Sugary Drinks

"Nutrition Experts: Despite Ruling, Soda Ban Is Still a Great Idea - NBC News."NBC News. N.p., n.d. Web. 05 May 2014.

It is not the government’s responsibility to manage what we eat. “Government is setting aside whether they have the constitutional authority to regulate what we eat (paragraph 2, source 1).” Government regulating what we eat could stop responsible people that eat healthy from treating themselves. People who have long hours of work rely on fast foods because

The issue of whether the government's regulation of what we eat and drink is fair, this question has started many debates of whether the government should regulate what we eat and drink. On one hand people don't the government to interfere with their lives. On the other hand there are those who say the government should regulate what we and drink . Although arguments on whether the government's regulation of what we eat and drink sounds valid, there are some problems with them. Yes!! Government regulation of what we eat drink is fair>

The most supportive argument why people are in an agreement with the government controlling what we eat is because of all the obese people in the country with medical problems. In fact obesity is one of the many problems

One of the main problems of the ban is that it would selectively impact small businesses negatively in downtown New York that rely on the significant profits of large soda drinks. The ban only applies to certain businesses and can easily be avoided, thus businesses affected are not given a fair opportunity. Since the ban only applies to certain restaurants and businesses, customers can still buy large soda drinks at other retailers, causing stores like restaurants and fast-food joints that rely heavily on large soda sales to lose business due to an unfair standard. According to the Huffington Post, “two stores on the same block might very well be held to different standards.” The economist states that the ban “would not apply to grocery stores,” which is one of many examples of how the ban can easily be

Their advertisement proclaimed that all they wanted to do was “protect their Freedom of Choice.” “This is New York City; no one tells us what neighborhood to live in or what team to root for,” says the narrator, as Yankees and Mets fans shout in the background. (Grynbaum, 2012). Since May 30 when Bloomberg wanted to ban the sale of soft drinks over 16 ounces in regulated food establishments such as movie theaters and sport arenas. Senator Frank R. Lautenberg, a New Jersey Democrat, recommended there be a federal study linking together sugary beverages and obesity. “The talking points are ‘Nanny State,’ that it won’t work, because people will just buy as much as they ever would, and that this disproportionately hurts the poor,” said Kelly Brownell, director of the Rudd Center for Food Policy and Obesity at Yale University. (Grynbaum, 2012). People that are not middle or low class would buy as much soda as they wanted and the rest of the people would be stuck with whatever drink is leftover. The lower class minority groups seem to always get the shorter end of the stick and in most cases unless a big group of them get together their voices will not be heard. The mayor or the city council should not have the right to tell you what size soda to drink or what kind of soda to drink; We live in The United States of America and there is no law that says anything about a specific size or flavor of soda so until that day comes nobody should

The ban on larger sodas would only make people buy more than one soda to satisfy their cravings as they do not like being told what they can and can not have. In 2013, in response to the ban, The Daily Signal reported “Mayor Bloomberg and the Board of Health seek to use their power to change consumer behavior. This assumes that citizens are ignorant and must be protected from themselves.” This agrees with the above statement of the people not liking being told what they can and can not do, or have. Another thing people may argue is that the ban is for people to be able to be healthier and still have soda. CNN News reports that “One of those solutions is to control portion size and sugar consumption.” While this is true the ban would only be subjective to places such as movie theaters, sports venues, restaurants, and places that people visit every once in a blue moon. The Huffington Post reports, “It's also important to look at where people acquire such large drinks. … Such neighborhood stores selling over 50 percent food products fall under the jurisdiction of the City's Department of Health, and therefore would be limited by the ban. Those selling under 50 percent food products would be exempt from the ban.” This basically states that convenience stores, supermarkets, and gas stations would not be subjective to the ban so people could just go to one of these places to get larger sodas therefore finding a way around the ban. This subjectiveness of the ban would not only make the ban inefficient but would also cost the city by stores and other places that fall under the jurisdiction of the ban having to cut workers, which then causes the state to have to create more programs for poorer city

There have been many health related bans put in place throughout history, but none have been as controversial as NYC Mayor, Michael Bloombergs soda ban. Mayor Bloomberg is trying to put into ordinance a regulation that will limit the size of drink cups in restaurants, sporting arenas, movie theaters, and food carts. This ban is controversial because New Yorkers feel like the mayor is trying to control them and take away their choices. They feel that he shouldn’t get a say in how much of a sugary drink they consume, even though they can still buy the same amount as before if they buy two cups instead of one. However, this regulation is going to affect public health in a positive way, because it’s going to make people stop and think before they

In New York City the mayor is trying to ban sugary sodas to decrease the amount of obesity. Two-thirds of adults in New York are overweight, 40% of elementary and middle school students fight obesity. Is this because of the intake of sugary sodas or is it the lack of self control? "Liz Berman, the coalition's chairwoman" states "We are smart enough to make our own decision about what to eat and drink."

Sugary drinks and fast foods are constantly being consumed by Americans, causing an increase in health problems. Government regulation of what we eat and drink is fair because it will increase awareness of what individuals eat and can prevent higher rates of obesity. The article by Ryan Jaslow, "Sugary drinks over 16-ounces banned in New York City, Board of Health Votes" clearly supports the banning. However, “Should the Government Regulate What We Eat?" argues that the ban puts the American values of freedom at risk. Such regulations are necessary in order to maintain a healthy environment.

Question 2 – This infographic relates to Nadia Arumugam’s claim that, if not anything else, this ban may teach us about the importance of “portion control”. In her article she quotes Thomas Hardy and according to him the reduction of the consumption of sugary drinks from 20 to 16 ounces “every other week” will help New Yorkers avoid gaining about 2.3 million pounds a year. One of the problems is that people don’t realize the actual amount of unhealthy products they consume in a longer period of time.

Snacks and sodas have been removed from vending machines and have been banned on school campuses because of the state legislature and school boards. A “fat tax” has been suggested for high calorie foods. Another possibility being considered is that restaurants will have to send in every item on their menu to a laboratory so that it can be tested for its nutritional value and then labeled on that restaurant’s menu. This takes away a person's personal responsibility for their own body and well-being and makes it the government’s responsibility. Balko states “your well-being, shape, and condition have increasingly been deemed matters of ‘public health’, instead of matters of personal responsibility.” It is becoming more and more common for states to prevent private health care providers from charging obese clients at higher rates which removes any financial reasoning behind being

Many store owners might argue that if they ban super-sized soda drinks they will be receiving less money because the bigger the drink the more it costs; however, the health of the U.S citizens is much more important because the more they consume those sugary foods and

Regulating what the government should control and what they should not was one of the main arguments our founding fathers had to deal with when creating our nation, and to this day this regulation is one of the biggest issues in society. Yet, I doubt our founding fathers thought about the idea that the food industry could one day somewhat control our government, which is what we are now facing. Marion Nestles’ arguments in the book Food Politics: How the Food Industry Influences Nutrition and Health deal with how large food companies and government intertwine with one another. She uses many logical appeals and credible sources to make the audience understand the problem with this intermingling. In The Politics of Food author Geoffrey

Should the government be able to tell us the amount of sugary drinks we consume? In the recent years obesity has become a national problem. Because of obesity, the current generation of American children might be having a shorter life than their parents. Children learn about acceptable behavior by observing and copying their parents, in this case the healthy way they eat and drink. Existing factors said that the ones responsible for a big change were sugary drinks causing us a drastic change in health. Sodas for example are cheap, especially if you buy them on sale. That’s one reason the obesity rate is higher and more accessible to consume in low income families. To emphasize sugary drinks mostly contain caffeine and chemicals in which harm our body. This cause make the government concerned encouraging them to limit the amount consumed, but -Do sugary drinks really cause the problem? -Does the Government have to take extreme actions to ban sugary drinks? Or -Do we have the right to drink wherever we want and how much we can to drink?