According to a story by Fox 25, Boston, the mayor of Cambridge MA would like to restrict the size of sodas that can be sold in restaurants. No, I didn't read much further than this. I thought it was ludicrous when New York City Mayor Bloomberg proposed a similar restriction on patrons buying soft drinks at restaurants, arenas, and other public venues. Now the mayor of Cambridge MA is jumping on the band wagon of making people healthy by imposing more "nanny" legislation.
Are too many Americans obese? Do we often eat the wrong foods in the wrong quantities? Of course we do, but the answer lies someplace other than restricting adults from buying soft drinks in certain size containers. If people want to drown themselves in sodas, iced teas, or other high calorie drinks, limiting the portion size isn't going to stop them. Unless you restrict the sale of these beverages altogether, people will go back for more or ask for seconds. I'm sure restaurants will be glad to refill your cola beverage to keep you as a customer. Or will the soft drink police be there to slap the cuffs on some miscreant waitress.
And how do you measure a soft drink anyway? Do you measure it with ice or without. That can make a big difference. While many restaurants serve a soft drink in a 20-ounce glass, the actual measure of soda may be only 1/3 that.
To me there are several issues that the introduction of stupid legislation brings up. The first is what's next? Where does nanny legislation stop? Will burger size be monitored? How about how many fries can be put in a serving? How about the 5-cheese omelet I order at my local breakfast restaurant? I'm sure that the breakfast special of eggs, meats, pancakes, and toast, served with syrup and butter can pack on more pounds than a soda. Will restaurants be restricted to 500 calorie meals? What about supermarkets? Will the 12-pack fridge pack be banned? Maybe I'll need to buy my favorite beverage in single serving cans - one to a customer. And what will happen to the sale of candy bars? We allow people over age 18 to buy as many cigarettes as they want and those over 21 to buy as many bottles of alcohol as they can carry, but we think that restricting the size of sugar-laden beverages is a smart idea.
The second issue is one of personal freedom. Believe it or not, we do have the right to kill ourselves in the U.S. We are allowed to smoke and drink. We sell cars that can go much faster than roads in this country allow. We allow people to bicycle down busy roadways, text while walking, bungee jump, breathe in carbon monoxide as they (healthfully) jog down the sides of busy roads, skip year physicals because they can't afford the doctor or insurance, sleep outside because they can't afford shelter, and do all sorts of crazy things that can result in injury and death. We even pay athletes big money to get out there on the football field and slam into each other - an activity that has been shown to result in the long term after-effects of concussion. In New Hampshire, we do not even require adults to wear motorcycle helmets. You are free to be a vegetable for the rest of your life in order to feel the wind in your hair. But people need to have their soft drinks limited. Go figure.
Another issue is the one concerning sugar substitutes. It is my understanding that legislation proposed by the mayor of Cambridge does not pertain to items sweetened with sugar substitutes. Scientists have argued the issues of non-nutritive sweeteners since saccharin was introduced. The issues surrounding many sugar substitutes range from cancer to migraine headaches to diarrhea. We have an entire generation that has grown up on sugar substitutes. (Could there be a connection with issues such as autism there I wonder?) We're fed information that leads us to believe that these items are natural, harmless, and actually good for us, but the latest studies suggest that the use of certain artificial sweeteners can actually elevate our desire for sweets. Now I'm not a fan of high-fructose corn syrup either, as it is largely made from genetically modified corn, so if I'm going to drink a soda, it contains 100% sugar. It appears that lawmakers have no problem filling children and adults with chemicals, but sugar is a problem.
Let's face it; there's more going on regarding obesity in America than soda sizes. Often households with children have only one parent or two parents both working, so there is more processed food being served. Organic and healthy food is more expensive than the cheaper prepared food choices. You can feed a whole family on a can of ravioli and bread and butter on much less cost (and time) than a chef salad prepared at home with organic veggies and leans meats and cheeses. People don't walk. Frankly, there is nowhere to walk in many cases unless you drive to the local health club and pay for a membership. On my street, a pedestrian takes a chance on losing his / her life. Sidewalks are available only in the the very hearts of communities (and not all of them), and we have discouraged children from walking by filling them and ourselves) with the fear of predators lurking around every corner. Bicycling is worse. With people texting, eating, and putting on make-up as they drive, even those who aren't impaired are often a menace to bicyclists. Roads are narrow and trying to get around a bicyclist with traffic in both lanes can be a challenge even for the most careful driver.
We are a fat society because our entire lifestyle has changed. We work longer; we sit more (working behind computers); we walk less, we have less recreation time (when was the last time you played a game of anything?); we eat on the run; we eat what's quick and handy. That's why we are unhealthy. If the government would like to make us healthier, they can 1) put physical education and active recess back in schools, 2) provide paved sidewalks and designated bicycle trails, 3) make provisions for health insurance rebates for exercise classes, or workout hours, 4) create better opportunities for people to buy wholesome natural and organic products close to home, 5) provide incentives for companies whose employees have sit-down jobs to provide on-site workout rooms that can be used before and after work, as well as during lunch and breaks, and 6) provide income tax credits for people who remain in normal weight ranges as determined by their doctors. Then you'd see some real results. In the meantime, hand me that two-liter soda on the top shelf....
No comments:
Post a Comment