GMA: Health Labels 'Confusing' for Consumers

GMA: Health Labels 'Confusing' for Consumers

By Carolyn Plocher (Bio | Archive)
Wed, 10/21/2009 - 13:45 ET

In performing its duty to help save us from ourselves, ABC often turns to its favorite kill-joy food police, the Center for Science in the Public Interest. And they did it again on Oct. 21, when "Good Morning America's" Lisa Stark lamented with CSPI's executive director, Michael Jacobson, about the conniving designs of the food industry to lure unsuspecting consumers into its artery-clogging, diabetes-ridden death trap.

What would that death trap be? Well, it depends on what day you tune in. It could be anything from drug-like frappuccinos to "killer" donuts to conscienceless fried chicken to unnatural soda pop to "Heart Attack Entrees with Side Orders of Stroke." (And don't forget some of the absolute riskiest: leafy greens, eggs, tuna, tomatoes, sprouts, and berries.) This time, though, CSPI decided to attack more broadly by fighting against health labels, such as "Smart Choice," "Nutritional IQ," and the American Heart Association's heart-shaped logo.

These health labels are designed by "grocery stores, scientists, or manufacturers themselves to steer health conscious shoppers to supposedly nutritious products," warned Stark.

Story Continues Below Ad ↓

"We have these different conflicting systems," said Jacobson, "and some of them are flawed - that not so healthy foods get the symbol."

Jacobson gave Froot Loops as an example, saying, "When it has 40 percent sugar - you know, can you picture half the box with grain and half the box with sugar - that's not such a smart choice."

He also gave Kraft's Strawberry Bagel-fuls as an example of an undeserving food honored with a "Smart Choice label." Stark explained that the bagels are "stuffed with cream cheese and strawberry puree, sweetened with sugar and colored with red dye 40."

Gasp! Where did she find such classified information?! Oh wait, by reading the list of ingredients on the package, something that's required on any processed food.

But what about that 40 percent sugar content in those colorfully deceitful cereal boxes? Where can you find that? Oh yes, the nutrition label - also mandatory on every food product.

But apparently shoppers are too dense to turn to the side of the box for that information, so the FDA is "cracking down," saying that these health labels are "confusing" to consumers. "Good Morning America" read a portion of an FDA statement that warned food companies it is "analyzing ... [labels] ... that appear to be misleading."

And the solution? Develop "one simple label that everyone would have to use" - a so-called "nutritional gold standard." And of course, CSPI, which once damned polyunsaturated fats in favor of the now universally reviled trans fats, applauds the action. ABC clearly does too. Out of the 2 minute, 10 second segment, it gave only 8 seconds to the manufacturers to defend their labeling. That means that the idea of government regulation, which was presented positively, was given more than fifteen times more attention.

Comments Policy

All comments are owned by whoever posted them and are subject to our terms of use. They should not be assumed to represent the views of NewsBusters.

Oh, for crying out loud!!!

Wed, 10/21/2009 - 13:57 ET by motherbelt

These food labels are designed by "grocery stores, scientists, or
manufacturers themselves to steer health conscious shoppers to
supposedly nutritious products," warned Stark.

Uh....no. They were required by the government....to inform people of sodium and fat content etc, so that those who needed or wanted to keep track of those things, could. For instance, I check the sodium content, because my DH is on a sodium-restricted diet. It's still my choice to decide whether the amount is OK or too high, and/or if the food is "nutritious."

And as time went on, they decided we needed even more information: so they requiredbreaking down the fat content into saturated and unsaturated, telling what percentage of the daily allowance everything was (based on a 2000 calorie diet), what percentage of our diets should be fat, and fiber, etc., until we are about to go blind reading it all.

So now they complain that it's all too confusing.

Channelling Jim Traficant....Beam me up, Scotty!!

For crying out loud---

Wed, 10/21/2009 - 14:08 ET by matthewdean

MB---

Not to mention the time involved in researching, designing, and printing newer/larger labeling.

If time is money, reckon any additional costs get passed our way?

"I may not agree with what your bumper sticker says, but I will defend to the death your right to stick it." (Unknown)

What does DH stand for?

Wed, 10/21/2009 - 14:27 ET by CO2Maker

Designated Hitter?

<g>

All these groups answer to SOROS

Wed, 10/21/2009 - 13:55 ET by carolina09

Center for Science in the Public Interest, while started in 1971, is now closely associated with all these Soros organizations. HCAN, ACORN, all are agitating to tyrannize over us and all get money from Soros before they take money away from us.

In the eyes of the elitist press...

Wed, 10/21/2009 - 14:12 ET by Army Brat

we are all ignorant children that must be protected from ourselves from all things in all manners.

They clearly have our best interests at heart...we should just listen and obey... After all...they brought us Obama. That says it all.

Obama is a liar and Truth is

killing his Marxist agenda.

I want his lifestyle

Wed, 10/21/2009 - 14:18 ET by tim413

Brother Jacobson pretty darn healthy for a thirty-year-old. He needs to tell us what he eats.

Stop federal judges from foisting their notions of "fairness" on the States. Amend the 14th Amendment! - tim413

If only we knew whether Twinkies are sugary ...

Wed, 10/21/2009 - 14:46 ET by KC Mulville

I'm sorry. If you don't know that FrootLoops are filled with sugar, but you think that a new labeling system will "inform" you and you'll make a healthier choice ...

I mean, seriously, why would immigrants want to come to a country this stupid?

At the center of the world

Wed, 10/21/2009 - 14:49 ET by fitzfong

At the center of the world economic collapse are Marxist parasites like Michael Jacobson, Al Gore and Robert Kennedy, Jr., employing junk science and media hysteria to recklessly and arrogantly kill private sector jobs and destroy the economy to achieve the shallow objectives they possess.

"I spent a lot of money on booze, birds and fast cars. The rest I just squandered." -George Best

CSPI has yet to find a food

Wed, 10/21/2009 - 15:11 ET by HockeyKid

CSPI has yet to find a food it likes. Like Jackie Mason said, "For years they told me my corned beef sandwich was going to kill me with all the meat. So I cut down on the meat. Now it's the BREAD that's going to kill me!"

Jacobsen is a vegetarian zealot. He wants you converted.

Here's one of his typical remarks: "kids know about vending machines, and they can go to 7-Eleven and get a big gulp which contains half a gallon—a thousand calories, almost!—of soda pop in a single serving."

What's wrong with that? A "Big Gulp" at 7-Eleven is 32 ounces. Any adult will tell you that's a quart, which is not half a gallon, by a factor of 2. 12 ounces of soda have about 170 calories, or about 14 calories per ounce. That means a Big Gulp of canned soda would be about 332 calories. Hardly a thousand. But wait, there's more! Any food retailer can tell you that fountain mixed soft drinks don't carry as many calories as bottled sodas, because the proprietors typically "down the mix", which means reducing the amount of syrup per volume, in order to increase the profit margin. Call it a 10% reduction (it's usually more than that), and we're at 300 calories as opposed to 1,000. Hey, it's only a 333% inflation of the figures...

THAT's the kind of "science" Jacobsen uses: junk science and scare tactics.

"Beauty is only skin deep, but liberal's to the bone." - me

Any food retailer can tell

Wed, 10/21/2009 - 16:07 ET by Another Dead Kennedy

Any food retailer can tell you that fountain mixed soft drinks don't carry as many calories as bottled sodas, because the proprietors typically "down the mix"

I can't speak for the industry today, but as a teen I remember representatives from Pepsi Co frequently checking in on the pizza shack I worked for. His job was to confirm that the correct ratio of syrup to water was being served. Pepsi, Coke, or any other soda manufacturer does not want a watered down version of their product being served. It speaks poorly of the product.

But I haven't been in a 7-11 for a Big Gulp in many years, so I can't confirm whether or not they post the nutritional value of their soda. However, your multiplication is a bit off. At 14 calories per ounce, a 32 oz Big Gulp is 448 calories. Have a water instead. Your body will thank you.

xoxo - Ted

Hey, Gladys Kravitz: Mind

Wed, 10/21/2009 - 17:55 ET by fitzfong

Hey, Gladys Kravitz:

Mind your own business instead. Your neighbors will thank you.

"I spent a lot of money on booze, birds and fast cars. The rest I just squandered." -George Best

Is this you minding your own

Wed, 10/21/2009 - 18:04 ET by Another Dead Kennedy

Is this you minding your own business?

Or are you just upset that I threw a little experience and a correction in there?

xoxo - Ted

You did what, Gladys? "I

Wed, 10/21/2009 - 18:23 ET by fitzfong

You did what, Gladys?

"I spent a lot of money on booze, birds and fast cars. The rest I just squandered." -George Best

Are you bored, fitz? Did

Wed, 10/21/2009 - 18:27 ET by Another Dead Kennedy

Are you bored, fitz? Did all your friends go home? Or did Sesame Street just end?

xoxo - Ted

That's right, Gladys. You

Wed, 10/21/2009 - 18:39 ET by fitzfong

That's right, Gladys. You bore me.

"I spent a lot of money on booze, birds and fast cars. The rest I just squandered." -George Best

In that case, mind your own

Wed, 10/21/2009 - 18:42 ET by Another Dead Kennedy

In that case, mind your own business. Apparently I'm so boring that you just felt the urge to tell me I shouldn't comment directly to another member, who intentionally used misinformation to further his argument. Fitz, you're truly pathetic.

xoxo - Gladys

Oh, no, I've been called

Wed, 10/21/2009 - 19:30 ET by fitzfong

Oh, no, I've been called "pathetic" by NewsBusters' resident yenta. How will I go on? By the way, you're certain that HockeyKid intentionally misrepresented the numbers to advance his position? A 12-oz can of Coke is 140 calories. 140/12= 11-2/3. 11-2/3 X 32= 374 calories (rounded up). Even accounting for a mathematical error, his calorie estimate is closer than yours.

Hey Gladys, how miserable is your life that you feel the need to tell people what to eat or drink for their own good? I sense you have aspirations to be on the Homeowner's Association...that way, you can tell everyone how to act and then write tickets to enforce your values on others. Your neighbors may not know (or care) that you exist...but, by God, they're going to pay for it! Then they'll notice you.

"I spent a lot of money on booze, birds and fast cars. The rest I just squandered." -George Best

Pathetic. xoxo - Ted

Thu, 10/22/2009 - 10:04 ET by Another Dead Kennedy

Pathetic.

xoxo - Ted

Thanks, Gladys. When I've

Thu, 10/22/2009 - 10:44 ET by fitzfong

Thanks, Gladys. When I've rendered an obnoxious gossip queen like yourself speechless, I know I've done the world a favor.

"I spent a lot of money on booze, birds and fast cars. The rest I just squandered." -George Best

You want a pissing match,

Thu, 10/22/2009 - 11:30 ET by Another Dead Kennedy

You want a pissing match, you got it pal. The number 170 was not made up by me. Did you bother reading the whole thread? Hockey used 170 to make his point. I used that number which he provided, divided by 12 (oz), and came up with 14.17, rounded down to 14. Multiply that times 32 (oz), and what do you get? 448. Yes, a can of Coke is 140, and a can of Welch's grape is 190. Now, what exactly your point on this thread? Have you an argument, or are you just looking for a liberal to pick a fight with?

xoxo - Ted

~"Pissing match"

Thu, 10/22/2009 - 11:39 ET by choselife3x

You're both going to need a Big Gulp to replenish your ammo, pretty soon.

I can see it now, the great "Soda War". Alright, I'm outta here before y'all whip out your firearms and the measuring tape....

dborschjr68, CTPatriot, and pelicanmarsh are dead to me. I want
nothing to do with them as they represent a time for me that was less
than Christian and less than appropriate. --black47211 aka donaldborschjr

Of course I read the entire

Thu, 10/22/2009 - 12:40 ET by fitzfong

Of course I read the entire thread, Gladys. HockeyKid was commenting on the typically vacuous, hyperbolic whinings of that parasite Michael Jacobson.

Being the self-indulgent, hyperventilating overly-officious eunuch that he is, Jacobson made reference to the "1/2 gallon" Big Gulp...in an attempt to pump the calorie count near the magic 1,000 number (kind of like the pinkos who couldn't wait for enough soldiers to be killed in Iraq so that they could exploit the next big round number in the body count). It advances Jacobson's tyrannical objectives to inflate the numbers for maximum effect...so he used the 64 oz. Big Gulp (making sure to use the phrase "1/2 Gallon" to add dramatic "substance") as his example.

The point, of course, is to link the market availability of large cups for fountain drinks to obesity/diabetes/heart disease in the hopes of taxing and regulating soft drinks out of existence. First, go for the low-hanging fruit: THE CHILDREN. When vending machines are then regulated out of the schools, Jacobson's viruses move down the road to infect the convenience stores and use THE CHILDREN to regulate the size of sodas that can be purchased.

When they get rid of the 64 and 32 oz. Big Gulps, that still won't be enough, for they'll then go after the next size down...ignoring (for the immediate term) the fact that there are other ways of getting 64 or 32 oz. sodas into peoples' hands if that's what they really want...you know, perhaps buying multiple fountain drinks or a 6-pack, for example. When they can no longer regulate the distribution size of the fountain drinks, they will seek to outlaw them entirely on behalf of THE CHILDREN.

Then they'll seek to tax canned soft drinks: at the distribution level to maximize sales tax...and, of course, when they institute a sales tax, they always project that purchase behavior will stay the same...that consumers will not react negatively to the higher prices. When consumers eventually succumb to price sensitivity, sales tax revenues go down, but the government has already spent as if the projected revenue was there to be spent...so they have to find another source of tax revenue to close the gap between projected revenue and actual revenue: I know, jack up income taxes again. Because government will never live with less, it will never live within its means. Oh, yeah, and when you consider the jobs lost through the artificial reduction in consumer demand, I don't know if raising income taxes when there is less income to tax is such a great idea.

Meanwhile, Jacobson will move his Trojan Horse down the road to try to infect another industry...and you will continue your smug, unsolicited advice to those who are clearly not interested in your opinion (and get pissy when someone points that out). Now, Gladys, do you have a legitimate counter-argument or are you content being the local busybody?

"I spent a lot of money on booze, birds and fast cars. The rest I just squandered." -George Best

Right. Who's nosy? It

Thu, 10/22/2009 - 13:12 ET by Another Dead Kennedy

Right. Who's nosy? It took you 4 posts to even mention the topic.

And yes, if suggesting that someone drinks water instead of a Big Gulp makes me smug, then I'm smug. As far as your conspiracy theory behind the soda tax, go with it. I'm not worried myself, because I barely drink the stuff. If there's a 100% tax on the price, it's still a cheap beverage.

xoxo - Ted

Well of course you're not

Thu, 10/22/2009 - 13:41 ET by fitzfong

Well of course you're not worried, Gladys. It's a tax on someone else whose behavior you find objectionable. That's profound logic: if everyone just acted like Gladys Kravitz in the first place, Gladys Kravitz wouldn't need the government to tax/regulate/punish their behavior until they did act like Gladys Kravitz. Sure, they can afford the extra cost because Gladys Kravitz thinks it's still too cheap...and even if they can't afford it, it's for their own good.

Screw the jobs that will be lost, even though those jobs were created to meet a natural consumer demand...those workers will be much better off on unemployment than they will be doing something productive like bottling carbonated beverages that people actually like.

That's the way you spoiled, arrogant, intellectually vacant parasites on the left operate...inflate government to enforce your narrow-minded, tyrannical values. Hey, Gladys, why don't you learn some basic economics before shooting off your mouth about conspiracy theories?

"I spent a lot of money on booze, birds and fast cars. The rest I just squandered." -George Best

I'm done. Until you learn

Thu, 10/22/2009 - 13:49 ET by Another Dead Kennedy

I'm done. Until you learn to be respectful, I can't justify continuing this. Grow up.

xoxo - Ted

Translation: Gladys Kravitz

Thu, 10/22/2009 - 14:35 ET by fitzfong

Translation: Gladys Kravitz has taken a savage rhetorical beating and knows it. You're not fooling anyone with your lame attempt to save face. Until you learn to be respectful? Of you, Gladys? Please. You must earn respect for it to be granted. But, oh my Gladys, you sure have picked up the snotty schoolmarm lingo. Don't forget to put in your application as the HOA Meter Maid, you're absolutely perfect for the job.

"I spent a lot of money on booze, birds and fast cars. The rest I just squandered." -George Best

fitz

Thu, 10/22/2009 - 13:57 ET by MrShy

I see Ted has joined Jer's Thin-Skinned Brigade...

Actually, Shy, I get along

Thu, 10/22/2009 - 14:39 ET by fitzfong

Actually, Shy, I get along quite well with Jer. I may not agree with his politics most of the time, but he's very knowledgeable and fair to me. That is a suitable link for the yenta, though. :-)

"I spent a lot of money on booze, birds and fast cars. The rest I just squandered." -George Best

Oh I get it. You crave

Thu, 10/22/2009 - 14:43 ET by Another Dead Kennedy

Oh I get it. You crave attention! Look at me everyone!!! You're not looking!!! Fine, I'll yell louder, I'll use more childish names, and think that it all makes my argument stronger!!!

Truly, fitz, I didn't realize I was arguing with a 14 year old boy here. Not worth my time, but I'm sure you'll track me down on another thread. You seem like the type. Right, Shy?

xoxo - Ted

Right Ted! ( ????? )

Thu, 10/22/2009 - 14:54 ET by MrShy

Right, Ted!

( ????? )

Who craves attention, Kennedy?

Thu, 10/22/2009 - 14:53 ET by SickofLibs

You mean like starting a whole forum thread ABOUT YOURSELF where you solicit suggestions for new screen names?

And then not follow through on it?

Like that?

Precisely. I reached a

Thu, 10/22/2009 - 15:15 ET by Another Dead Kennedy

Precisely. I reached a conclusion that people were so confused after my previous name change that I just couldn't do it to them again. I was chastised for calling myself Kennedy Death Watch for having no respect for Ted, so I switched it to my current name, which of course everyone mistook irony or actual love. The name change forum was actually a suggestion by one of NB's most beloved conservative members (no Shy, not you!)

xoxo - Ted

Yeah, yeah, Gladys. Not

Thu, 10/22/2009 - 15:09 ET by fitzfong

Yeah, yeah, Gladys. Not worth my time, 14 year old boy, everyone's my stalker, woe is me, blah, blah, blah. Whatever helps you get through the day, Mrs. Kravitz. Give my regards to poor Abner.

"I spent a lot of money on booze, birds and fast cars. The rest I just squandered." -George Best

fitz

Thu, 10/22/2009 - 14:52 ET by MrShy

I don't hate Jer, either, but he is part of the Feigned Outrage Brigade, which is run by another NB'er who shall remain nameless.

Yes, there are a lot of brigades. :)

~Poor Shy

Thu, 10/22/2009 - 15:04 ET by choselife3x

Fitz didn't jump on the "bash Jer" bandwagon like a good little puppet.

Switch topics, quick!

They're not coming for my beverage

Sat, 10/24/2009 - 03:41 ET by Army Brat

so I don't care...

Sound familiar?

So "I love Ted Kennedy"...are you aware that your hero is a treasonous scumbag? Or is that why he's your hero?

Ted Kennedy should have been charged with treason over this. He was a treasonous sack of crap and should have been vilified instead of deified.

In May 1983, the KGB again reported to their bosses on a discussion in Moscow with former Sen. John Tunney. [Note: full text of this letter appended below]

Kennedy had instructed Tunney, according to the KGB, to carry a message
to Yuri Andropov, the General Secretary of the Soviet Communist Party,
expressing Kennedy's concern about the anti-Soviet activities of
President Ronald Reagan.

The KGB reported "in Kennedy's opinion the opposition to Reagan remains
weak. Speeches of the president's opponents are not well-coordinated
and not effective enough, and Reagan has the chance to use successful
counterpropaganda." Kennedy offered to "undertake some additional
steps to counter the militaristic policy of Reagan and his campaign of
psychological pressure on the American population."

Kennedy asked for a meeting with Andropov for the purpose of "arming
himself with the Soviet leader's explanations of arms control policy so
he can use them later for more convincing speeches in the U.S." He
also offered to help get Soviet views on the major U.S. networks and
suggested inviting "Elton Rule, ABC chairman of the board, or observers
Walter Cronkite or Barbara Walters to Moscow." Here's one link to the story. there are many.

http://www.usasurvival.org/ck0828-309.html

Obama is a liar and Truth is

killing his Marxist agenda.

Are you aware that Ted

Sat, 10/24/2009 - 09:44 ET by Another Dead Kennedy

Are you aware that Ted Kennedy has never been, nor will ever be my hero? Are you familiar with the definition or irony? I've explained my name several times over the months, once even on this very same page. So read on.

xoxo - Ted

I have a Gladys in my

Wed, 10/21/2009 - 18:33 ET by kangaroo

I have a Gladys in my neighborhood. Is their life so screwed up that they have to make it difficult for any of us here to even pick our nose with out code enforcement, animal control, or cops turning up at our doorstep. Hell this neigborhood are on a first name basis with these enforcers,

~

Thu, 10/22/2009 - 10:07 ET by choselife3x

Maybe you could try picking your nose in private. That might help.

Noses---

Thu, 10/22/2009 - 15:41 ET by matthewdean

Chose:

You can pick your friends, and you can pick your nose, but you should'nt pick your friends' nose.

At least in public anyway.

Did the current Administration pass a law saying I cannot pick my nose in public?

If so-

The act may be gauche, but I shall endeavor to thumb my nose at them, as it were, on a daily basis, in public.

"I may not agree with what your bumper sticker says, but I will defend to the death your right to stick it." (Unknown)

ted, help me out

Thu, 10/22/2009 - 13:52 ET by katainkent

I'm having trouble juxtaposing your position on soda with your position on pot.

____________________________________________
The Emperor, he has no clothes

Trouble with what exactly?

Thu, 10/22/2009 - 14:27 ET by Another Dead Kennedy

Trouble with what exactly? Do you know my position on soda? I don't believe I posted that.

xoxo - Ted

If eating Twinkies

Wed, 10/21/2009 - 16:35 ET by StarAZ

If eating Twinkies is the only way I can avoid being an old prune like Soros, I will have to do what I have to do.

If loving Twinkies is wrong

Wed, 10/21/2009 - 22:25 ET by CO2Maker

... I don't want to be right.

ROFL!

Wed, 10/21/2009 - 22:27 ET by MightyMouth

Dipped in Milk! Oh yeah!!!

"The bureaucracy is growing to meet the needs of the growing bureaucracy"

Lol...Wow...I'm a dipper

Wed, 10/21/2009 - 22:32 ET by bigtimer

Lol...Wow...I'm a dipper too.

Making me crave Graham Crackers & Milk now.

'Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea'~Breitbart

Tried chocolate-covered grapham crackers lately?

Thu, 10/22/2009 - 10:29 ET by StarAZ

They still make them. Remember, when we were kids? And they are still yummy.

Do you have any idea how wrong that is?

Thu, 10/22/2009 - 10:36 ET by CO2Maker

Twinkies in Milk?

Think: Dan White, "Twinkie defense," Harvey Milk

I'm so confused

Wed, 10/21/2009 - 16:47 ET by CO2Maker

Everybody says labels are so confusing. What do I know? I went to gummint school?* What do those little dots in between numbers mean? What do all those numbers mean? What is sodium? What is polycarbonate fats? Everything I buy in the grocery store has the same things in them, so why do they taste different? I need hellllp. "Make 'im stop, George!"

*Not really. I went to Catholic school. I just play a gummint school graduate on the internet.

Food Labels not enough now

Wed, 10/21/2009 - 19:27 ET by katainkent

blank white boxes and blank white cans on the shelf with BIG RED ARROWS pointing to the labels. That should do it. Of course all of you in marketing... find another job you evil people!

____________________________________________
The Emperor, he has no clothes

Yep, we ignern't types in flyover country is too dad-blame dum

Wed, 10/21/2009 - 22:23 ET by R D Helm

...to read them thar food labels the federal guv'mint puts on all them thar fancy food packages and all.

Yessirree, but we'uns went to them guv'mint skools, and we wasn't learned all them fancy multi-soluble word's 'n all, like monos odium gluta-somethin' er other.

Shore are glad them fine folks over ar' at that thar Center for Science in the Proletariat Interest is sho-nuff keepin' up on all this komplikated stuff, that way, we'uns can worry 'bout mo imprtant stuff, like how we is gonna spend that thar extre twenti-five dollars that nice fella' in that thar White House up 'ar in Washin'ton D.C. done put in our unemployment checks in that thar gazillion dollar stimulus package o' his.

He, he, a gazillion shore is a lot, ain't it?

-Dave

Our elected representatives have failed us.

Thu, 10/22/2009 - 09:00 ET by jessieH

When it comes down to a choice, I'll let the food kill me instead of letting the federal government do it. They need to stop trying to tell us what to do, eat, or believe and do the damn job we elected them to do.

Fitz

Thu, 10/22/2009 - 12:37 ET by MrShy

I love you, but PLEASE.... give us a few separate paragraphs!

I am referring to your post above that you just wrote, on this thread, but responding here so you can probably go in and add a few line breaks before someone responds... :)