New York Solving Obesity One Drink At A Time
July 28, 2016 at 4:25 p.m.
By Gary [email protected]
During the presser, Bloomberg and his health czar had a bunch of big soft drink cups in front of them. In front of those, there were piles of sugar cubes which were supposed to represent the amount of sugar in each drink.
The mayor was unveiling NYC’s “most ambitious effort yet” to combat obesity among New Yorkers.
(That’s weird because when we visited NYC, my wife Mary and I were struck by how fit everybody looked. We surmised that since most people in the city walked a lot, they were in better shape. We actually talked about it. Commented on how few obese people we saw.)
But anyway, the mayor’s plan is to ban the sale of big sodas and other sugary drinks at movie theaters, restaurants and street carts.
According to the New York Times, “the proposed ban would affect virtually the entire menu of popular sugary drinks found in delis, fast-food franchises and even sports arenas, from energy drinks to pre-sweetened iced teas. The sale of any cup or bottle of sweetened drink larger than 16 fluid ounces — about the size of a medium coffee, and smaller than a common soda bottle — would be prohibited under the first-in-the-nation plan, which could take effect as soon as next March.”
The ban wouldn’t affect fruit juice, diet pop, dairy-based drinks or booze. Grocery stores and convenience stores would be exempt.
Now, I don’t really care one way or another.
But I can tell you this: It’s not going to make much of a difference with regard to the obesity problem.
For one thing, the ban doesn’t include free refills. So you can take your 16-ounce cup back again and get more sugary fluid. The ban also doesn’t include multiple purchases, so you can just buy two drinks, dump them into your refillable guzzler cup and gulp merrily along.
I just really don’t get the sense that these bans are really all that effective.
Take smoking.
Look at how much time and effort has been spent banning – well trying to ban – smoking. I’m surprised cigarette packs don’t carry the warning label: “Stop Smoking Now You Scum-Sucking Bottom-Feeding Mouth Breather.”
Pretty soon the only place you’ll be allowed to smoke will be on some deserted island. But you know what? Lots of people still will smoke.
It’s not that I disagree with banning things that are bad for you. It’s nice eating in a restaurant without cigarette smoke wafting about.
Problem is, when you start down that road, you find you’ve got a lot of banning to do.
With cigarettes, the argument is that it’s not just the person smoking that’s affected, it’s those around them, too, because of second-hand smoke.
Fair enough.
But I believe there is such a thing as second hand fast fooding. I mean, I see a guy walking down the street with a bag of Burger King and I’m feeling hungry. Ever drive by the BK and get a whiff of those BK broilers?
Sucks you right in.
Ever see those ads on TV? They make those processed meat food products look pretty darn appealing.
And when you go out to eat at a restaurant, ever notice how much food they bring you? Usually, it’s enough to feed at least two people and you shovel what you can’t eat into a styrofoam box and drag it home with you.
That’s called value.
But that stuff hurts all of us. That stuff contributes to obesity in America. Obesity in America drives up health care costs. It increases lost work time and decreases worker productivity. It lowers life expectancy.
Heck, even our kids are growing up fatter these days. But is it really because of fast food and sugary drinks?
Nah.
You could ban of it tomorrow and people still would find ways to be overweight. Even if you banned every single food that was unhealthy – which, by the way, is the same as saying every single food that is really tasty – people would still eat too much of the good foods and be overweight.
It all comes down to choices. People make all kinds of choices. Some good. Some not so good. Whether it’s booze, food or sugary drinks, people decide how much they’re going to consume.
And they make choices about their lifestyle. Will they take the stairs or take the elevator, even if it’s only one flight?
Will they exercise a little bit every day or be totally sedentary? Will they take a walk or creep around on Facebook? Will they try to eat moderate portions of healthy food?
Everybody knows they should, just like everybody knows they shouldn’t smoke. But more and more, it appears to me people just don’t really care.
And that is something that simply cannot be legislated no matter how hard you try or how noble your intentions. Frankly, in a freedom-loving constitutional republic like the U.S.A., I’m not sure it’s even the proper role of government.
But hey, ban away NYC. If I’m thirsty, I’ll just grab the free refill.
[[In-content Ad]]
During the presser, Bloomberg and his health czar had a bunch of big soft drink cups in front of them. In front of those, there were piles of sugar cubes which were supposed to represent the amount of sugar in each drink.
The mayor was unveiling NYC’s “most ambitious effort yet” to combat obesity among New Yorkers.
(That’s weird because when we visited NYC, my wife Mary and I were struck by how fit everybody looked. We surmised that since most people in the city walked a lot, they were in better shape. We actually talked about it. Commented on how few obese people we saw.)
But anyway, the mayor’s plan is to ban the sale of big sodas and other sugary drinks at movie theaters, restaurants and street carts.
According to the New York Times, “the proposed ban would affect virtually the entire menu of popular sugary drinks found in delis, fast-food franchises and even sports arenas, from energy drinks to pre-sweetened iced teas. The sale of any cup or bottle of sweetened drink larger than 16 fluid ounces — about the size of a medium coffee, and smaller than a common soda bottle — would be prohibited under the first-in-the-nation plan, which could take effect as soon as next March.”
The ban wouldn’t affect fruit juice, diet pop, dairy-based drinks or booze. Grocery stores and convenience stores would be exempt.
Now, I don’t really care one way or another.
But I can tell you this: It’s not going to make much of a difference with regard to the obesity problem.
For one thing, the ban doesn’t include free refills. So you can take your 16-ounce cup back again and get more sugary fluid. The ban also doesn’t include multiple purchases, so you can just buy two drinks, dump them into your refillable guzzler cup and gulp merrily along.
I just really don’t get the sense that these bans are really all that effective.
Take smoking.
Look at how much time and effort has been spent banning – well trying to ban – smoking. I’m surprised cigarette packs don’t carry the warning label: “Stop Smoking Now You Scum-Sucking Bottom-Feeding Mouth Breather.”
Pretty soon the only place you’ll be allowed to smoke will be on some deserted island. But you know what? Lots of people still will smoke.
It’s not that I disagree with banning things that are bad for you. It’s nice eating in a restaurant without cigarette smoke wafting about.
Problem is, when you start down that road, you find you’ve got a lot of banning to do.
With cigarettes, the argument is that it’s not just the person smoking that’s affected, it’s those around them, too, because of second-hand smoke.
Fair enough.
But I believe there is such a thing as second hand fast fooding. I mean, I see a guy walking down the street with a bag of Burger King and I’m feeling hungry. Ever drive by the BK and get a whiff of those BK broilers?
Sucks you right in.
Ever see those ads on TV? They make those processed meat food products look pretty darn appealing.
And when you go out to eat at a restaurant, ever notice how much food they bring you? Usually, it’s enough to feed at least two people and you shovel what you can’t eat into a styrofoam box and drag it home with you.
That’s called value.
But that stuff hurts all of us. That stuff contributes to obesity in America. Obesity in America drives up health care costs. It increases lost work time and decreases worker productivity. It lowers life expectancy.
Heck, even our kids are growing up fatter these days. But is it really because of fast food and sugary drinks?
Nah.
You could ban of it tomorrow and people still would find ways to be overweight. Even if you banned every single food that was unhealthy – which, by the way, is the same as saying every single food that is really tasty – people would still eat too much of the good foods and be overweight.
It all comes down to choices. People make all kinds of choices. Some good. Some not so good. Whether it’s booze, food or sugary drinks, people decide how much they’re going to consume.
And they make choices about their lifestyle. Will they take the stairs or take the elevator, even if it’s only one flight?
Will they exercise a little bit every day or be totally sedentary? Will they take a walk or creep around on Facebook? Will they try to eat moderate portions of healthy food?
Everybody knows they should, just like everybody knows they shouldn’t smoke. But more and more, it appears to me people just don’t really care.
And that is something that simply cannot be legislated no matter how hard you try or how noble your intentions. Frankly, in a freedom-loving constitutional republic like the U.S.A., I’m not sure it’s even the proper role of government.
But hey, ban away NYC. If I’m thirsty, I’ll just grab the free refill.
[[In-content Ad]]
Have a news tip? Email [email protected] or Call/Text 360-922-3092