• RealFknNito@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    15
    ·
    8 months ago

    This is why anyone outside the left laughs at us. You have people sincerely equating sugar to cocaine because a corporation decided to try and make tasteless gruel edible.

    Watch out, if you put sugar in your oatmeal you’re a drug addict. You’re taking truly the dumbest position possible because to admit there’s a middle ground doesn’t let you dig into the big bad Corp.

    Should it be regulated due to its overabundance? Yes. Should it be regulated like cocaine? Fuck no. What’s wrong with your brain? Too much sugar or cocaine?

    • AlphaOmega@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      I think you are missing the entire point. Nestle puts sugar in the baby formula because it’s a physically addictive substance. A mother who buys the formula but later tries to switch to different formula will end up with a baby going through sugar withdrawals. I think it’s safe to assume the baby may not even feed until it’s given the Nestle formula.

      This isn’t the first time Nestle has done something like this, they have a dark history. Some might even call them evil.

      Plus all the long term health issues associated with giving children sugar. “Added sugar intake at an early age may have adverse life-long health consequences, including overweight, obesity, cardiovascular diseases, asthma, and dental caries, as well as worse dietary habits” https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8624134/

      And yes I think it should be regulated for children, based on the science it is a serious health issue.

      Also you keep mentioning the “left” like this is some political discussion. This has nothing to do with politics. **I think most people would agree that using a legal addictive substance to hook babies to your product is a real dick move and something should be done to prevent it from happening. **

      • RealFknNito@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        10
        ·
        8 months ago

        Lol the only reason you’re against this move is because sugar is vaguely tied to addiction and you want to demonize a corporation. Honey has sugar, are the bees trying to get us addicted too? These are the ramblings of the insane.

        Yes, Nestlé fucking sucks. Evil, even. But them farting in the wind is not them engaging in chemical warfare. Treating it like it is, is part of what I can’t fucking stand. This is an isolated event. Just because someone has a shit reputation doesn’t mean every single minor move is a nefarious conspiracy.

        You people are bored and hypocritical. The same people that would consider weed harmless but unironically compare sugar to cocaine. Sugar spurs on habitual addiction, not chemical dependancy. Not knowing the difference, pretending you understand addiction because you read the headline of a study and the parroted news articles, that’s how bullshit gets spread around.

      • RealFknNito@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        8 months ago

        Fucking anything that derives pleasure can be habitually addictive, this shit means nothing. Literally nothing. Chemical dependancies are not the same fucking thing. Stop pretending they are so you can look smart. This circlejerk of dipshits is truly beyond my patience.