Advertisement -- Learn more about ads on this site.
Fitness Minutes: (7,968)
142 3/12/13 11:35 P
I like BUBBLE75's idea of the tax. That way individuals have to pay the ultimate health cost of their addictions. And consumers will be able to make a more informed choice having a better sense of the real cost of drinking a large soda. Nutrition labelling on fast food and restaurant products would also facilitate informed consumer choice.
If heroin and crystal meth were designed, marketed, and (legally) sold by corporations would Americans be vehemently fighting for their freedom to purchase these products in unlimited quantities? Absolutely. But shouldn't freedom yield to reason at times?
Governments exists to collectively solve the problems that people can't tackle as individuals. While its great that some individuals can resist soda (or heroin) that doesn't mean that addiction isn't a problem for many members of society, for which everyone pays the price.
The food Americans eat today is controlled by corporations who want NOTHING but bigger profits. How bad is it to shift some control from predatory corporations to your elected representatives (who care about your health)?
Fitness Minutes: (19,449)
1,606 3/12/13 10:42 P
People want to control others. I think people have to take responsibility for their own actions.
Fitness Minutes: (1,201)
205 3/12/13 9:53 P
I agree with what Bunnykicks said upthread, even if he/she is *gasp* not an American.
Fitness Minutes: (29,499)
4,787 3/12/13 8:15 P
The judge is right. This whole thing is ridiculous. If an obese person wants to drink huge quantities of soda, they will. It's all about choice. The mayor thinks he's going to solve the city's obesity problem by making it impossible to buy a Big Gulp. It's a joke.
Companies supersize things to sell more product; they donít concern themselves with the needs, or the rights, of the public. And thinking that limiting the size of a container is going to put people out of businesses, doesnít make sense to me. If people want more product, they will buy more product. Meanwhile a vendor keeps pushing the supersize. He fills a huge container with ice, sells a little more product, makes more profit, and we cheer our right to swallow more junk. Itís the way of free enterprise. It has almost nothing to do with civil liberties. Itís all about the almighty dollar.
The judge was right. The government should continue to do what it is doing educate people on proper nutrition (remember not long ago the food pyramid was replaced by the plate). But if something is legal - I should be able to purchase/eat/drink however much I want. The majority of consumers know that 32 oz is not a normal serving size and I have not met anyone in the past 10 -15 years that thought soda was good for you - they know its not. The government needs to be kept in check.
I think they should just put a heavy tax on food/drinks that have no nutritional value as the effects of consuming these products regularly results in the tax payers having to pay for the inevitable health care costs of this type of lifestyle. Those who consume these products as a rare treat won't be hit hard and those who have them daily will have to seriously reconsider what they're putting in their mouths. Leave the freedom of choice, but don't make me pay for people's bad choices.
Fitness Minutes: (11,937)
359 3/12/13 3:24 P
Fitness Minutes: (2,155)
819 3/12/13 3:22 P
As someone who is tremendously bothered by the continual erosion of our rights as guaranteed by the first and especially the fourth amendment, the equation of whether or not stores in a city are allowed to sell 20 ounce drinks -- when someone who wanted more could always buy more regardless -- sort of makes me want to cry.
It's not worth that kind of rhetoric. Save it for the big stuff.
Zig... i hadn't even noticed your edit, my post had absolutely ZERO to do with the flag emoticon that you used. ZERO. Also ZERO to do with "America." (citizenship in which is apparently requisite for participation in this thread, I've since been told).
The flag waving was actually because I had mistakenly double posted my entry and thought that was an appropriate way to edit. The fact that it bothered anyone is incredible to me. I will never apologize for waving the American Flag. It represents the sacrifice of some of many, family included, and the founders of this country who believed in the individual. The founders of America gave us many warnings of government overreach and this move by Bloomberg is representative of that. The American history is amazing and something to be proud of.
I think Bloomberg isn't as stupid as he's being made out to be for this stunt; people are talking about him and this law. Ladies and gentlemen; good or bad press is always GOOD press. This is making himself relevant on a national level and we all bit it hook, line & sinker.
"And really...should NON-Americans be dishing how Americans live their lives?"
Oh well EXCUSE ME.
Fitness Minutes: (2,138)
1,999 3/12/13 2:11 P
@BUNNYKICKS...you are missing the point. America was founded on personal freedoms and liberty. More and more of those freedoms are being taken away every year by the government (a.k.a. Big Brother) in the name of homeland security, perceived safety of the citizens, or anything the government deems is "unhealthy or unsafe" for Americans.
The fact that NY wanted to ban any size sodas over 16-oz, is really not the main issue...it's about the further eroding of civil liberties. Where do we stop? The American public has become way too apathetic and complacent in the protections of their rights.
The soda issue, if successful in NY, would have been passed in other states as well. People should continue to have the CHOICE of whether they wish to consume large amounts of sugary sodas. Anyone intent upon drinking larger amounts will easily bypass the 16-oz rule...and get 2 16-oz sodas, or even 3! The better option is information and education.
And really...should NON-Americans be dishing how Americans live their lives? Governments should take care of themselves and their own citizens...not meddle in the personal lives of others.
I'm not sure that "freedom of choice to choose to eat and drink ourselves into an obesity-related health crisis, thus contributing to the ballooning cost of health care, because we have lost all connection with and understanding of What Constitutes a Portion Size" is a battle that deserves the proud and enthusiastic waving of the Freedom Flag. Pick your battles! This isn't a good one!
Though outright banning large cups sounds a bit silly, there *should* be some sort of labelling requirement indicating that 64-ounce sodas are NOT A SINGLE SERVING SIZE.
One of the things I hear over and over and over on these and similar health/diet-related message boards is the utter SHOCK people experience, when finding out that their favorite restaurant lunch meal actually contained 2400 calories and a week's worth of sodium. And how so many of us STRUGGLE with portion control, incredulous that a "serving" of pasta is one scant cup and not three! And how so many of us panic at the thought of having to "eat out" because so many restaurants are just not geared towards "normal portions." So, while I can see the "silly factor" involved in attempting a "large soda cup ban," I am in favour of the effort to DO SOMETHING about the environment/combat the effect of Giant Multinational Corporate Marketing that makes us honestly believe it is our RIGHT AND FREEDOM TO CONSUME. Yeah, it's in the best interest of the marketers that we really believe it's our fundamental right to overindulge in everything-all-the-time. That's what pays their bills and lines their pockets.
Disclaimer: I am not American, but we on your northern border do share this bloated-portion-size problem and the burdening of our health care system that results.
Fitness Minutes: (35,692)
4,388 3/12/13 12:42 P
I get the intent, but it's not the government's place to make these types of rules IMO. Stick with mandating easy to access nutrition info and let individuals decide
And the whole thing made no sense at all. I can't buy a large soda in a restaurant, but I can go next door to a convenience store and buy it? Or I CAN buy a large diet soda or fruit juice?
there might be a few people who now will take the time find out how many empty calories and how much sugar soft drinks contain, so that's good
Fitness Minutes: (63,084)
2,239 3/12/13 12:31 P
The one good thing that came out of this is the publicity about how large amounts of soda are unhealthy.
I support people's right to choose, just because someone opts for a large soda doesn't mean they don't have a healthy handle on it. Everything in moderation is my motto, a bit of junk every now and then isn't going to kill you and can help keep you focused the rest of the time.
Too many busy bodies in this world, with too much time on their hands!
Fitness Minutes: (10,696)
5,606 3/12/13 11:35 A
Once in a while, the system gets it right. The idea was stupid from the start. Ban something today, ban two things tomorrow. This is supposed to be a free society so don't let the government get their camels nose under the tent or soon we wont have a tent.
It is our personal responsibility to realize what is bad for each of us and if we don't follow our own knowledge, then that is too bad. I am responsible for me and only me. If asked, I will give my thoughts and opinions.
When I was really heavy, I KNEW I was not doing the right thing and I almost paid the ultimate price for my stupidity. Their is no law against stupidity.
I did not get the point from the get go. I never get the large drink, that is dumb when you can refill a small one. I refill my drink many times. Here it goes water in cup first until meal comes, then I switch to soda and drink about 8 oz of that with my burger or pizza. I say burger or pizza because that's all I drink soda with. I then, if coffee pots are self serve get a cup of coffee in same cup... Restaurants who serves soda come around filling glasses also...what a waste of time, paper, and other resources on this subject....People can drink 40 ozs. of soda in a small cup if they wanted to. Oh if I get soda to go I still get small drink, I just say no ice, it is already real cold. People who want a large amount of soda will drink a large amount of soda no matter what size of cup.
I agree this is the United States, this country is based on freedom. The government has no place in telling anyone what they can eat or drink,freedom of choice for all!
Fitness Minutes: (2,155)
819 3/12/13 10:20 A
@ Bluenose -- But you're willing to let corporations do that? Their advertising and food sciencing doesn't have quite the same "thou shalt not" authority that the government has, but they're sure trying. When a significant majority of Americans are affected by the presence, availability, and perceived desirability of these foods to the point of being overweight or obese (and all of those factors directly and often deliberately acted on by those who sell it to us) -- is that really just a personal responsibility issue anymore? Are the majority of Americans just that ignorant or stupid?
I don't think so. I think our normal common sense and mechanisms of self control are being subverted, in part by circumstance and in part by intentional effort on the part of corporations to make more money.
This ban is a silly way of combating the issue, IMO, but that doesn't mean that there is no issue.
The whole thing was silly...for many reasons.One though, was that it only included certain establishments,while others were exempt.What kind of law is that? What makes it ok in one business and not the other? Made no sense to me.Not only that,but if you're going to go around trying to force people to eat healthier...why not ban GMO foods,or limit the amount of pesticides that are on our foods...or the amount of antibiotics that are given to livestock that we eventually ingest? The list could go and on...Heck...make it so that real sugar is used in soda rather then HFCS.Again...the list is long.
Fitness Minutes: (36,922)
526 3/12/13 9:57 A
well, this seems to be an issue that will dominate the message boards. My take is simple, no giant soda today, no freedom tomorrow, remember the choice is ours to make to be healthy. To many of our freedoms are being sucked up by the government or the big corporations, oil medicine etc, what has happened to the America that george and the boys founded is big brother watching you, or are u watching big brother
Fitness Minutes: (1,825)
8 3/12/13 9:48 A
I think the issue that was trying to be tackled was that companies are providing us with more and more products that are ridiculous in portion size and its becoming normal to have these huge sodas and bags of chips with thousands of calories that we simply don't need. If something doesn't change than people will just be getting fatter and more people will develop type 2 diabetes and other health problems as a direct consequence - well its already happening - and taxpayers will pay dearly for this. Just because there is information that these things are not healthy doesn't mean that people won't go for them, particularly kids and teens who are at greater risk if they develop obesity early. I think the soda ban was a good thing, and I am disappointed that an argument of "freedom" which does not even necessarily make sense, gets in the way of trying to revert back to a healthier culture. but, hey, this is 'MERUCA after all.
Fitness Minutes: (85,576)
11,045 3/12/13 9:35 A
Good for that Judge! It's up to each individual to monitor their own eating and drinking habits. If a person knows that soda is bad for them but they choose to drink it anyway that's their business not the governments.
I agree with you BLUENOSE, I also never said that the companies that made the large size drinks were looking out for our freedoms either. I just think we live in a nanny state government and I'm smart enough to know to stay away from sodas just like I do not eat fast food. Everything in moderation, there were plenty of times when I did order a large diet coke and would share it with my husband. I don't need the laws to tell me to eat healthy, there is plenty of educational material and my own common sense for that.
Fitness Minutes: (65,430)
2,752 3/12/13 6:38 A
With all the literature out there; if you cannot make your own healthy choice it is your own fault. The government does not need to tell people what to eat and drink!
Fitness Minutes: (2,155)
819 3/12/13 5:27 A
Even though I don't much support the ban on large servings (might be more accurate to say I roll my eyes at it), I'm very skeptical of this being considered any sort of victory for freedom. I'm with the person who said that this freedom is an illusion. The huge-sized soft drinks are not offered by the soft drink corporations out of any concern for your freedom of choice or mine -- we could choose to drink as much just as easily if the maximum serving size were only 4 ounces. No one had proposed or was likely ever to propose banning the consumption of soda as such. (As has been done for drugs, for instance.)
The point of the ban -- and indeed the point of the large serving sizes themselves -- was that by and large people do NOT consciously choose how much they really want to drink. Soda is sweet, and your body knows that sweet is good, and when you are conditioned to it by your upbringing and society and habit and even the way your brain works, then your body is going to believe that more sweet is better and drag your brain along for the ride. The people who are trying to sell this to you know this perfectly well; in fact I'd say they know it better than most opponents of the ban do. Soda companies are not interested in protecting your freedom of choice; they are interested by their very existence as profit-making entities in subverting it, and they do that very well.
Fitness Minutes: (174,160)
5,968 3/12/13 12:28 A
I think it was rediculous to ban sodas in the first place.
Fitness Minutes: (2,138)
1,999 3/11/13 11:05 P
@RubenB2003...if you don't know why the law was struck down, then you obviously have different views on personal freedoms and personal CHOICE issues....
Has anyone ever thought of the thousands of people who would be losing their jobs if these silly bans took effect? This economy is already hurting never mind thousands more in unemployment lines. Soda has been around for years and years they don't gear it to a certain group of people (poor) everyone can afford soda the rich , middle class and poor we have to start taking responsibility for how much we eat and drink of something instead of blaming others for our own weaknesses. Moderation is key to a healthy lifestyle, but the lives we live now compared to the lives they lived in the 50's are stressful and there is so much bullying going on in our society and everyone airbrushes models that are already to thin to look perfect and when people don't fit the prototype they get depressed and give up on themselves. It's not soda companies that are making us fat it's how much we choose to put of a product in our own mouth. It seems to me that since this fructose corn syrup came about and is in everything that's when waistlines expanded, why don't they ban that cause we have no choice about that it's everything...
There was no "ban" on soda. There were limitations put on its sale, just as there are limitations put on alcohol. The people of NYC were still able to drink themselves into obesity.
For the record, I have the freedom to choose all sorts of unhealthy things. That doesn't make them good. In fact, our government took away our freedom to use morphine, heroin, cocaine...and pretty much everyone these days thinks that was a good idea. (People were pretty angry about it at the time though.)
Fitness Minutes: (199,659)
3,771 3/11/13 9:50 P
It is a Victory to protect our freedom of personal choice!
I feel that adults should be allowed to choose what they want to eat and drink.
Fitness Minutes: (7,968)
142 3/11/13 9:48 P
The freedom you speak of is an illusion. Corporations create addictive products and aggressively market them to vulnerable people - particularly low income people and children. Sugary drinks are today's cigarettes. It is taxpayers who ultimately pay for the health costs associated with treating the consequences of people's addiction to sugary drinks (obesity, diabetes, etc). Good on NY for trying. I look forward to the appeal.
Good for them, we have a brain for reason! It's pretty common knowledge that banning things doesn't really solve anything. Just look what happened with prohibition of alcohol. I'm sure others who feel drastic changes like this needed to happen will be upset to hear that it was turned down but I am happy it was because when we start banning things for the good of all, where does the line stop?
Fitness Minutes: (2,138)
1,999 3/11/13 7:22 P
SparkPeople, SparkCoach, SparkPages, SparkPoints, SparkTeams, SparkDiet, SparkAmerica, SparkRecipes, DailySpark, and other marks are trademarks of SparkPeople, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
SPARKPEOPLE is a registered trademark of SparkPeople, Inc. in the United States, European Union, Canada, and Australia. All rights reserved.