy choices. Those on the lower end of the socioeconomic scale are therefore often left with a poor offering of choices - that is, they are often left with only the poor ones.
I don't think any government should (or would like to) impose a set of stringent dietary standards on any citizens, but those citizens must also have the ability to make the choices for good health for themselves. Government intervention at the societal, infrastructural level is not about influencing individual choice - it is about augmenting the number of choices, and the information about each choice - available to all citizens regardless of socioeconomic status.
Dear Sir,
what the proponent of the motion is advocating is basically a Pigouvian tax that starts by cutting a whole bunch of agricultural subsidies.
This debate is thus strangely framed: both parties are advocating a decrease in State intervention, albeit not in the same markets. I feel the moderator may underline that point on further remarks.
Dear Sir,
Yes, the government should intervene for the sake of its population, as the head of the primitive village was imposing to save grain for the next season.
However intervention should be to refrain from subsidizing costly ways of producing food. In my youthful days the cheapest food was the healthyest: oddly shaped apple from the garden rather than a banana brought over the seas and artificially matured by gaseous containers.
Let gas and oil go up and all those silly things shall evolve towards a more logical solution. In Europe already we feel the consumer is going back to basics, buy local, from the grocer rather than the large surface, buy at the farm... search for natural apples, not the ones that look like they just got out of the machine, soft drink distributing machines are forbidden in Belgian schools for instance .
You can't find a farm in New York of course, and if you say "back to basics" to an american citizen he shall think of a hamburger.
So let him make the choice, but with an unsubsidized cost.
Since food prices are fairly inelastic companies will always search for the cheapest ingredients to be used in industrialized food. Excessive use of sugar and salt is also of concern. Governments should enforce rigid control on that trend as well on advertising of food, especially for children.
Dear Sir,
if obesity, overconsumption, and a large carbon footprint are such growing concerns, why not go straight to the heart of the problem and eliminate the farm bill subsidies that cause these problems to exist in the first place? piling on more government regulations is a band aid on the wound that is government support to big-business farm corporations
Dear Sir,
I can neither vote for or against this proposal, because the premise of the statement is flawed. A vote for suggests a support for the amplification of (in my case, the US) government's efforts in guiding food and nutrition choices, while a vote against suggests support for a laissez-faire environment.
Since very few--not even Ms. Leech--endorse complete anarchy in food production and distribution, clearly the better question is "what regulations and actions ought governments to enact and enforce?"
Certainly, not the ones they have been doing. As has been well-documented in many recent books and films, the US Government's role in guiding food and nutrition choices has been catastrophic to both public health and consumer choice.
What is needed is not a STRONGER role, but a SMARTER role. Smarter farm policy would make actual food, and not just corn and soy derivatives, competitive in the food marketplace. Smarter school lunch programs would both encourage and free local officials to build relationships with local, sustainable agriculture. Smarter public nutrition programs would report real unfettered research untainted by food industry influence.
In their current forms, I have confidence in neither the government's efficacy nor the food industry's intentions. Abstaining from this motion seems the only choice.
Dear Sir,
I find this debate very philosophical: Is one libertarian , or liberal?
Dear Sir,
The food industry cannot possibly be "concerned about the health of the nation" as they simultaneously poison it with their very products. Big Tobacco doesn't care about the lungs of our nation and Big Food doesn't care about their bodies. They both peddle their own brand of poison to the people.
Mr. Brownell's opening remarks are clear, concise, and offer specific criticism of various problems in the food industry. Ms. Leech, no offense intended, puts forth an argument that takes up a bit of space but not much thought. What is she actually saying here? Her opening remarks sound more like a politician's, carefully designed to actually say only very little while saying quite a lot.
The argument that the government and the food industry both have no place telling the people what to eat is, frankly, untenable. Think about it-- every advertisement the food industry has ever put out has had one purpose: to tell you what to eat. And now Ms. Leech argues that they has no place telling the people what to eat? Meanwhile on television there are hundreds of ads airing from the food industry saying "eat this" or "eat that", very few of which offer healthy food.
While I certainly would not argue that more government involvement is necessarily the answer to this problem, it is remarkably clear that the food industry 1) will not step up and take real responsibility, and 2) really has no interest in doing so, as long as they can spin their current actions to sound as if they do.
Dear Sir,
School boards should have active nutrition policies. Snack food vending machines should not be allowed, even though they may provide funding for extra school facilities. Meals offered in school cafeterias should encourage children to eat healthy foods.
Surely there is controversy regarding what foods are most healthy. However, there is little debate over whether milk or fruit juice is more healthy than pop. There is little debate about the fact that fruits and vegetables are good for us. Even if many children are getting accustomed to eating a meal of hamburger, fries, and a soft drink, school cafeterias should resist simply catering to the least common denominator of diet.
This being said, there is little the government can or should legislate to improve the dietary habits of adults. And by the way, Kelly Brownell looks like he could stand a little pushing back from the table as well as pushing back against the rapacious food industry. Oops. Is this not entirely courteous?
Dear Sir,I support govement should play a strong role in guiding food and nutrition choise. I think it is even more necessary in developing countries because the sence of food and nutrition choise is still very low. It is off course related with the average educational level.So before those people can reach the level to make reasonable selection by themself, gevement should provide help at current stage.
Dear Sir,
Ms. Leech states most eloquently the postition of the food and drink industry: educate people rather than tell them what to do, let them make their own choices. But they have been saying this for years. Why then, are the problems outlined by Mr. Brownell continuing to worsen? Because talk is cheap. Most people make choices based upon the urges, not their brains. And the industry intentionally manipulates their urges. So it is in the interest of the industry to verbally support education and choice but then include addictive ingredients into their products. i.e., The executives in the industry know what sells their products - added fat, simple sugars, and salt. A simple solution would be to regulate those ingredients and require them to be replaced with healthy alternatives(stevia vs. sugar, for example) or removed altogether. It is analogous to why pharmaceutical companies don't spend research dollars on the benefits of red yeast rice vs. statins to lower LDL cholesterol. They would go out of business if a holistic approach was adopted.
Dear Sir, Can't we even have a meal without a government nanny stepping in and telling us what to eat? Studies on what's good for us are changing all the time. Remember when carbohydrates were good for us and meat was bad? Then, along came Dr. Atkins who was vilified by the nutrition establishment. The fact is, we're omnivores and we should practice moderation in our diet. But allowing the government to step in and do anything more than give us an opinion based on current thinking will lead to a further erosion of our rights. Our forefathers fought a revolution over less government control in their lives than we are now putting up with. This is an area of government spending we could all do with less of.
Dear Sir,
I must agree with others who feel that we did not hire the government to tell us what to do. Externalities should certainly be acknowledged and managed as well as we're able by severing the links that cause them or by including their cost in the price.
Dear Sir,
If junk food is generally tastier than healthy food and people are naturally more inclined to buy tastier food, so we can reasonably expect that a firm expecting to make money will be encouraged to produce it and actively promote it. Then this correlation between taste and junkyness exerts a first order influence on distorting good choices. This negative influence is compounded by the fact that the negative consequences of eating junk food are not experienced by a person in the short run (and of course, as exposed by Mr. Brownell, that person is even less aware of the costs caused to others through increased health costs to be paid by the state). There is a second order influence that distorts choices: the negative correlation between production costs and junk food.
Dear Sir, The food industry is, IMHO, comparable to the tobacco industry. Promoting foods that have ONLY caloric value Coca Cola], or disproportionate caloric value [McDonald's]. Perhaps the government can intervene with the corn and soy and marketing and advertising industries. I will not hold my breath until that happens.
Rather than government, and labeling, and 'good will' of food industry we can & hopefully will take page from the tobacco industry lies. A class action suite that demonstrates that false advertising and pricing lead to wrong\destructive diet and hypertension, diabetes, obesity, etc!!!!!!!!!
Dear Sir,
I ioo agree that the government has insinuated itself into far too many aspects of our lives. There is no doubt of the real and relentless hunger facing far too many people ... and the long term developmental issues caused by early malnutrition. The tidal wave of obesity in the developed world is an affornt to common decency. Not many women can be size 2, not many men can be as fit as SEALS. There is a range of healthy body types that does not include 300,400, even 500 pound and above body weights.
There needs to be some sort of disincentive to eat so poorly. I can not say if there should be a tax on patently unhealthy food or some minimum/maximum formulation requirements. This suggestion would again place the government in the role of social engineering. While the concept is justifiable, the government's hand in this market should be indirect and in the form of better options.
Dear Sir,
I think food is too sensitive an issue not to be kept without some sort of control or regulation. We should not forget that if government doesn't have a strong say on this issue then people all over the world will have no other option but to eat any type of food at the price set by some very money-hungry and selfish traders who are just after money hoarding and selfishness-not to forget the GM food they might easily opt for whose short and long term effect is still not known.
Matloob(Mat) Alam
Dear Sir,
Externalities - for welfare states, unhealthy food should be taxed proportionally to the health costs they will bring.
Dear Sir,
I voted to disagree. If I voted to agree, I am sure the result at limit would be the government requiring all citizens to ingest Soma.
Dear Sir,
Please phrase the questions to reflect the ensuing controversy. Both Mrs. Leech and Dr. Brownell argue food availability, but the motion suggests "guiding food and nutrition choices". I take issue with the uses of "choices". It reads as though availability is implied, and that is what, I believe, will be argued: that governments should versus should not increase involvement in food restriction and distribution practices, which of course is done already.
Please, in the future, consider more appropriate phrasing of the motion. For this one, I would have suggested "... governments should play a stronger role in guiding food choices and nutrition distribution."
Then the question becomes obviously 2-part: the role of government in advertising and product quality (food choices) and the role of governments in food allocation (nutrition distribution). As it stands now, however, it only serves to reflect the beliefs people hold in the ability of the government to affect restrictions on our choices. This is an interesting argument in itself, but an academic one compared to the very real problem of geographically segmented obesity and malnutrition. Instead of increasing awareness of this topic, the argument, I fear, will instead be bogged down in the one about government intervention in general.
Davis, CA
Dear Sir,
we are not debating here on personal freedom vs. state control. The real question is, given a state-of-the-art where a good part of world population can't afford a fair nutrition while a few people suffer from diseases caused by over-nutrition, how governments can intervene to balance it all? In any case, individuals would never be able to do it.
Dear Sir,
Once the government has dealt with what you eat, get ready for no less than 8 hours of sleep at night, and daily exercise requirements, and don't forget to cut the grass and wash your car regularly. Is there no realm where government doesn't want to stick its nose?
Countries with starving people should think about birth control or maybe spending less on the military. Countries with obese people, should let them live the lives they've earned: a miserable existence and an early death. Darwin will sort these things out if you give him a chance.
Dear Sir,
I think there is considerable merit to the claim that grain subsidies are at least partly responsible for the obesity epidemic that now plagues the US and other developed nations. Agricultural policies have hardly resulted in a more efficient system of food distribution or improved nutrition in either the rich or developing world.
Why should we believe that the government would act in the benefit of the 'common man' rather than pander to interest groups as is the norm?
Being for more governmental regulation in the food industry is advocating a further treatment of the symptoms without regard for their underlying causes. In the US, regulations that require certain measures take place in order to ensure "safety" of the unknowing consumer has led to massive increases in food production costs, thus the rise of industrial agriculture. Not to mention corn subsidies that make feeding cows unnatural feed more affordable.
When a problem arises, the government's fix is antibiotics, sterilization, and other control measures that add cost to the process without fixing what is really wrong. If the government removed some of the obstacles to small scale, clean farming and ranching, the need to regulate more would disappear. What a relief that would be for a country with a massively bloated government that creates ever more problems with their "solutions."
Dear Sir,
In response to such propositions, we must always, [i]always[/i] come down on the side of liberty. Personal freedom must always trump state control.
In this particular debate, a possible complication with that axiom involves the hidden costs to society, in terms of health care, when people choose to eat unwisely. But the answer consistent with liberty is to [i]remove[/i] those costs, not to impose new laws to compliment them. In other words, I have the right to take risks with my health, and in turn you have the right to be free from financing my health care.
Government's true role here is to legislate that consumers have the necessary and accurate information pertaining to the ingredients in the foods they eat, and to the medical community's opinions as to what those ingredients might do to them.
Information. Transparency. Liberty. All are vital elements to a thriving society. They apply to this debate as much as any other.
Dear Sir,
This government has involved itself, uninvited and too intricately and intimately, in so many aspects of the lives of the populace, that it should refrain from further interference, although somehow I doubt that it will do so.
Dear Madam and Sir
While food habits are a concern in a world of hungry and obese, I don't think it is for government to guide food and nutrition choices. Guiding health and environmental choices would probably be a more appropriate term to be used.
What we as humanity world wide should start to acknowledge is that the way we wish to live causes overpopulation to be increasingly a cause for many of the problems we face, including the currently trendy 'climate change influenced by man' theme.
Dear Sir,
Whilst we don't want government making ever more decisions for us it seems that the majority of people are unable to make sensible decisions regarding food and therefore ultimately their health. Whilst personal choice is vital, this only works if people are prepared to pay the costs of their decisions. However, people continue to expect free health care for all disease irrespective of whether the condition is primarily their fault through poor lifestyle/food choice. Therefore it seems the government should play a greater role in food and nutrition choices as we arguable have an obesity and lifestyle related disease epidemic about to explode.
Dear Sir,
There is no way any government can decide for (or force) the public on what should be eaten. It can surely guide and suggest, playing a stronger role at that, for the sake of nutritional purposes.
One thing is certain. A sensible government ought to exercise greater control on the wild production of junk food.


text:
Roofing Repair Roselle Park NJ 07204, Siding Repair, Skylight Replacement
|Listing details
We offer Roofing Repair Roselle Park NJ 07204. We are Specialized in new installation, repair and replacement roofing services, either residential or commercial, even if your project is large or small. We have the training and experience to do the job well done, and we assure you that we will do the job quickly, accurately and very comfortable to be under your budget. Let us do it, and you'll recognize our team's professionalism, customer-focused attitudes, and desire to always seek your 100% approval during each stage of the process form start to completion.
We are your trusted roofer. We can handle all your Roofing, Siding, Skylight, Gutters needs in Roselle Park NJ 07204. All types of materials such as asphalt shingle & flat ruberuized. Our team serves both residential and commercial customers, usually we work on any type of roof as pitched or flat areas.
Call or Email Nivelo Roofing for a free consultation now - (732) 662-2668


text:
Informal Bodycon Dress
Long-term Love Dress in Blue$49.99Price: $49.99
Your styling of this royal blue maxi dress marks the beginning of a prosperous and passionate bond! Simple, casual, and stunning all at once, this side-vented dress is one of those staples that raises the bar for basics.
Inspiring Exhibit Dress$54.99 $37.99Price: $54.99 $37.99 30% off!
Inspired by the captivating simplicity of a recent gallery tour, youve composed a stunning look with this navy-blue sheath! Rusched detail and 3/4-length sleeves bring minimalistic elegance to this jersey-knit dress, completing a masterful look thats its own work of art.
Simple as That Dress$54.99Price: $54.99
Slipping into this cerulean-blue dress is all it takes to feel fabulous! This frocks form-fitting silhouette is made marvelous by a surplice neckline, side ruching, and 3/4-sleeves that show off your dazzling accessories.
I'm on Your Side Dress$49.99Price: $49.99
Sacrificing cuteness for comfiness? Not with this jersey-knit tank dress! Enhanced by a ruched side accent and an asymmetrical hem, this dusty-blue frock is one you can always rely on to look and feel completely lovely.
Long-Term Love Dress in Stripes$49.99Price: $49.99
Your styling of this striped maxi dress marks the beginning of a prosperous and passionate bond! Simple, casual, and stunning all at once, this side-vented dress - in hues of oatmeal, navy, and ivory - is one of those staples that raises the bar for basics.
Out All Day Dress$54.99Price: $54.99
This striped dress keeps you comfy and chic throughout your busiest days! Crafted from a soft jersey-knit and enhanced by side-swept ruching, this navy-and-grey frock is perfect for both work and play.
Ace of Graceful Dress$59.99Price: $59.99
With flowing movement and unparalleled poise, you glide across the room. All eyes are on you in this snowy white sheath dress. Constructed with a classic silhouette, this femme frock is accentuated with a bold lace chest detail, V-neck, and a back zipper closure - a perfect pairing for your ...
From Day to Play Dress$49.99Price: $49.99
For a graceful transition from office attire to a night-out look, count on this navy-blue sheath dress! Layer your fave blazer over the ruched, cap-sleeved silhouette of this jersey-knit frock, then accessorize with shimmering accessories before meeting your girls for happy hour!
Take Me to Trunky Town Dress$49.99Price: $49.99
Get movin and groovin in this quirky black bodycon dress. Boasting a charming herd of pale-pink and white elephants across its smooth, elasticized silhouette, this spunky sheath takes you on a whirlwind of wild style!
Slip of a Coin Dress$69.99Price: $69.99
Banish outfit indecision by sliding into this ambrosial black slip dress! Boasting minimalist spaghetti straps, an edgy mesh neckline, and matching lace detail on the bust and hemline, this marvelous midi sees that style is never left to chance.


text:
1 person found this helpful
"Good job "
- Comp & Benefits
- Work/Life Balance
- Senior Management
- Career Opportunities
I have been working at CUNA Mutual
Very easy going and without the micro management, Take lunch's and breaks at your will. Its pretty quit and relaxing. Friendly places.
Its currently down sizing but all companys are.
The product Aministration department is having sytem challeges. It's is causing lay-offs. It is improving but know there is a system that needs heavy improvement, which will make your job easier,
- Any Location
- Any Job Title
1 person found this helpful
"CUNA Mutual - A great place to work. "
- Comp & Benefits
- Work/Life Balance
- Senior Management
- Career Opportunities
I have been working at CUNA MutualPros
CUNA Mutual employees truly embody the corporate values that are on the wall. Passion, courage and innovation describe ever individual within the company. Collaboration is how things move effectively. Executive leadership has tremendous integrity and they focus on making this the best work environment in the city of Madison. It is crucial that you continue to hire the type of folks you have, solicit their feed back and respond in kind. It is this cycle that makes CUNA Mutual such a rewarding experience.Cons
Everyone is moving so quickly to get things done that it requires a significant effort to change their direction.Advice to ManagementAdvice
Keep up the great work!RecommendsApproves of CEO
2 people found this helpful
"What used to be a particularly attractive employer isn't so much any more. "
- Comp & Benefits
- Work/Life Balance
- Senior Management
- Career Opportunities
I worked at CUNA MutualPros
Comp and benefits are competitive. Credit union marketplace is admirable. Most people want to do a good job. Facilities are generally comfortable.Cons
Executive leadership does not support each other. Considerable infighting amongst groups. Still feels like an old boy network. Limited number of women and minorities in senior roles. Often poor communication on important matters. Leadership training and development doesn't seem to be thoughtful. Downturn in financial services and poor handling of a technology project have created an uncomfortable environment. Credit union marketplace is consolidating but the company struggles to play in other markets.Advice to ManagementAdvice
Be more collaborative. If this is impossible, get rid of those folks unwilling to collaborate.Doesn't RecommendDisapproves of CEO


text:
Congrats for not digging your heels in on the short side (like I did on the long side - I'm still slightly under breakeven right now). Best of luck.
I am suspicious that BBEP was the victim of naked shorting, and a failure to deliver perhaps millions of synthetically created shares, combined with the rise in oil prices has triggered a massive squeeze. The action we have endured (the dramatic downswing but ALSO the recent dramatic upswing) goes beyond fundamentals. We've really had no substantive news from the company that would trigger such a move in either direction. To me this is indicative of something very broken within the technical aspect of how this security trades.
This is looking pretty squeezy. The question is whether or not there are any fundamentals behind it, or if this move is entirely technical.
It acts like maybe they are about to get some financing and the banksters know about it. Fingers crossed.
I think you are approaching a 52-week high.
Everybody on every upstream message board is clamoring about how good the hedges look for their favorite company. Well, the collective hedge portfolios of oil producers - the thing that should save them from low prices - in this case turns out to be the *cause* of low prices.
Every energy CEO I see on TV says that in spite of low oil prices, they will pump more oil this year than they did last year. Why is that? It's because their hedged production for 2015 is bigger than 2014's production, and no company is going to stop pumping oil that they've already sold in the futures market at 2x the current spot price. They need the cash! But that only serves to increase the market's oversupply, further driving down the spot price. It's a vicious circle.
Congrats. I thought you were really pushing your luck back at what, $7-8. Well the joke is on me. Whatever you do, don't stay too long and give back your gain. They call it a "short" for a reason.
by $0.06. Woohoo!
If you can't laugh at yourself, you might as well jump off a bridge (not really - don't do that, please).
Yup, the margin calls will really be rolling in now...this is super ugly.
Not at this time. The 8.3-cent monthly dividend should be safe through March or April. At that time the banks that hold their credit line will evaluate BBEP and could force them to suspend it until they pay down the loan.
It's not payable until the 16th, so nobody has.
The upstreams like LINE and BBEP have already cut the distributions in half, and are at 12-15% yield again.


text:
Article Last Updated: Friday, November 09, 2012 1:56pm
Courtesy Photo
The Montezuma-Cortez High School graduating class of 1967 recently enjoyed a reunion weekend together. On Friday, Sept. 14, the group met for a picnic at Parque de Vida, and on Saturday evening the class celebrated with a dinner at Kokos. Both evenings were spent visiting and catching up on the last 45 years. The Class of 1967 was the last high school class to graduate from what is currently the Cortez Middle School building.
By By Gladys Hart
Email announcements to email@example.com and include "Community Calendar" in the subject field. Items submitted less than two weeks in advance will be less likely to be published. Entries and the calendar may be edited for length and content.Monday, March 30SouthWest Colorado Concerts presents Quartetto Gelato at M-CHS at 7 p.m. This Canadian quartet is known for clever programming and humor and...


text:
Sikh temple shooting: Thousands to honor victimsComment
Thousands of mourners were expected to gather Friday morning to pay their final respects to the six worshippers gunned down by a white supremacist at their Sikh temple over the weekend.
James Holmes' attorneys say their client is mentally illComment
Attorneys for the suspect in the Colorado movie theater shootings said Thursday their client is mentally ill and that they need more time to assess the nature of his illness.
Kyrell Kyyon McNeill's stepfather arrested in Woodbridge shootingComment
The stepfather of a young Woodbridge boy who accidentally shot and killed himself last month has been arrested on charges related to the shooting.
Jared Lee Loughner pleads guilty in Arizona shooting caseComment
More than a year and a half after the stunning mass shooting in Tucson, Jared Lee Loughner, the man accused of shooting former Arizona Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords, pleaded guilty Tuesday.
Gunman kills six at Sikh temple in WisconsinComment
The gunman who killed six people at a Sikh temple in Wisconsin before being shot to death by police was identified Monday as a 40-year-old Army veteran and former leader of a white supremacist heavy metal band.
Sikh temple shooting: Seven dead, including gunmanComment
Authorities say that 40-year-old Wade Michael Page, an Army veteran and alleged white supremacist, is the man who shot and killed several people inside a Wisconsin Sikh temple on Sunday.
Anthony Boatwright killed in Temple Hills shootingComment
An 18-year-old man has been arrested and charged with murder in the shooting death of Anthony Boatwright, a Northeast D.C. man who was found dead in the street in Temple Hills early Monday morning.
Jared Lee Loughner plea: Alleged Tucson shooter has Tuesday court dateComment
A competency and change of plea hearing for Jared Lee Loughner, the man accused of shooting Rep. Gabrielle Giffords and killing six others in January 2011, has been scheduled for Tuesday.
Daniel Roh, father, shoots son at family home, officials sayComment
A 30-year-old Spotsylvania County Man is in stable condition Monday after Sheriff's officials say his father shot him during a confrontation at a family home.
Tucson shooting: Jared Lee Loughner may get plea dealComment
A court-appointed psychiatrist will testify Tuesday that Loughner is competent to enter a plea in the shooting rampage that killed six people and injured 13, including Giffords, said the person, who was not authorized to discuss the case publicly and spoke on condition of anonymity.
James Sylvester Caroline arrested, charged in Arlington jewelry store murderComment
Authorities say that 52-year-old James Sylvester Caroline was arrested Thursday on a probation violation on Wednesday. On Friday, he was charged with the murder of Tommy Wong.
Alabama Avenue double shooting injures two
D.C. police are investigating a double shooting on Alabama Avenue in Southeast, for the second night in a row.
D.C. shootings kill one, injures threeComment
Violence in several parts of the District left one man dead, and three other shot, including two juveniles.
James Holmes charged with 24 counts of murderComment
James Holmes, the 24-year-old man accused of killing 12 people and wounding 58 others at an Aurora movie theater, has been formally charged with 24 counts of murder, 116 counts of attempted murder in the July 20th shooting.
Northwest shooting closes area near Gallery Place MetroComment
An area near the Gallery Place Metro station in northwest Washington has been closed following a shooting.
James Holmes, Colorado shooting suspect, faces formal chargesComment
James Holmes, the 24-year-old man accused of killing 12 people and wounding 58 others at an Aurora movie theater, is scheduled to be formally charged with 12 counts of first-degree murder in the July 20th shooting.
U Street Corridor Plagued with Second Straight Weekend ShootingComment
Shortly after 1 a.m. Saturday shots were fired outside a 7-11 store in the popular U Street corridor in Northwest Washington, marking the second shooting in a week that has plagued the popular weekend spot.
Neil Prescott, Maryland mass shooting suspect, arrestedComment
Authorities say that they averted a "violent episode" with the Thursday night arrest of Neil Prescott, a Crofton resident who repeatedly threatened to open fire at his Prince George's County workplace.
RecommendedRecent Facebook Activity
Only On 7
ABC7 News at 4 Now Weekdays!ABC7 is giving you MORE news in your afternoons with an extra hour, an hour earlier! Join ABC7's Leon Harris and Alison Starling for what's trending in your community and world. Every weekday afternoon at 4pm right after "The Queen Latifah Show" at 3pm on ABC7.


text:
Customer Service Posters
Customer Service Posters is highly attractive and makes a luxury wall decoration, this unit dimension is 18 x 24 inch and the price is $14.99. If you're trying to discover top recommended Customer Service Posters with low-cost price, the one is the admirable deals for you.
Display Customer Service Posters the way the theaters do with these attractive movie poster lightboxes. This item is standout to note that this poster is primarily written for the professional with a elegant image and social life. This is based on the idea that putting all your commitments on twinkling paper instead of keeping them in the region will make you more polished. The product is nothing more than a graceful receptacle to facilitate the offloading of all of this posters, in effect clearing the mind. Customer Service Posters measuring , these are also printed on cardboard. This item is a excellent poster, but it is lovely expensive to get a frame for this product. This poster is absolutely rich, and it is a intensely standout one. Customer Service Posters is nice, the finishing of the poster isn't the best, for for the cost, it is shimmering.


text:
Transatlantic b2b Baltic cruise, 25days for $2k
Looking to find someone who might be interested in going eastbound transatlantic on NCL Star April 21 from New Orleans and staying on board for the next 9 day cruise. 25 day cruise would run about $2k including taxes. NCL is currently running a upgrade offer pay for inside get outside, pay outside get balcony so if interested we might can get a balcony for only a little more. Return flight to Dallas when I checked today is $582 so fly here and then home or perhaps you can find a reasonable rate to your city.
Trip would visit Russia, Germany, Estonia, Denmark, Finland, Swedan, Portugal and England.
If interested please post and I can get exact numbers or help find a cheap flight (try skyscanner).
Current rates:
Transatlatic $599pp with $125 obc
Baltic $1009 with $75 obc
Bump, anyone? There is also a similar trip on celebrity but it's more expensive
|All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:10 AM.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.6.1


text:
Work Quotes
"While some people can't wait until their retirement, others feel cheated that they have to retire at all."
Catherine Pulsifer
"Do the kind of job that if at the end of the day, your employer had to pay you what you were worth, they couldn't afford to keep you, rather than for you to owe them."
Christine Brown
"Those who preserve their integrity, remain unshaken by the storms of daily life."
"I've worked in corporate environments for many years, and one thing that�s clear is that there�s no shortage of people knowing how to play the blame game."
Jeanne Boschert, The Ethical Exit: Transition Your Work and Love Your Life
"Don't be afraid to give your best to what seemingly are small jobs. Every time you conquer one it makes you that much stronger. If you do the little jobs well, the big ones will tend to take care of themselves."
Dale Carnegie
"In order that a man may be happy, it is necessary that he should not only be capable of his work, but a good judge of his work."
John Ruskin
"When you are inspired in your work, everything seems to fall into place."
Wayne Dyer
"Whatever you do, do it with all your might. Work at it, early and late, in season and out of season, not leaving a stone unturned, and never deferring for a single hour that which can be done just as well as now."
P. T. Barnum
"One of the things that modern work has shown us time and time again is that a job seems only as good as the day is long. This simply means that one never knows when the fortunes of a company will change where no change was expected."
Byron Pulsifer, The Finish
"You can work hard, you can have excellent educational credentials, but how many points would your attitude score?"
Catherine Pulsifer, How Many Points Would You Score
"Delegate your work. stop spending dollar time on penny jobs."
Mary Kay Ash
"Commit your work to the Lord, and your plans will be established."
Proverbs 16:3 ESV
"The main reason people struggle financially is because they have spent years in school but learned nothing about money. The result is that people learn to work for money . . . but never learn to have money work for them."
Robert Kiyosaki
Words of Wisdom | Inspirational Quotes | Inspirational Poems | Privacy | Contact Us | About Us | Disclaimer | Disclosure |


text:
Men's New Balance 1400v2Item #NBA1576
VIP:$89.96 Get This Price
Loading product details ...
Reviews (5)
Need Help?
Product Description:
Men's NEW BALANCE® 1400V2 :: Clock likity-split race times, running super speedy in lightweight performance and a better-than-ever fit with the Men's New Balance® 1400v2 racing flat. You'll soar like the wind, feeling maximum comfort on every step in this updated version that features an enhanced fit, compliments of the no-sew overlays and TPU films. You'll get that same airy breathability and super-grip traction you loved from the Men's New Balance® 1400, not to mention the stability that makes this racing flat your perfect pick for tempo runs as well as casual training runs. 6.3 ounces
Category Type:
! Endangered Shoe [?]
Features & Benefits:
REVIEW SNAPSHOT®by PowerReviews
Best Uses
Reviewed by 5 customers
Sort by
Best Uses
Comments about Mens New Balance 1400v2 Running Shoe:
I have transitioned from heavier, more cushioned shoes to these shoes for short to medium length runs and races (including marathons). These shoes ar e lightweight and fit well (if you half a size up as recommended). They do wear out pretty quickly. Also, I have had some issues with traction on wet surfaces.
Best Uses
Comments about Mens New Balance 1400v2 Running Shoe:
Great shoe for distance training and racing. Lightweight and breathable. But man! the color options are hideous.
Best Uses
Comments about Mens New Balance 1400v2 Running Shoe:
Started use as a training shoe but now save them mainly for race day. Great shoe that you can put on and forget; they simply work. Used them in races from 5K to 10 miles. Use orthotics for a bit more arch support but otherwise shoe is good out of the box. Took a couple of short runs before shoes felt totally broken in.
Best Uses
Comments about Mens New Balance 1400v2 Running Shoe:
These shoes fit perfectly...nice and snug!! Ever since Ive been using these, i have been setting personal best times in my 5K races. Love these shoes!!!
Best Uses
Comments about Mens New Balance 1400v2 Running Shoe:
if you're looking for a shoe to feel fast in that can actually get you miles, this is your shoe. WOW. Great feel, not too soft for a performance shoe.
Your Help Is Here
Shop with confidence knowing your team of Fit Experts is waiting to answer all your questions. You can always find your perfect product and your perfect fit. Your Road Runner Sports Fit Experts will make sure you get exactly what you want and have tons of fun in the process! Give us a call, chat, or email!
Call 800-743-3206 to
Send us an email and count on a Fit Expert to reply to you as quickly as possible
You May Also Like
More Related Products
Men's NEW BALANCE® 1400v3 :: Race stronger than ever with the highly acclaimed Men's New Balance® 1400v3, the running shoe ...
Men's NEW BALANCE® MINIMUS 1010V2 TRAIL :: Hit the trails and get comfortably closer to Ma' Nature by running in ...
Men's NEW BALANCE® FRESH FOAM BORACAY :: Experience a new kind of smooth softness from the minute you step into ...


text:
*Lucy0214, I would love to see pics of your windows, please!
Hey Lucy - I remember on an earlier thread how you, too, had picked beige windows. I know beige is going to be best for my exterior, but now I'm worried about the inside. I have several french doors that are flanked by windows and I don't know if beige/tan grids in the french doors are going to look good or not... If you're around, I'd LOVE to see interior photos of your windows!
Many thanks!!
Lucy0214 - I am tickled pink that someone is building the Vida de la Confianza! That is our plan too! BUT, we had an architect change a lot of things, so it's not exactly the same as the stock plan anymore. Do you have a build blog? I would love to see more pics of your house. I know I've searched all over the internet, but never found ONE real life picture of it (until I saw yours)!
They just set our basement walls on Monday, so we should be rolling along soon with everything else. I'm excited to share some photos on this blog as things progress :)
Are you putting railings on the front porch?
Thanks Stephanie, I do not have a blog but will be happy to share pictures. We changed a few things from the stock. I don't know if you can message me on here, hate to put my info on here. On the front porch will be stone and cedar columns, no railings. Let me know if you have any questions, happy to help!
Lucy0214, My wife and I have narrowed our house plans to a select few, and the Vida de la Confianza house plan always seems to come to the top of our list. I have seen a few of the pics of your construction that have remained on this site, but most are not accessible. Would you be willing to share some of your construction and final product photos with us? Interior and exterior...but mostly interior spaces are what we are after. Anything that you would be willing to share with us would be fantastic, as we haven't been able to find actual photos of this plan. (You can email me from my userpage). Thank you!