The virtual ink was not dry on my last post on Mayor Bloomberg's proposed sugary soft drinks ban when the next round of proposed bans have surfaced. So, in addition to legislating a maximum soft drink size of 16 ounces, there are proposals to limit the size of your theater popcorn AND put a ban on high calorie milk drinks like milk shakes. So, sorry Starbuck's lovers but you may see your options for 591ml vente Caramel Macchiato drastically reduced to a 354ml tall, or worse yet, just plain banned. Think I'm exaggerating? Here is a quick calorie comparison of a few common milk drinks:
|Beverage || Ounces ||Calories |
|McDoanlds Chocolate McCafe Shake|| 12 oz|| 570|
|Starbuck's Double Chocolaty Chip Frappuccino® Blended Crème|| 12 oz || 500|
|In & Out Burger Chocolate Shake|| 15 oz|| 590|
Arguments From People For The Ban
While listening to a local radio talk show this morning a few people raised some valid points. This is another case of most of us sharing a common goal, that is, to "help us" eat healthier but we are miles apart in our views about how to get there. Here are some of the pro-ban arguments.
One caller suggested it was child abuse for parents to purchase over-sized drinks for a child which contribute to their obesity.
Obesity Is Expensive
Another caller said we HAVE to make these laws because all these obese people are going to cost us (employers, society) too much to support when they have health problems down the road.
The Masses Have No Self Control
One person suggested that our citizens don't have enough self control to eat properly, they need the government to control their diets for them.
Regulation Of Commerce
The issue is regulation of commerce. If you overfed an animal excessive amounts of food it would be considered cruelty. The government needs to stop business from over-portioning foods sold to consumers.
People Have No Self-Control
Food needs to be legislated, just like drugs, guns, because people don't have enough self control to monitor their own desires.
Arguments Against The BanJust Educate
It was suggested that we start nutritional education in Jr. High and High School. After that, let them make their own life choices.
It's A Free Country
"It's a free country, I think". "Life liberty and the pursuit of happiness." Callers stressed that we are supposed to have freedom of choice in this country. Why is the government wasting time on making food choices for people.
The Issue Is: Is It The Government's Place To Legislate Our Food Choices
Many people agreed that the real issue is not this ban or that ban but in fact did we hire this "government" to make our food and nutritional choices. The health argument is being used to take away people's choices.
We started with sugary drink bans. Now we have a ban on the size of a sugary drink. Today they are talking about limiting the size popcorn we can buy. It seems like the bans won't stop.
What Do You Think?
I'm very concerned about over-regulation from our government. The bans may be well-meaning but they seem extremely obtrusive in a "free country". One caller in the talk show said "Our government is here to protect our rights not to tell you how to live". I wonder what you think about the topic? Please take our poll and leave a comment.