Hey, there! Log in / Register
Cambridge public-health officials not sure Bloomberging soda cups will cut sugar consumption
By adamg on Fri, 02/15/2013 - 1:46pm
The Harvard Crimson reports hesitancy on the part of city public-health officials to go along with a proposal by some city councilors to limit the size of sugared drinks sold in restaurants in the city:
"Does limiting soda size make sense, if people can still buy large size beverages in retail establishments, such as supermarkets and corner stores?" asked Claude-Alix Jacob, Cambridge's chief public health officer. He added that consumers could also order more servings of soda at restaurants.
Neighborhoods:
Ad:
Support Universal Hub
Help keep Universal Hub going. If you like what we're up to and want to help out, please consider a (completely non-deductible) contribution.
Comments
It bothers me that the "chief
It bothers me that the "chief public health officer" is giving the same reaction you hear from a 5 year old that think he just hit the jackpot with the line "could also order more servings of soda at restaurants".
Has he really not read and understood the research that people will consume whats placed in front of them, even if theyre no longer thirsty/hungry?
And of course
People could order large sodas and share.
I can remember as a kid, my parents would order a SuperSize meal at McDonald's and then we'd share. Of course, now SuperSize doesn't exist any more (too unhealthy!)
Well- the old "super size" is
Well- the old "super size" is the new medium, these days.
Re: the comments above, when
Re: the comments above, when I go out to dinner with my wife, we often get one water and one soda and split both so that neither of us drinks the whole soda.
My personal preference, if we're going to mandate soda servings, wouldn't be to put a cap on it, but to say that there has to be a small size (i.e. 8 oz) available, and that it be called a small. Not "value size" (hello, Burger King), and not bottomless bucket of soda only, either.
I say you let people drink and eat
whatever the hell they want. It's called freedom of choice. If they get health problems as a result you charge them progressively higher premiums. And if they are getting 'free' or heavily subsidized heathcare, that's another story. But,of course, people who wish to control others will use expensive healthcare costs as a convenient conduit.
But, per usual, I detect creeping 'progressive' puritanism.
Nanny State Run Amok
Unless these people have solved all the other issues in Cambridge, they need to stop and think about how stupid this is.
No silly, unenforceable law is going to stop someone from drinking all the Pepsi they want to drink. Maybe next they will demand restaurants take a BMI reading prior to seating the customer.
"Sir, you are overweight based on your BMI, by law, we can't serve you anything from the left side of the menu."