Maybe I'm the only one who drinks DIET SODA? Seltzer? Hello!
I certainly realize that aspartame and Splenda aren't the perfect solution, but for heaven's sake, people! There is no earthly reason to be guzzing all of that sugar/HFCS when there are dozens of alternatives.
Re: Good proposal
chapAnjou
6/7/2012 2:33:10 PM
I couldn't possibly agree with you more. However, I see this proposal as being that kickstart that makes people really start talking about the amount of sugar and fat (and hopefully we start focusing on the amount of sodium as well) that exists in so much of our food. The ban may not stop obesity on its own, but perhaps it will signify the first steps in a cultural change.
Thing is, this proposal really isn't going to do anything to stop obesity. Too much processed food, too much sugar (cane, corn or beet), too much fat and too little daily exercise among Americans in general. We don't need bans on sugar in food. We need fundamental cultural change.
Maybe I'm the only one, but does anyone else agree with what's being proposed here? Personally, I feel this is a great first step towards making the nation healthier. Sure, people can look at this as their civil liberties being trampled all over, but at the end of the day, we're talking about people being stopped from turning themselves into morbidly obese messes.
Double standard
chapAnjou
6/7/2012 1:28:08 PM
"No comments were forthcoming from Starbucks (Nasdaq: SBUX), which, despite having sugar-laden offerings of its own, would not be affected by the proposed ban. Although many of its products are sweet, including the 310-calorie 12-ounce Chocolate Cookie Crumble Frappucino, which has 40g of sugar (about 10 teaspoonfuls), they also contain coffee and dairy products, both exempt from the ban."
This is what's confusing to me. If you're going to propose a ban, then shouldn't you go all the way with it? Why just focus on soft drinks? Sugar is sugar and if you're going to say that one thing is bad, you can't say the same thing in a different disguise isn't.
Anyone else agree with that?
Re: Public Policy and Science
chapAnjou
6/7/2012 1:24:02 PM
@Cat tail, at the end of the day a person is responsible for their own actions and unless they ban all sweet drinks, etc. someone will find away to get the same amounts of sugar/fat as they did before. Having said that, it kind of creates a survival of the "fittest" (using the term quite loosely) of junk food lovers where they have to ask themselves how far they're willing to go to shove that extra 16oz. of cola down their gullet, hahaha.
Re: Public Policy and Science
chapAnjou
6/7/2012 1:21:44 PM
"Wharton statistics professor Jean Lemaire expressed skepticism about the effectiveness of such a ban, noting that people find ways around laws regulating such vices as alcohol and cigarettes."
@Tenacious, you bring up a good point, but I think the more important thing is that it raises awareness. Suddenly, if the spotlight is on how bad this is or that is, maybe it'll stop a mom from picking up that junk product for fear of looking like a bad mother, etc. There's a trickle down effect here that can't be overlooked.
Re: Public Policy and Science
cat tail
6/7/2012 8:19:49 AM
Banning big cups of sweet stuff actually gives it that forbidden fruit allure. Sales, even in smaler cans or bottles, will probably spike and exceed current consumption.
Re: Public Policy and Science
Tenacious
6/7/2012 7:58:34 AM
Agreed. While University of Pennsylvania experts note there is research to support that shrinking a container size can help shrink a person's waistline, Wharton statistics professor Jean Lemaire expressed skepticism about the effectiveness of such a ban, noting that people find ways around laws regulating such vices as alcohol and cigarettes. "We can tax it; we can make it more expensive; we can reduce opening hours of the stores that sell it, but people find ways to get around that," he said.
Re: Public Policy and Science
driven
6/7/2012 7:48:04 AM
Take away giant vats of soda and junk food fanatics will find another way to sabotage their health. You can't force them to be healthy.
The blogs and comments posted on Investor Uprising do not reflect the views of Investor Uprising, PRNewswire, or its sponsors. Investor Uprising, PRNewswire, and its sponsors do not assume responsibility for any comments, claims, or opinions made by authors and bloggers. They are no substitute for your own research and should not be relied upon for trading or any other purpose.
|
 |
Latest Blogs
Telecom-equipment maker Ciena is a stock trader’s dream, as long as the timing is correct.
The FTC is offering a $50,000 cash prize to the person or group that can come up with a solution to those annoying robocalls.
Akamai is in the middle of four significant tech trends.
John Malone of Liberty Media will be taking over Sirius XM satellite radio when the existing CEO Mel Karmazin steps down. What's it mean?
Demand for students of the humanities exists, despite widespread aspersions on the discipline.
IU Education
Resources to help you become a better investor
Investor Uprising on Twitter
25 market-moving companies we're tracking
|
Tweet This