Is what's good for you really better?

It's been a few days since I wrote down this topic and then actually began to write about it, so forgive a little... scatterbrained'ness :)

I don't know if it was through a conversation, something that I read, or something that I heard on TV but it makes me wonder. If something is good for us, does that really mean that it's better?

Now, we can obviously argue the obvious points. Grey Goose > Smirnoff but that doesn't mean it's good for you. Camel > Parliament but that doesn't mean it's good for you.

I'm talking mainly about the emotional and/or social aspects of this argument. An example, eh? Ok, let me think.... breaking up with a person (significant other) that you don't love may be good for you but is it really better for you?

I guess the argument is a little like apples and oranges. What's good for you NOW may not be better for your LATER. I had that with a boyfriend... only the opposite and I've very recently realized that it was such. At the time, breaking up with him was the right thing but I didn't believe it was better for me. Now, I believe that breaking up with him was better and it's been good for me. It's the little revelations in life that really make it worth living, isn't it?

Even moreso, it got me thinking about how else I could apply this. Because, after all, this blog is about many things. Punctuation, however, is not one of those things.

So, what other revelations can we uncover? I'm open to suggestions.

On the flip side, however, we always have that sinking sensation to do something bad. Isn't that why girls always go for the bad boys? Girls want something that they shouldn't have which makes it that much sweeter when we get a taste. Don't get me started on chocolate.

But think about it.... and let me know.