On Wed, 5 Sep 2012 07:16:51 -0700 (PDT), "
wrote:

[...]
I don't see that as something evil, just companies responding
to customer demand. It's like taking the sugar out of say
bread and butter pickles or soda and replacing it with sucralose.
Is that a bad thing too? If company A didn't do it, company
B would because there is a market for it.

"Evil" is your word, not mine. And while I wouldn't want government
stepping in and telling manufacturers what they should make (God
forbid!), companies that are aware of (or should have been aware of)
the dangers of replacing various FOOD ingredients with processed
chemicals, knowingly making false claims, taking advantage of gullible
consumers like you, etc., should be roundly criticised, even sued out
of existence (See: Big Tobacco). And that includes the government
itself, which is where a lot of these health problems originate, such
as pushing the low-fat, high-carb paradigm, at the expense of people's
health. Throw in (mostly drug pushing) organizations like the ADA,
AHA, etc., and there should be enough malfeasance found to keep an
army of white-shoe law firms busy.

This is a good example of why so many dieters fail - they fall for
this rubbish, i.e., that you can have your cake and eat it, too (no,
you can't!), and then wonder why they're still fat and/or unhealthy,
or can't keep the weight off, long-term.

Sheesh.

Just like you can't be a little bit pregnant, you can't be a little
bit low-carb and expect to be successful in the long run.

--
Dogman

"I have approximate answers and possible beliefs in different degrees of certainty
about different things, but I'm not absolutely sure of anything" - Richard Feynman