NYC Large sugary drink ban proposed

Adsnwfld

It is a violation of our freedoms. It will NOT stop people from being fat. I know plenty of people who order 1 large Coke a day, if they weren't allowed to get a 36oz drink they would buy multiple small drinks. It will do nothing. Cigarette prices are jumping by leaps and bounds and that hasn't stopped people from smoking.

Government, stay out of our lives.

sportyredhead01

Until healthy eating becomes more affordable than unhealthy eating, America is going to be fatter than ever. Soda or no soda.

liftingheavy

That document is about the schools themselves requiring PE, rather than the government.

Anyway, as I was saying, my point is that in countries where governments take public health seriously and promote healthy living, people are... healthier! It isn't a question of society vs the government. It's OUR government, and it can and should play a role in tackling the obesity crisis. Whatever the US is doing at the moment, it clearly aint working, and I don't believe that's because US citizens are less responsible or lazier or greedier than people in other countries. Its because they are living in a toxic food environment.

Excuse my butting in, but I need to comment on this.

I have family all across the eastern sea board of the US. I have visited many states in the country. Every single supermarket I've visited has a fresh produce, dairy, and meat section. Every single 7-11 (gas station/convenience store) has fresh fruit and veggies. Every single corner store and bodega carries bottled water. We may have plenty of "toxic" food CHOICES, but we are certainly not being force fed here.

It IS all about choice, as we learn here on MFP. If it were not, Americans would literally be unable to lose weight, correct? I actually appreciate the food options we have here. I enjoy indulging in fast food and ice cream sometimes. I used to eat it way more often than I do now. But I was unhappy with my weight and made the choice to cut back on it. I didn't need Big Brother to do it for me.

OK, so if it isn't the environment and public policy, why is the obesity crisis so much worse in the US?

Laziness, gluttony, poor choices....I understand that it is not an easy pill to swallow. People don't like to admit fault. Hey, I was in denial for YEARS. It is much easier to blame other people or the government. But the truth is, I waltzed right by the fresh food section and decided to buy the crap that was available to me.

So Americans are lazier and greedier than Europeans? I don't buy that...

The obesity rates here vs. Europe and China would suggest that we are. And why don't these same companies offer these super sizes over there? It's offensive that they've figured out that Americans, will buy and consume anything that is put in front of them shouting "freedom!" It's not freedom for me, while my tax dollars subsidize healthcare for people that make these choices because they are free to do so.

And as I mentioned in another thread, I don't care what adults do at all... as long as I am not subsidizing them in ANY way. But kids buy these huge drinks and 5 serving bags of flaming hot cheetos on the way to school and it has got to stop.

Kids in other countries are lapping our kids, and nutrition/obesity in children here is a major factor. I am a Junior Achievement volunteer and the size of middle school children is astounding.

aftergypsies

I don't think the government needs to tell people what they can and cannot do in terms of their own health.

scagneti

It doesn't matter how passionate I am about fitness. I can't wrap my mind around government-imposed sanctions. If they can ban a certain size of soft drink, then they can ban portions of meat over three to four ounces. The more laws the government passes, the less freedoms we have as people. Health and wellness must be approached from an educational point-of-view. Mommas and daddies have to be taught from a young age about portion sizes, healthy living, and better food choices. If you think putting a ban on soft drinks will work, then you don't have an understanding of business. There is a company somewhere working on the next slurpy goo that's nearly 1,500 calories a slurp, and the kids will want it like our hearts want oxygen.

100% agree. And what terrifies me is that my idea of eating healthy is pretty much in direct opposition to the government's idea of healthy. Are they going to ban my coconut oil that I love and insist I use frankenoils instead? What about my macadamia nuts -- they're a ridiculous number of calories for a small serving? I'm perfectly healthy and closer to being underweight than overweight so I feel the government can go **** themselves when most of what they preach is utter nonsense.

marekdds

This is BS. Not now or have I ever bought a huge sugary drink, yet I managed to get fat, all by myself. What will they ban next - cookies, birthday cake. The government is overstepping their bounds.

liftingheavy

Regardless if this is a good idea or not, I think in addition to or instead of, there needs to be massive education about health for the public, whether it's billboards, ads on computers, proper healthy eating/fitness talk in schools, etc. Yes, we are free to choose, but we're not doing ourselves any favors by letting the obesity rates soar.

I completely agree. There is no counterbalance for kids to the glitsy ads from fast food companies and fantastic 99 cent menus aside from a few PSAs.

When the First Lady had a "lets move" program for kids and suggested that they eat more vegetables, people went ape. It wasn't the average Joe who started going ape, the powers that be said it a few times (because more veggies means less 99 cent meals) and people jumped on the bandwagon.

As I stated in a previous thread, do you know how many people in this country cannot enlist because they are overweight? This is not a freedom issue - adults can buy 2-10 sodas if they want. But they won't buy their kids 2 sodas. They will buy them a normal sized one.

This is a huge issue - it not only affects health, but innovation for the future of this country, national defense, self esteem and motivation, education etc. etc. etc.

Even if you are a person that hates the government viscerally, you have to open your eyes and see what is happening in this country. Will New York banning oversized sodas solve the problem? No. But it's a move in the right direction.

cldwyer150

Incentives for making healthy lifestyle decisions and promoting active living make more sense to me too!

focus4fitness

I personally think the government has somewhat of an obligation to try to think of something to help this crisis that we are in. By 2030 more than 40% of American will be obese. Which will lead to more health problems which will lead to more health costs passed on to consumers. We have a serious problem that I can only forsee getting worse. It would be really goofy for a government to completely ignore a health crisis of this size.


Having said that, I don't think this will work at all. lol I don't think the problem we have is going to be swayed by not having a large coke, or someone having two buy two cokes to satisfy their soda fix.

April4th

Well said.

It amazes me that "we" happily let more and more of our freedoms be taken away every day.

martinah4

Yeah, God forbid Americans learned any lessons from countries who have stayed slim by spending tax money on building SIDEWALKS so people don't have to drive everywhere, or MANDATING physical education in schools, or REGULATING fast food advertising... A socialist nightmare! (That just happens to result in people being healthier, happier, and more productive!)

We've had government-mandated physical education in schools since the 1960s, dude. And I walk everywhere in my city. On sidewalks.
[/quote]

American's have failed miserably at policing themselves, or we would not have found ourselves with this obesity problem to begin with. The people on this site are incredibly conscious of their health, or they wouldn't be here. MFP is not an accurate cross-section of American society.

The government mandated PE in schools does not even come close to what a student should be getting on a daily basis. My children's elementary only required 20 minutes 2-3 days a week. Finally, the PE teacher pushed and pushed, (and won this year) to get 4 days a week for 40 minutes. A small victory, and she had to fight for it.

BrianSharpe

Freedom of choice includes the freedom to make bad decisions.

GorillaNJ

I personally think the government has somewhat of an obligation to try to think of something to help this crisis that we are in. By 2030 more than 40% of American will be obese. Which will lead to more health problems which will lead to more health costs passed on to consumers.

I never buy this argument... If Johnny Coke dies of a heart attack at 55 wouldn't that be cheaper then Tommy Marathon dying at 87 of a stroke or any of the maladies of old age? Same thing with smokers... Wally Marlboro and his Lung cancer at 75 cant cost that much more then an additional decade of even reasonable health.

liftingheavy

I personally think the government has somewhat of an obligation to try to think of something to help this crisis that we are in. By 2030 more than 40% of American will be obese. Which will lead to more health problems which will lead to more health costs passed on to consumers.

I never buy this argument... If Johnny Coke dies of a heart attack at 55 wouldn't that be cheaper then Tommy Marathon dying at 87 of a stroke or any of the maladies of old age? Same thing with smokers... Wally Marlboro and his Lung cancer at 75 cant cost that much more then an additional decade of even reasonable health.

It's not the 55, 75, or 87 year olds that are the biggest concern here. It's the 6, 12 and 18 year olds. If anyone here cannot see the link between nutrition and the future of this country they have their eyes closed and their ears covered.

martinah4

Most States do not. Have a look at HBOs recent 'weight of the nation' doc for more info

http://theweightofthenation.hbo.com/

But I guess that you would support such a move, which, as I was trying to point out, is an example of government intervention in 'private' health matters.

Really? I saw a list on the PBS website and the majority of states did. The list was outdated but I can't imagine all of the states have changed their policy.

Your link was just to the main Weight of the Nation page. No information about PE classes immediately obvious to me.

And yeah, I do think there should be mandatory PE classes in public school. You know why? Because it's public school. Taxpayers are paying for it so if there is a vote to add mandatory PE then I have no issue with it.

http://www.cdc.gov/healthyyouth/shpps/2006/factsheets/pdf/FS_PhysicalEducation_SHPPS2006.pdf

This shows that the majority of schools have a mandatory PE program. That's from your HBO website

That document is about the schools themselves requiring PE, rather than the government.

Anyway, as I was saying, my point is that in countries where governments take public health seriously and promote healthy living, people are... healthier! It isn't a question of society vs the government. It's OUR government, and it can and should play a role in tackling the obesity crisis. Whatever the US is doing at the moment, it clearly aint working, and I don't believe that's because US citizens are less responsible or lazier or greedier than people in other countries. Its because they are living in a toxic food environment.

What? The state government is the thing making these schools have a PE program. Just because it isn't the federal government doesn't mean it's not some form of government.

I think you're a bit confused. I live in the UK, and though there are considerably less obese people (from what I've seen) the trend is the same as everywhere else - wealthier people are thinner, and poor people are fatter. The thin people aren't thin because the government told them to be, they're thin because they can afford frequent grocery trips and healthy food and have the time and money to go to the gym every day. The poor people are fatter because they can only afford to grocery shop once a month and therefor need to buy long-life food that is worse for them. They also work longer hours so they do not have time for exercise or the money for the gym. I'm sure most of the less fortunate people would like to be healthier, but it simply isn't in their budget. The government telling them how bad the food is that they're eating won't change their financial situation. The government telling them that they should exercise won't change that they don't have time to exercise.

If the government wants to do something, they could stop subsidizing the corn/sugar/etc industry. By doing that they are driving down costs for the manufacturer and making unhealthy food cheaper.

FAIL! This is inaccurate. My family of 6 (me, husband and 4 kids) rely on one income. My school-teacher husbands income. We are considered above poverty level, and lower-middle class is stretching it. We eat fruit and veggies at every meal. We don't have gym memberships. It is more expensive for our family to eat at McDonald's than it is to sit down and have a healthy meal with all the macros. Seriously. My husband tallies it up, and it averages between $10-$12 dollars a meal. A sit-down restaurant for our family is never less than $40. You just have to know how to shop. My kids are incredibly healthy and not even overweight. The truth is, to actually eat healthy involves meal-planning, turning on your oven and actually taking time to cook and prepare. It's far easier to load up the car and go to Burger King.

BrianSharpe

It's not the 55, 75, or 87 year olds that are the biggest concern here. It's the 6, 12 and 18 year olds. If anyone here cannot see the link between nutrition and the future of this country they have their eyes closed and their ears covered.

I agree but my question is........where are their parents? It's the parents' responsibility to ensure that their children eat a healthy balanced diet, not the government's.

liftingheavy

Most States do not. Have a look at HBOs recent 'weight of the nation' doc for more info

http://theweightofthenation.hbo.com/

But I guess that you would support such a move, which, as I was trying to point out, is an example of government intervention in 'private' health matters.

Really? I saw a list on the PBS website and the majority of states did. The list was outdated but I can't imagine all of the states have changed their policy.

Your link was just to the main Weight of the Nation page. No information about PE classes immediately obvious to me.

And yeah, I do think there should be mandatory PE classes in public school. You know why? Because it's public school. Taxpayers are paying for it so if there is a vote to add mandatory PE then I have no issue with it.

http://www.cdc.gov/healthyyouth/shpps/2006/factsheets/pdf/FS_PhysicalEducation_SHPPS2006.pdf

This shows that the majority of schools have a mandatory PE program. That's from your HBO website

That document is about the schools themselves requiring PE, rather than the government.

Anyway, as I was saying, my point is that in countries where governments take public health seriously and promote healthy living, people are... healthier! It isn't a question of society vs the government. It's OUR government, and it can and should play a role in tackling the obesity crisis. Whatever the US is doing at the moment, it clearly aint working, and I don't believe that's because US citizens are less responsible or lazier or greedier than people in other countries. Its because they are living in a toxic food environment.

What? The state government is the thing making these schools have a PE program. Just because it isn't the federal government doesn't mean it's not some form of government.

I think you're a bit confused. I live in the UK, and though there are considerably less obese people (from what I've seen) the trend is the same as everywhere else - wealthier people are thinner, and poor people are fatter. The thin people aren't thin because the government told them to be, they're thin because they can afford frequent grocery trips and healthy food and have the time and money to go to the gym every day. The poor people are fatter because they can only afford to grocery shop once a month and therefor need to buy long-life food that is worse for them. They also work longer hours so they do not have time for exercise or the money for the gym. I'm sure most of the less fortunate people would like to be healthier, but it simply isn't in their budget. The government telling them how bad the food is that they're eating won't change their financial situation. The government telling them that they should exercise won't change that they don't have time to exercise.

If the government wants to do something, they could stop subsidizing the corn/sugar/etc industry. By doing that they are driving down costs for the manufacturer and making unhealthy food cheaper.

FAIL! This is inaccurate. My family of 6 (me, husband and 4 kids) rely on one income. My school-teacher husbands income. We are considered above poverty level, and lower-middle class is stretching it. We eat fruit and veggies at every meal. We don't have gym memberships. It is more expensive for our family to eat at McDonald's than it is to sit down and have a healthy meal with all the macros. Seriously. My husband tallies it up, and it averages between $10-$12 dollars a meal. A sit-down restaurant for our family is never less than $40. You just have to know how to shop. My kids are incredibly healthy and not even overweight. The truth is, to actually eat healthy involves meal-planning, turning on your oven and actually taking time to cook and prepare. It's far easier to load up the car and go to Burger King.

If most families operated like yours there would not be 35% obesity in this country. Sadly, that is not the case which makes this an anecdotal example. A family of 6 can eat off of the dollar menu at most fast food for 18 dollars, and not have to prepare a thing at home. When both parents work that is apparently an attractive option.

These menus were not around 20 years ago. Neither were 52 ounce jugs of soda. What happened, and why aren't 52 ounce jugs of soda available in China and Europe? Because their people demand better and we should too.

Mamasota

are they banning refills too?

martinah4

So Americans are lazier and greedier than Europeans? I don't buy that...

You don't have to buy it, but it doesn't make it untrue. I don't mean this offensively, but have you been to the US? Spend an hour in NYC and you will see that the American mentality is "WAY bigger is WAY better." We want bigger cars, bigger houses, and bigger portions. I've never visited Europe but have many friends who have and they say that the culture is like night and day.

The bottom line is, if we didn't have the choice to be healthy, then no one would be. How do you think healthy people maintain their healthy lifestyles if we are apparently so opressed? How come environment and public policy aren't making THEM fat?

I agree for the most part--having been to Europe many times, it IS like night and day. At this point, I think it has more to do with American mentality--the "bigger is better" mentality--than it does anything else. If you ban large drinks, people will just get two small ones. People love to feel like they are getting away with something :-) while I don't think it's a bad idea (in Europe, our small drinks are their large drinks! and of course, if a european wanted to be gluttonous they would just drink 5 sodas...), I don't think it will combat the problem. Many Americans would rather have quantity over quality (case in point--the many buffets that serve crappy food for very little money.)

This is neither here or there, but when I've visited Europe (the last time 3 years ago), a 16 oz water was 4 american dollars, and one 12 oz Coke was about $4.

liftingheavy

are they banning refills too?

No, but a refill on an 8 ounce cup of soda is a heck of a lotter better than a refill on a 48 ounce one. The economy sucks, and if people can get 96 ounces of soda for 99 cents they will. It's economic, and there is no way to get around it, sans reducing serving sizes. We all survived on normal sizes 20 years ago.