Soda Ban Essay

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

The soda ban is said to be a bad idea because it excludes diet soda and fruit juice which causes obesity and

To begin with, these sugar regulations would need to set a limited on the amount of sugar allowed in these products. Otherwise, people will continue to consume more and more sugar. Right now, it is a fact that “Each 12-ounce serving of soda a person consumes each day raised type 2 diabetes risk by 10 to 15 percent, and many Americans are consuming

As an attempt to reduce the rising obesity and obesity-related disease rates, Mayor Bloomberg of New York City has proposed a ban on soft drinks larger than 16 oz. According to an infographic created by the Huffington Post, extra large soft drinks have accounted for an average of 301 extra calories in people’s diets across the US. Although measures need to be put into place to improve the unhealthy diets and lifestyles of many Americans, a ban on large soft drinks is not the solution. The ban on soda would be an ineffective attempt at reducing obesity and obesity-related diseases, as well as an infringement of civil liberties and an attack on businesses in New York City.

As a closing remark, San Franciscan's should pass the soda tax because it would discourage people from buying unhealthy drinks, it would help the city’s funds, and it will show people how concerning the country’s health is. This tax would only benefit their people and town in a good way health wise and economically. The soda tax has been approved by the city of Berkeley already, and its impact has been positive. Overall, the soda tax will eliminate the soda industry’s dominance in the 21st

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

To start off the soda ban of New York is a terrible idea and will cost more money to instate than leaving the intake of soda the way it is. This is proven in an info-graphic given by graph paper diaries in which a child is speaking to governmental leaders about teaching them basic math, before they try and educate the population on health priorities. Now someone might disagree with this argument

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

Question 1 - In her article Nadia Arumugam acknowledges some of the counter arguments to her own claim. She admits that the ban does not prevent customers from buying two cans of soda if they wanted, it only forbids “food services establishments regulated by the city” to sell sugary drinks exceeding 16 ounces. Through his art, the creator of the cartoon Dave Granlund demonstrates his position on the soda ban by questioning its effectiveness. He would likely disagree with the Nadia Aruguman because if someone wants to drink more than 16 ounces, he can and he will most probably do so.

Recently, people have become worried about the health issues associated with consuming sugary drinks, especially soda. The rate of people being diagnosed with type-2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease has been going up primarily because of beverages with added sugar (Cited in Crawford, 2016). Several studies have found that soda is linked to over 180,000 deaths per year (Cited in Crawford, 2016). An article by the Huffington Post (2011) said that an average American drinks about 44.7 gallons of carbonated beverages a year, which adds up to over 350 pounds of soda. Comparatively, in 2005 an average American drank only 0.5 gallons, making soft drinks the most consumed beverage in America (n/a, 2011). The way the government is trying to fix

Soda companies “dramatically announced that they would aim to cut the number of sugary drinks calories by twenty percent over the next ten years by reducing the portion size and trying to sell more zero-calorie and low calorie options.” By reducing the portion size, Americans could be drinking more cans, and possibly drinking more ounces than they were originally. As for the zero-calorie and low calorie options, the drinks are considered by doctors to be worst than the original because they contain artificial sweeteners that are not ‘natural sugars’, but chemically made sugars that puts an individual at greater risk of being morbidly obese by slowing their metabolisms, and is also known to elevate their blood pressure. Mexico’s soda consumption and obesity rate was once worst than the United States a few years ago, Mexico then established “a significant tax on soda and junk food.. Soda consumption in Mexico fell by a couple of percent points almost immediately.. there was almost as large increase in the sale of bottled water (not taxed).” Mexico had went ahead with its initiative to stop their nation’s problem, as for the United States, soda has become a major part of our diets. I believe that is restricting us from progressing from this aggravated problem.

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

Soda banning is one of the uttermost debatable and controversial topics in the country. One of the questions that people are asking is should soda be banned? The soda ban is the best way to go to eradicate obesity in the country. It will lower the risks for diabetes, cancer, and death. If we banned it, we will save people from the ramifications of their health. More importantly, the economy could increase and create numerous jobs for out of work people. However, if the ban does happen diet soda won’t be a part of the ban even though it consists of a dangerous chemical, aspartame. Furthermore, if we banned it, we might be taking away a citizen's right to drink whatever they crave whenever they please. That being the case, the biggest

The first question in Kass’s formulaic approach to the ethics of public health is “What are the public health goals of this program?” (Kass, 1777) By nature, the public health goal of any program is to essentially promote the overall health of a population through an organized and communal effort. In the case of the soda tax, the ultimate public health goal is simply to reduce the amount of morbidity & mortality and improve the well being of society. This begins by tackling the obesity problem, which is directly linked to morbidity & mortality. According to Brownell, “for each extra can or glass of sugared beverage consumed per day, the likelihood of a child’s becoming obese increases by 60%” (Brownell et al., 1599). It can be inferred that drinking soda is linked to obesity rates, but why should obesity rates matter? According to Sturm, “a higher BMI…is associated with increased mortality and increased risk for coronary heart disease, osteoarthritis, diabetes mellitus, hypertension, and certain types of cancer. Even modest weight reductions can have substantial lifetime health benefits” (Sturm, 245). Obviously if someone is morbidly obese, he or she is at extreme risk for a myriad of

According to “New York Soft Drink Size Limit”, recently in New York City the limit on the 16 ounce sugary drinks law passed. As of March 12, 2013, eight members of the New York City council approved this law to prohibit more than 16 ounces per beverage. This encounter to ban soppy drinks is supported by Mayor Michael Bloomberg. The law prohibits, fast food restaurants, movie theaters, sports stadiums, and gas stations to sell sugary drinks